Skip to content

scientific(coverage): bind the exact normal critical value into the prospective design #740

Description

@seonghobae

Finding

CoverageCalibrationDesign::tepp_nominal_95_v1() prospectively fingerprints the nominal coverage target, practical band, attempt count, and Monte Carlo precision, but the actual interval-construction critical value is still caller-local in analysis_engine as NORMAL_95_PERCENT_CRITICAL_VALUE = 1.959963984540054.

That leaves the persisted prospective design under-specified: the evidence can claim tepp.coverage.nominal95.v1 while the executor's exact normal-marginal interval rule is represented only indirectly by source_head. A later executor drift in the critical value would change scientific coverage while retaining the same validation-design identity/fingerprint. This is the remaining criterion/construction split after #732/#737 made the prospective validation design durable before execution.

No 10,000-DGP acceptance outcome has been executed yet, so this prospective contract can still be completed without post-outcome threshold tuning.

Required RED / repair

  • make the exact two-sided normal critical value an owned field of CoverageCalibrationDesign::tepp_nominal_95_v1();
  • expose it through the validation owner and include its exact IEEE-754 binary64 bits in the canonical design fingerprint under a new fingerprint-domain version;
  • make the coverage-calibration executor consume the owner-issued critical value rather than a local constant;
  • update the pinned fingerprint contract and shard/evidence expectations that derive it, without changing the nominal 0.95 target, practical [0.91, 0.98] band, 10,000 attempted DGPs, or MCSE <= 0.005;
  • preserve normal_marginal_interval_bounds(...) as generic numerical arithmetic; do not move estimator/covariance arithmetic into the design owner;
  • document that this completes prospective interval-construction identity before the first acceptance run and does not itself provide acceptance evidence.

Boundary

This is prospective design completeness. It does not execute #680, define numerical-failure acceptability, alter the simulation DGP/seed schedule, authenticate the build, or promote a scientific/release claim.

Refs #639 #680 #721 #725 #732 #737.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions