CompactionLifecycle model verdict (OMN-21104)
=============================================

Reviewer: Codex (codex-cli, its configured default model, reasoning effort high), run
read-only in the lane's worktree as an adversarial reviewer of the model, its configs, the
TLC results and the design note (README.txt), against plan task TA.1 and the plan's
compaction transaction and boundary algorithm. The rule given to the reviewer: APPROVE only
with no BLOCKER and no MAJOR finding.

Rounds
------

round 1  model sha256=a7a54c5eda316de1374d5dcd6ed581d4e066610bab0312d0ca4c201206a86449  REJECT  1 BLOCKER, 5 MAJOR
         (not_selected derived from an ordinary turn and from a boundary predating the
         activation; no candidate assembly hash or candidate conflict; no source-completeness
         barrier; staleness by transcript length only; the fallback invariant vacuous in the
         design; record-level boundary evidence and the current-context projection absent)
round 2  model sha256=2cfabd52cc6133b201ee45bb3ec63b3c4a8409c4c77017577913ad775087f6eb  REJECT  2 MAJOR
         (the full version vector checked for precompute only; the activation's publication
         point read from the harness transcript, which the orchestrator cannot see)
round 3  model sha256=6fe9fd078133ea141f94ea41215b9aa3877c66ed82d9c8a3dc08af4572dc9cee  APPROVE 0 MAJOR, 1 MINOR

Round 1's sixth finding was answered by scope: record-level boundary extraction and the
current-context projection are TA.13's and are listed as out of scope in README.txt. After
round 3 the README's P6 row was reworded for its MINOR (the condition is the request's
session high-water, not publication). The model and every config are unchanged since the
round-3 review.

Round 3 review, as returned (worktree paths made repo-relative)
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Reviewed model SHA-256 `6fe9fd078133ea141f94ea41215b9aa3877c66ed82d9c8a3dc08af4572dc9cee`. The completed TLC summary records both design checks passing and all seven mutants violating their intended properties. Model, config and output hashes match.

1. **MINOR — P6’s description still refers to publication.** [README.txt:55](formal/compaction_lifecycle/README.txt:55) says “advances past its publication.” The implemented condition is advancement beyond the **request’s session high-water**, which can precede publication. Update that description to match.

No BLOCKER or MAJOR findings remain:

- P3 checks the complete trigger-fixed vector. The README explicitly reconciles request-fixed manual/auto inputs with kept-precompute revalidation.
- The request high-water removes the unsupported harness read. Within this abstraction, turn holding, boundary invalidation and revalidation justify using the first boundary after that high-water.
- All seven properties are non-vacuous, and every mutant changes one constant representing a meaningful design decision.
- Required lifecycle actors and states are represented. Activation conflict remains a defensive alarm; candidate conflict is reachable. Record extraction and current-context retirement remain explicitly outside this model’s verification scope.
- P6 still relies on the documented literal capture-gap rule. Adopting the proposed pending-evidence behavior would require revisiting its liveness claim.

verdict: APPROVE model=CompactionLifecycle.tla sha256=6fe9fd078133ea141f94ea41215b9aa3877c66ed82d9c8a3dc08af4572dc9cee
