Second opinions¶

Three M5 steps refine a proposal without ever raising its level.

Claude as a recorded second opinion¶

The Claude Messages API exposes no logits, so Claude can never be an AnyJev backend. What it can do is answer the same rendered State / Question / Options text through structured outputs (messages.parse with an answer model whose only field is a literal over the frozen options, adaptive thinking, no forced tool choice). Every such record is provider='claude', level='none', calibration='none', probs=None; a refusal, an error or an answer outside the options abstains. With claude.second_opinion on (or annotate --second-opinion), a proposed candidate group gets Claude's yes/no over its top candidates, recorded in the same group with the winner as parent. Claude agreeing is noted on the proposal; Claude saying no to the winner turns the outcome into escalated, which stays a proposal for a human to settle. Nothing Claude says can make a group auto (the profile requires an AnyJev calibration), and nothing it says changes a probability.

Specificity¶

When a proposed term has children in its ontology, the pipeline asks term.fits over those children (a second group that records which term it refines). A child replaces the parent only when p(child) is at least policy.specificity_delta (0.10) above p(parent) and the child clears the proposal threshold on its own. Recorded fixtures may lack the children calls; the parent then stands. On the first end-to-end run at L0 (carc-fast) 23 child groups were opened and none replaced its parent (Bench results).

Planner audit¶

Before any column is looked at, dataset.ontology_applies is asked once per registry entry over the card header. The answers are recorded (they never write) and compared with the planner's ontology list: annotate prints the agreement, and the run's result carries audit.planner_only and audit.model_only, so a planner that keeps naming ontologies the model rejects, or missing ones it accepts, shows up in the sidecar rather than in a hunch.