Orchestrata Ultimate › Plans › analysis › README
Analysis pipeline
Source: plans/analysis/README.md at 8a2cb42ad · last changed 2026-08-23 · first committed 2026-08-23 · 51 lines.
Prose pending.
Plan text
Analysis pipeline
The master report (../system-analysis-master.md) is generated. Do not hand-edit it.
journal.jsonl (per-round swarm output)
│
├─ build_register.py ──> register.json # machine-readable finding register
│ # global OA-NNN ids, provenance, verdicts
│
└─ render_report.py ──> ../system-analysis-master.md
▲
overlay.json # curated cross-round material the
# per-agent schemas cannot carry:
# corrections, user decisions, traps
Adding a round
- Run the swarm; note its
wf_*run id. - Append it to
ROUNDSinbuild_register.py. - Regenerate:
python3 plans/analysis/build_register.py plans/analysis/register.json
python3 plans/analysis/render_report.py \
plans/analysis/register.json \
plans/system-analysis-master.md \
plans/analysis/overlay.json
Findings keep stable OA-NNN ids across regenerations as long as earlier rounds are
unchanged, because ids are assigned after a deterministic sort.
Why a register and not a document
An analysis that is hand-maintained prose drifts from its evidence — which is the single most common defect this analysis found in the system under study (six requirement corpora, four ADR registers, two layer models). The register is the authority; the markdown is a view of it.
Verification states
| State | Meaning |
|---|---|
confirmed |
An independent domain coordinator re-verified the finding and promoted it. |
refuted |
A coordinator rejected it. The reason is retained, not deleted. |
unverified |
No coordinator ruling matched it yet. Not a claim that it is wrong. |
Coordinators re-key findings into their own id space, so verdicts are joined to
findings by content similarity, not by id — see _attach_verdicts.