TheRON/otivm
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

obsolete

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
TheRON
2026-04-30 15:01:46 -04:00
parent 0e1094fc44
commit b31843c5e2
1 changed files with 0 additions and 300 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

300
docs/training/corpus/Layer_3--Actor_Perspective/CORPUS-0003-same-loss-six-readings.md
View File

@@ -1,300 +0,0 @@
# CORPUS-0003
## Same Loss, Six Readings
### Status: Training Corpus Seed
### Layer: Layer_3--Actor_Perspective
### Purpose: Teach that the same venture loss can be explained differently by each actor profile without changing the settled arithmetic
### Repository Path: docs/training/corpus/Layer_3--Actor_Perspective/CORPUS-0003-same-loss-six-readings.md
---
## 0. Scenario
A trader sends oil from Ostia to Capua.
The venture loses money.
All six actors see the same final account.
They do not explain the failure the same way.
The arithmetic is fixed.
The diagnosis differs.
---
## 1. Shared Final Account
| Item | Value |
|---|---:|
| Origin | Ostia |
| Destination | Capua |
| Good | oil |
| Purchase price | 10 asses |
| Movement and handling | 6 asses |
| Additional delay cost | 2 asses |
| Total cost | 18 asses |
| Final sale value | 14 asses |
| Final result | 4 asses loss |
Final arithmetic:
```text
14 - 18 = -4 asses
```
The venture lost 4 asses.
No actor can change that settled outcome.
Each actor asks why the loss happened and what must be corrected before the next venture.
---
## 2. Marcus Atilius Varro — Former Legionary
Varro reads the loss through failed execution.
He asks:
- why did delay occur?
- who controlled the cart?
- was the route checked?
- were animals fit?
- who failed to keep schedule?
- was there a backup movement plan?
Varro does not first blame price.
He blames disorder in movement unless shown otherwise.
### Varro Diagnosis
```text
settled result: 4 asses loss
primary failure: movement discipline failed
evidence: delay cost added 2 asses
next correction: stronger route control, better carrier, backup timing
```
For Varro, the loss came from failure to keep the venture moving.
---
## 3. Lucius Fabius Felix — Freedman Trader
Felix reads the loss through missed timing and mispricing.
He asks:
- who bought or sold before us?
- did the seller know more than we did?
- did the Capua price fall before arrival?
- was the purchase price too high?
- could the cargo have been sold earlier?
- did another trader close the window?
Felix does not accept that the margin simply vanished.
He looks for the actor who moved faster.
### Felix Diagnosis
```text
settled result: 4 asses loss
primary failure: price window closed before sale
evidence: final sale value only 14 asses
next correction: buy cheaper, move faster, reduce exposure, watch rivals
```
For Felix, the loss came from acting after the market had already changed.
---
## 4. Quintus Cornelius Lentulus Minor — Noble Younger Son
Lentulus reads the loss through poor access and weak buyer position.
He asks:
- who was the buyer?
- why was a better buyer not available?
- did the trader lack introduction?
- was the cargo offered to the wrong household?
- did association with weak buyers reduce price?
- could a better name have produced better terms?
Lentulus does not see only a failed sale.
He sees inadequate social placement.
### Lentulus Diagnosis
```text
settled result: 4 asses loss
primary failure: weak access to better buyers
evidence: final sale value below expected value
next correction: improve buyer channel, secure introduction, avoid low-status sale pressure
```
For Lentulus, the loss came from selling into the wrong social channel.
---
## 5. Gaius Licinius Crispus — Failed Magistrate
Crispus reads the loss through weak terms and poor enforceability.
He asks:
- was a price agreed before delivery?
- was there a witness?
- did the buyer have right to reduce offer?
- were delay costs assignable to someone else?
- could payment have been compelled under clearer terms?
- was the settlement documented?
Crispus does not trust informal expectation.
He sees the loss as failure to bind obligations before risk appeared.
### Crispus Diagnosis
```text
settled result: 4 asses loss
primary failure: terms failed to protect the trader
evidence: sale value fell and delay cost remained with trader
next correction: bind buyer earlier, record terms, assign delay responsibility
```
For Crispus, the loss came from insufficient enforceable structure.
---
## 6. Titus Varenus Secundus — Camp Logistician
Secundus reads the loss through capacity and load planning.
He asks:
- was the cart underloaded?
- was return value ignored?
- did delay come from poor animal or load condition?
- was the cargo matched to transport?
- could another good have filled unused capacity?
- did the route carry value both ways?
Secundus sees not only the failed oil sale.
He sees wasted movement.
### Secundus Diagnosis
```text
settled result: 4 asses loss
primary failure: movement capacity was poorly used
evidence: transport cost remained high relative to cargo value
next correction: combine loads, secure return cargo, reduce empty movement
```
For Secundus, the loss came from inefficient use of capacity.
---
## 7. Publius Terentius Chresimus — Guild Scribe
Chresimus reads the loss through incomplete accounting and unverified assumptions.
He asks:
- were all costs counted before dispatch?
- was the expected sale price recorded or merely repeated?
- did the delay cost appear in the plan?
- was the quantity or quality disputed?
- were any obligations left out of the estimate?
- does the account reconcile after settlement?
Chresimus does not accept “bad luck” without checking the account.
### Chresimus Diagnosis
```text
settled result: 4 asses loss
primary failure: expected account was incomplete or unverified
evidence: added delay cost and lower sale value changed final result
next correction: separate estimate, known cost, unknown cost, and settlement value
```
For Chresimus, the loss came from trusting an estimate before the account was complete.
---
## 8. Same Loss, Different Corrections
| Actor | Main Diagnosis | First Correction |
|---|---|---|
| Varro | movement failed | control route and carrier |
| Felix | price window closed | move faster or buy cheaper |
| Lentulus | weak buyer access | secure better introduction |
| Crispus | terms were not binding | document obligations earlier |
| Secundus | capacity was misused | combine loads or return cargo |
| Chresimus | account was incomplete | verify costs and settlement assumptions |
The loss is the same.
The recovery plan differs.
---
## 9. Correct Model Behavior
The model should separate:
| Category | Meaning |
|---|---|
| settled arithmetic | fixed loss after final values |
| actor diagnosis | how each actor explains cause |
| actor evidence | which fact each actor treats as most important |
| actor correction | what each actor would change next |
| recovery path | practical next action after loss |
Actor perspective should alter diagnosis and recovery, not the final account.
---
## 10. Incorrect Model Behavior
The model should not:
- let actor confidence change the settled loss
- make every actor explain failure the same way
- treat the loss as only bad arithmetic
- ignore recovery path
- assume the loudest diagnosis is true
- collapse movement, access, terms, capacity, and accounting into one generic mistake
- call the decision irrational solely because the hidden outcome was bad
---
## 11. Layer-0, Layer-1, And Layer-2 Concepts Used
This example uses:
- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0004-cost-includes-more-than-purchase-price`
- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0005-profit-is-sale-minus-total-cost`
- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0006-delay-is-economic-cost`
- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0010-credit-depends-on-trust`
- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0011-status-changes-access`
- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0012-every-venture-risks-loss`
- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0018-rivalry-changes-conditions`
- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0019-success-has-no-boundary-failure-has-a-hard-stop`
- `Layer_1/CORPUS-0003-arithmetic-resolves-the-venture`
- `Layer_1/CORPUS-0010-hard-stop-after-loss`
- `Layer_2/CORPUS-0005-hidden-true-state-vs-known-state`
- `Layer_2/CORPUS-0012-settlement-reveals-truth`
---
## 12. Success Condition
If the model can keep the 4-ass loss fixed while producing six different rational diagnoses and six different recovery priorities, this file is functioning correctly.