The full incident scenario now runs against the assembled daemon: an
operator goal becomes a want to reduce uncertainty, an investigation
intention and a diagnosis plan; telemetry is read; logs need authority,
so a scoped request with risk, mitigation and fallback is raised and the
intention is blocked until an operator grants it; the logs are read with
personal data masked and summarised back into cognition; the operator
supplies the judgement that a restart should help; a standing commitment
turns the restart into a request for approval; after approval the typed
capability runs and health is verified rather than assumed; the fault
persists, so a prediction error weakens the supporting belief, the plan
is replanned into an escalation that reuses the live log grant and does
not repeat the restart; once the database is fixed a second approved
restart verifies, the procedure is learnt, and "Why did you restart
atlas-worker?" is answered from the recorded chain and scores as
supported.
Changes the scenario exposed:
- New operator goals are raised by the goal monitor, so a cycle runs and
wants are derived from them.
- Intentions link live beliefs about their action's target, so a failed
expectation is evidence against the belief it rested on and the plan
lists it as an assumption.
- Reconsideration reacts to a plan's own intention only; a subordinate
"obtain approval" intention shares the plan and previously caused the
parent's plan to be closed.
- The harness accepts a clock for the executor's verification windows.
Further failure-mode tests: a retracted assumption replans a waiting plan
away from the restart and withdraws its approval request; conflicting
commitments are raised once in a cycle while both stay represented.
Volition and planning now run as part of cognition (PLAN §8.2 item 3):
- A volition hook derives wants after each cycle from what it perceived
and produced, satisfies answer wants when a reply is sent, raises due,
overdue, expired and conflicting commitments, and expires faded wants.
Events produced by earlier cycles are not re-derived.
- An intend process proposes deciding about the strongest undecided
wants; the candidate competes for the workspace, so attention gates
what the mind decides to pursue. The handler makes value tensions
explicit (caution against disruptive writes, privacy against reading
personal data), resolves them with recorded scores, runs deterministic
formation with commitments, policy preview, goals and values, records
the decision whatever it is, and plans a formed intention in the same
transaction. Operator requests carry their own weight in formation.
- Explicit requests in conversation ("restart <unit>", "logs for <unit>",
"fetch <url>") become wants with proposed means instead of direct
invocations; the reply says the request was recorded and that acting
depends on commitments and policy.
- The executor is woken after commits, runs in a scheduler-owned loop and
reacts to the event bus: a new commitment tightens or abandons affected
intentions (withdrawing their pending approvals), a weakened assumption
or a finished goal triggers reconsideration. A tightened plan may reuse
its strategy; a failed one may not.
- Metacognition gains volition checks: strong wants repeatedly set aside,
intentions with no recorded reason, intentions a commitment forbids,
commitments that cannot be kept, churn, repeated failed execution,
cost outweighing value, and intentions that outlived their goal.
- A plan model role and prompt let a model propose decompositions that
the planner validates. Ablations are a fork-only configuration field.
- Approvals required by an intention are described as coming from a
commitment or value constraint. The expectation after an approved
action is linked to the execution event, not the request.
- The wants.values column of the unreleased migration 0026 is renamed
value_keys: VALUES is reserved and the generic snapshot restore does
not quote identifiers.
- The hostile-output security test now uses a message that asks for no
action, because an operator's "status of <unit>" is legitimately a
read-only status check.
Phase 9. Goals form a mind-scoped tree with kind, priority, progress and
blockers; their deterministic relevance to a candidate feeds the
goal_relevance attention feature and a goal monitor raises stalled goals
and observations that touch one. Drives are a closed set of eight
scalars with operator-configured ranges and personality-derived
baselines; there is no self-preservation, replication or acquisition
drive and no way to add one at runtime. Affect is ten scalars moved by an
explicit rule table over events and decaying towards baseline; both
modulate attention weights each cycle and the effective weights are
recorded with every cycle and shown beside the configured ones.
Predictions carry a window and machine-checkable criteria (event terms
occurring or staying absent, a belief reaching a confidence, or operator
judgement). A resolver job judges them deterministically, keeps an
append-only outcome history for calibration (accuracy, Brier score,
confidence buckets, overconfidence flag), emits prediction_error events
scaled by how confident the miss was, and feeds the outcome back into the
linked belief as evidence. Causal hypotheses derive predictions
automatically. Curiosity turns misses, contradictions and unexplained
observations into questions that compete for attention and become
investigation goals when admitted.
Brain gains after-cycle hooks and goal/motivation state. API, UI (goals,
prediction dashboard, cognitive state panel, effective weights) and CLI
(goal, prediction, state). Demo scenario 4 verified end to end.
Andy Dixon