Anto01
480f13a6df
Three planning docs that answer the architectural questions the engineering query catalog raised. Together with the catalog they form roughly half of the pre-implementation planning sprint. docs/architecture/memory-vs-entities.md --------------------------------------- Resolves the central question blocking every other engineering layer doc: is a Decision a memory or an entity? Key decisions: - memories stay the canonical home for identity, preference, and episodic facts - entities become the canonical home for project, knowledge, and adaptation facts once the engineering layer V1 ships - no concept lives in both layers at full fidelity; one canonical home per concept - a "graduation" flow lets active memories upgrade into entities (memory stays as a frozen historical pointer, never deleted) - one shared candidate review queue across both layers - context builder budget gains a 15% slot for engineering entities, slotted between identity/preference memories and retrieved chunks - the Phase 9 memory extractor's structural cues (decision heading, constraint heading, requirement heading) are explicitly an intentional temporary overlap, cleanly migrated via graduation when the entity extractor ships docs/architecture/promotion-rules.md ------------------------------------ Defines the full Layer 0 → Layer 2 pipeline: - four layers: L0 raw source, L1 memory candidate/active, L2 entity candidate/active, L3 trusted project state - three extraction triggers: on interaction capture (existing), on ingestion wave (new, batched per wave), on explicit request - per-rule prior confidence tuned at write time by structural signal (echoes the retriever's high/low signal hints) and freshness bonus - batch cap of 50 candidates per pass to protect the reviewer - full provenance requirements: every candidate carries rule id, source_chunk_id, source_interaction_id, and extractor_version - reversibility matrix for every promotion step - explicit no-auto-promotion-in-V1 stance with the schema designed so auto-promotion policies can be added later without migration - the hard invariant: nothing ever moves into L3 automatically - ingestion-wave extraction produces a report artifact under data/extraction-reports/<wave-id>/ docs/architecture/conflict-model.md ----------------------------------- Defines how AtoCore handles contradictory facts without violating the "bad memory is worse than no memory" rule. - conflict = two or more active rows claiming the same slot with incompatible values - per-type "slot key" tuples for both memory and entity types - cross-layer conflict detection respects the trust hierarchy: trusted project state > active entities > active memories - new conflicts and conflict_members tables (schema proposal) - detection at two latencies: synchronous at write time, asynchronous nightly sweep - "flag, never block" rule: writes always succeed, conflicts are surfaced via /conflicts, /health open_conflicts_count, per-row response bodies, and the Human Mirror's disputed marker - resolution is always human: promote-winner + supersede-others, or dismiss-as-not-a-real-conflict, both with audit trail - explicitly out of scope for V1: cross-project conflicts, temporal-overlap conflicts, tolerance-aware numeric comparisons Also updates: - master-plan-status.md: Phase 9 moved from "started" to "baseline complete" now that Commits A, B, C are all landed - master-plan-status.md: adds a "Engineering Layer Planning Sprint" section listing the doc wave so far and the remaining docs (tool-handoff-boundaries, human-mirror-rules, representation-authority, engineering-v1-acceptance) - current-state.md: Phase 9 moved from "not started" to "baseline complete" with the A/B/C annotation This is pure doc work. No code changes, no schema changes, no behavior changes. Per the working rule in master-plan-status.md: the architecture docs shape decisions, they do not force premature schema work.
5.0 KiB
5.0 KiB
AtoCore Master Plan Status
Current Position
AtoCore is currently between Phase 7 and Phase 8.
The platform is no longer just a proof of concept. The local engine exists, the core correctness pass is complete, Dalidou hosts the canonical runtime and machine database, and OpenClaw on the T420 can consume AtoCore safely in read-only additive mode.
Phase Status
Completed
- Phase 0 - Foundation
- Phase 0.5 - Proof of Concept
- Phase 1 - Ingestion
Baseline Complete
- Phase 2 - Memory Core
- Phase 3 - Retrieval
- Phase 5 - Project State
- Phase 7 - Context Builder
Partial
- Phase 4 - Identity / Preferences
- Phase 8 - OpenClaw Integration
Baseline Complete
- Phase 9 - Reflection (all three foundation commits landed: A capture, B reinforcement, C candidate extraction + review queue)
Not Yet Complete In The Intended Sense
- Phase 6 - AtoDrive
- Phase 10 - Write-back
- Phase 11 - Multi-model
- Phase 12 - Evaluation
- Phase 13 - Hardening
Engineering Layer Planning Sprint
The engineering layer is intentionally in planning, not implementation. The architecture docs below are the current state of that planning:
- engineering-query-catalog.md — the 20 v1-required queries the engineering layer must answer
- memory-vs-entities.md — canonical home split between memory and entity tables
- promotion-rules.md — Layer 0 → Layer 2 pipeline, triggers, review queue mechanics
- conflict-model.md — detection, representation, and resolution of contradictory facts
- engineering-knowledge-hybrid-architecture.md — the 5-layer model (from the previous planning wave)
- engineering-ontology-v1.md — the initial V1 object and relationship inventory (previous wave)
Still to draft before engineering-layer implementation begins:
- tool-handoff-boundaries.md (KB-CAD / KB-FEM read vs write)
- human-mirror-rules.md (templates, triggers, edit flow)
- representation-authority.md (PKM / KB / repo / AtoCore canonical home matrix)
- engineering-v1-acceptance.md (done definition)
What Is Real Today
- canonical AtoCore runtime on Dalidou
- canonical machine DB and vector store on Dalidou
- project registry with:
- template
- proposal preview
- register
- update
- refresh
- read-only additive OpenClaw helper on the T420
- seeded project corpus for:
p04-gigabitp05-interferometerp06-polisher
- conservative Trusted Project State for those active projects
- first operational backup foundation for SQLite + project registry
- implementation-facing architecture notes for future engineering knowledge work
- first organic routing layer in OpenClaw via:
detect-projectauto-context
Now
These are the current practical priorities.
- Finish practical OpenClaw integration
- make the helper lifecycle feel natural in daily use
- use the new organic routing layer for project-knowledge questions
- confirm fail-open behavior remains acceptable
- keep AtoCore clearly additive
- Tighten retrieval quality
- reduce cross-project competition
- improve ranking on short or ambiguous prompts
- add only a few anchor docs where retrieval is still weak
- Continue controlled ingestion
- deepen active projects selectively
- avoid noisy bulk corpus growth
- Strengthen operational boringness
- backup and restore procedure
- Chroma rebuild / backup policy
- retention and restore validation
Next
These are the next major layers after the current practical pass.
- Clarify AtoDrive as a real operational truth layer
- Mature identity / preferences handling
- Improve observability for:
- retrieval quality
- context-pack inspection
- comparison of behavior with and without AtoCore
Later
These are the deliberate future expansions already supported by the architecture direction, but not yet ready for immediate implementation.
- Minimal engineering knowledge layer
- driven by
docs/architecture/engineering-knowledge-hybrid-architecture.md - guided by
docs/architecture/engineering-ontology-v1.md
- driven by
- Minimal typed objects and relationships
- Evidence-linking and provenance-rich structured records
- Human mirror generation from structured state
Not Yet
These remain intentionally deferred.
- automatic write-back from OpenClaw into AtoCore
- automatic memory promotion
- reflection loop integration
- replacing OpenClaw's own memory system
- live machine-DB sync between machines
- full ontology / graph expansion before the current baseline is stable
Working Rule
The next sensible implementation threshold for the engineering ontology work is:
- after the current ingestion, retrieval, registry, OpenClaw helper, organic routing, and backup baseline feels boring and dependable
Until then, the architecture docs should shape decisions, not force premature schema work.