RQ1+RQ2 start-line: live per-cell condition assembler + guarded launcher + Holm ratification

Wire the live per-cell condition assembler (cmd_chat/sor/assembler.py): compose
the existing R1/R4/R5/R6 pieces into a condition-encoding CircuitSpec per frozen
§2 cell, so a cell_id maps to a genuinely distinct, ForwarderPlan-gated
(engine != local) isolated circuit rather than the plain 3-hop control:
  - RQ1 bridge-on / on+padding insert a live bridge hop (+ R1 PADDING stream);
  - RQ2 bridge-/directory-federated genuinely span >= 2 houses
    (federation.select_federated_path, split-knowledge).
Plans only: opens no socket, moves no traffic, stands up no engine.

battery.assembler_dry_check validates on FIXTURES (6/6 cells distinct
fingerprints, all isolation-gated, same (cell,seed) reproduces, RQ1 bridge +
padding arms live, RQ2 federation >= 2 houses); write-once, kept out of any
confirmatory data dir. confirmatory_run preflight now runs it; the --operator-go
path no longer refuses cells as "not wired" — triple-lock + green preflight HOLD
on grid completion, then surface the operator's immutable data-run gate. No
confirmatory cell is ever fabricated.

Start-line instrument-validation gate (cmd_chat/sor/gate.py), grid + containment
pin (grid.py), and the guarded launcher (confirmatory_run.py) land alongside.

Holm: hold family_size = 7, report the 4 RQ1/RQ2 tests -> multipliers 7,6,5,4.
This is the pre-registration, not a deviation (prereg §6 [APPROVAL] size-7 family
+ D6 disclosure in the lead paper); docs/stage-05-holm-clarification.md marked
RATIFIED. RQ3-fold and alpha-split declined.

Containment intact; prereg untouched (SHA f22331a72e...); worktree-only. output/
gitignored (runtime artifacts, never source). Full SOR suite 156 passed. No
confirmatory data collected — the live data run remains the human gate.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

docs/stage-05-holm-clarification.md

@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+# Stage-05 analysis clarification — Holm–Bonferroni over the frozen family of 7
+
+**Status: RATIFIED by operator (Andre), 2026-07-19. Worktree clarification note
+only — NOT a deviation.** This restates, for the harness, a decision the frozen
+prereg **already fixes**; it does **not** edit the frozen prereg
+(`sor-consent-prereg.md`, SHA `f22331a72e0d0ccf38b787e63acabbe9d666456ec76076787a6d545c3193425b`).
+
+## Authority (this IS the freeze, not a new choice)
+
+The size-7 family and its disclosure in the lead paper are **pre-registered text**,
+so holding `m = 7` for the reported RQ1/RQ2 subset is compliance, not deviation:
+
+- **Prereg §6 — Multiple-comparison correction [APPROVAL]** (prereg lines ~218–222):
+  *"the confirmatory hypothesis tests across all three RQ families are corrected
+  together by Holm–Bonferroni … Test family (7 confirmatory tests): {RQ1-P1, RQ1-P2,
+  RQ2-P1, RQ2-P3, RQ3-P1-perf, RQ3-P1-latency, RQ3-P2}."* The family is frozen at 7.
+- **Prereg D6** (prereg line ~317): *"the shared prereg + Holm-corrected family are
+  disclosed in whichever papers result (which is more rigorous)."* The lead paper
+  discloses the **same size-7 family** even while reporting only the RQ1/RQ2 subset.
+
+Correcting the reported 4 against `m = 4` would shrink the frozen family after the
+fact — p-hacking the multiplicity down, contrary to §6. Holding `m = 7` is the
+only reading consistent with the frozen text.
+
+## The question
+
+The prereg §6 pre-registers a **confirmatory family of 7** hypothesis tests:
+
+```
+RQ1-P1, RQ1-P2, RQ2-P1, RQ2-P3, RQ3-P1-perf, RQ3-P1-latency, RQ3-P2
+```
+
+The **lead paper (G4 + RQ1 + RQ2, prereg D6)** reports only the first **4**
+(RQ1/RQ2); RQ3's three tests are the severable follow-on (§8). So: when we
+Holm-correct the 4 reported p-values, do we correct against **m = 7** (the frozen
+family) or **m = 4** (the reported subset)?
+
+Correcting against m = 4 would be **p-hacking the multiplicity down**: the family
+was frozen at 7 *before* data, and shrinking it after the fact — because RQ3 is
+being reported later — inflates the reported significance of the RQ1/RQ2 subset.
+That breaks the pre-registration.
+
+## Decision (implemented default)
+
+**Hold the family size at m = 7 for every reported test.** The reported subset
+never shrinks the correction to itself.
+
+Concretely, Holm step-down (`stats.holm_bonferroni`, `confirm.apply_holm`):
+
+- All reported p-values are sorted ascending and assigned ranks `k = 1..R`
+  (`R = 4` reported here).
+- Each gets multiplier `m − k + 1` with **`m = FROZEN_FAMILY_SIZE = 7`**.
+- So the 4 reported tests receive multipliers **7, 6, 5, 4** (smallest p → ×7).
+  The step-down enforces monotone non-decreasing adjusted p-values.
+- `holm_bonferroni` **raises** if `family_size < #reported` — you can never
+  accidentally correct against fewer than the tests you are reporting.
+
+This is a **conservative embedding**: the 4 reported tests are treated as
+occupying the 4 *smallest-multiplier* slots (7,6,5,4) of the size-7 family rather
+than the true unknown slots they would occupy if all 7 p-values were in hand. The
+adjusted p-values are therefore **≥** the values a full simultaneous size-7 Holm
+run would assign to these same tests. We over-correct, never under-correct — the
+honest direction for a subset report.
+
+*Covered by `tests/test_sor_confirm.py::test_apply_holm_corrects_against_family_of_seven`
+(top multiplier == 7; multipliers == [4,5,6,7]) and
+`tests/test_sor_stats.py` (family-size monotonicity + `ValueError` when
+`family_size < reported`).*
+
+## Gate vs. Holm ordering (not conflated)
+
+Every **reported decision** in §6 is a **CI gate** (RQ1-P1 CI excludes 0.5;
+RQ1-P2 ΔAUC CI > 0; RQ2-P1 ΔH two-sided CI sign; RQ2-P3 Spearman ρ CI). The
+bootstrap p-values feed the Holm step-down **only to order it** — no reported
+claim rests on a bare p. Holm is the family-wise multiplicity guard layered on
+top of the pre-registered CI gates, exactly as §6 / rigor-standards §Statistics
+require.
+
+## Operator ruling (2026-07-19)
+
+The operator (Andre) ratified the **conservative embedding**: hold `family_size = 7`,
+report the 4 RQ1/RQ2 tests, multipliers **7, 6, 5, 4**. This is exactly the frozen
+§6 / D6 text above — the harness default now matches the pre-registration.
+
+Two alternatives were considered and **explicitly declined**:
+
+- *Fold RQ3's three cells back in and report all 7 simultaneously.* Statistically
+  clean, but RQ3 was dropped for the lead paper (prereg D6) and would need the
+  paid/agent selector-arm decisions. **Declined:** do not fold RQ3 back.
+- *Full α-splitting / hierarchical gatekeeping.* More powerful, but requires a
+  pre-specified α-allocation the frozen prereg does not contain. **Declined:** not
+  available without a prereg change (which the freeze forbids).
+
+No open human action remains: the implemented default is the ratified one.