docs(research): connect decision feedback to action-value evidence

docs/architecture/rfcs/long-horizon-harness-benchmark-research-program-v0.md

@@ -1002,6 +1002,39 @@ delivery and model adoption qualify the path, not effectiveness. A dual-session
 Controller/Worker runtime, numerical fidelity engine and learned policy are not
 prerequisites. Later schema work needs an observed missing producer/consumer fact.
 
+<a id="action-value-episode"></a>
+
+#### Decision-episode readback for action-value evidence
+
+From a prospectively selected meaningful decision point, the first implementation
+slice should demonstrate one real, followable episode: **state then → pre-action
+forecast and choice → actual work/resources → returned evidence and next decision
+→ frozen terminal outcome**. Data semantics are in
+[research rationale §9](../../research/budgeted-research-planning.md#action-value-evidence);
+owners and negative cases are in
+[joint RFC §5.9 and C17–C18](target-yardstick-stride-decisions-v0.md#policy-evolution).
+Reuse existing plan/finding/measurement/followthrough. Report missing records as
+unrecoverable; do not fabricate retrospective forecasts or add model/Native calls
+to complete an episode. Include capture and analysis overhead in full cost.
+If the run is unfinished, leave the terminal link pending until the planned
+endpoint; do not add a run merely to complete readback.
+
+Readback should identify which key forecast was supported/refuted and how actual
+subsequent work addressed it. Evidence-backed continuation also counts as adoption.
+A two-hour local gain cannot label an eighteen-hour terminal forecast; an
+unobserved alternative is not zero. Keep the relevant work chain for delayed
+gains rather than crediting the last switch with all progress.
+
+This readback establishes linkage and analyzability. Synthetic examples can
+validate missing/late/revised-record handling but do not replace real adoption.
+Formal comparisons retain every prospectively selected episode, including
+failure, cancellation, no gain and insufficient evidence, rather than only
+success stories. Report forecast calibration, adoption/decision change,
+same-state paired contrasts, from-start terminal results and new-task benefit
+separately; passing one level does not pass the next. Hold out tasks, source runs
+or sibling-branch families for learning/calibration. Use the pilot and full-budget
+contracts below, not a separate experiment or expanded feedback permission.
+
 #### Affordable conditional-effect pilot
 
 Start with three complementary task types, under the pinned upstream task names:

docs/architecture/rfcs/long-horizon-harness-benchmark-research-program-v0.zh-CN.md

@@ -813,6 +813,28 @@ causal credit。给出强 utility 前必须做 holdout replay 或 bounded ablati
 源码交付和模型采用只验证路径，不证明效果。双会话 Controller/Worker、数值 fidelity
 引擎和学习型策略均非前置条件。后续 schema 修改要有已观察到的 producer/consumer 缺口。
 
+<a id="action-value-episode"></a>
+
+#### 动作价值证据的片段读回
+
+首个实现切片应从前瞻选定的有意义决策点，展示一个可接续的真实片段：
+**当时状态 → 事前预测与选择 → 实际工作／消耗 → 返回证据及下一决定 → 冻结终局**。
+数据语义见[研究说明 §9](../../research/budgeted-research-planning.zh-CN.md#action-value-evidence)，
+owner 与负例见[联合 RFC §5.9、C17–C18](target-yardstick-stride-decisions-v0.zh-CN.md#policy-evolution)。
+复用已有 plan/finding/measurement/followthrough；原记录缺失时报告不能恢复，
+不事后补造预测，不为补齐片段增加模型或 Native 调用。采集与分析开销进入完整成本。
+若全程尚未结束，终局先保留为待关联，在预定终点结算；不为完成读回追加一轮运行。
+
+读回需要明确关键预测有没有被支持或推翻，以及实际下一段工作如何处理它；
+有据继续原计划也是采用。两小时后的局部涨分不能充当十八小时终局标签，
+未选路线没有结果也不填零。延迟增益保留相关工作链，而非全部归给最后一次 switch。
+
+这条读回证明的是关联与可分析性；合成示例可验证缺失／迟到／修订处理，不能替代真实采用。
+正式比较保留全部预选片段，包括失败、取消、无收益和证据不足，避免只展示成功故事。
+分别报告预测校准、采用与决策变化、同状态配对差异、从头终局及新任务收益；
+前一层通过不自动使后一层通过。学习／校准留出隔离任务、来源 run 或同父分叉家族，
+仍沿用下述 pilot 与完整预算合同，不另起一套实验或放宽反馈权限。
+
 #### 可负担的条件效应 pilot
 
 先选三个互补任务类型，使用固定 upstream 版本的任务名称：

docs/architecture/rfcs/target-yardstick-stride-decisions-v0.md

@@ -567,6 +567,8 @@ population-selection operators remain `advisory_only`
 (`execution_authority_granted=false`) until matched-budget evidence qualifies
 promotion.
 
+<a id="policy-evolution"></a>
+
 ### 5.9 Policy evolution through the same owner
 
 | Stage | Useful next result | Retained boundary |
@@ -583,6 +585,33 @@ explicitly justified off-policy assumptions for policy-value claims. Preserve
 failed, cancelled and unknown results. Raw task data stays within the research
 boundary and cannot become a production memory or training corpus by default.
 
+When consuming these records for later learning, use the
+[action-value evidence model](../../research/budgeted-research-planning.md#action-value-evidence)
+to separate observed progress, value predicted under a continuation and remaining
+budget, and the causal contrast against a feasible alternative. A gain after
+`switch` directly supports only the first. An action name does not replace a
+concrete method, and an unchosen route is not a zero-score label.
+
+For selected decision episodes, existing provenance/followthrough should recover:
+
+- State/evidence visible at selection and remaining budget, compared routes,
+  concrete selected method, continuation revision and forecast horizon.
+- Key predictions, their basis or unknowns, and observations supporting continuation
+  or revision, recorded before outcomes are visible; keep original forecasts on revision.
+- Actual method, revision, resources and deviations; the observation's original
+  candidate/evaluator, availability time, and resulting next decision.
+- Related prerequisite and subsequent work, and the terminal outcome under the
+  frozen horizon/selection rule; preserve failure, cancellation, pending and missing coverage.
+
+These are proposed training-example semantics, not new mandatory fields on every
+Turn. Mark facts unrecoverable from existing references as missing; do not backfill
+them from later summaries or trigger evaluations to complete a form. Test forecast
+calibration, actual adoption, local paired contrasts and frozen-policy new-task
+benefit separately. Hold out shared tasks/source runs or whole branch families,
+not randomly mixed adjacent Turns. Continuing a route supported by evidence also
+counts as adoption; cue delivery, complete labels or a direction change alone
+do not establish policy benefit.
+
 No new policy registry, plan database, scheduler or universal scalar rank is
 needed for the first caller. Before any later schema change, demonstrate the
 missing producer/consumer fact, extend the existing versioned owner, and qualify
@@ -675,6 +704,8 @@ These are implementation acceptance requirements, not tests already passed.
 | C14 | Same evidence, different remaining horizons | Compare feasible terminal outcomes, including confirmation; do not require the same route or use a fixed per-candidate score. |
 | C15 | A prerequisite has no immediate gain but enables a plausible later improvement | Consider the conditional sequence and a bounded discriminating first slice; count dependent milestones once as state evidence, not independent rewards. |
 | C16 | Confirmation is pending or cannot finish under the terminal protocol | Retain immutable result attribution and honest unknowns; consider independent work or a feasible validated route without resetting cooldown or inventing gain. |
+| C17 | The next measurement improves, but the alternative is unobserved and earlier work also contributed | Record observed progress only; qualify predicted action value by continuation/budget, leave the causal contrast unknown, and link prerequisites instead of labeling the last action with all gain. |
+| C18 | A forecast is revised after the outcome, feedback arrives late, or related episodes cross training/evaluation | Recover forecasts/evidence from before result visibility; revisions preserve originals, local measurements do not stand for terminal outcomes, and evaluation isolates tasks/source runs or branch families. |
 
 Replay typed scenarios with synthetic evidence against real File/SQLite owners
 where persistence is touched. Use actual host/CLI settlement and packaged

docs/architecture/rfcs/target-yardstick-stride-decisions-v0.zh-CN.md

@@ -418,6 +418,8 @@ Bellman 表达式不会提供状态转移模型；事后峰值不能成为决策
 而非按特性复制校验或排序样板（配套收敛提案见 [#8516](https://github.com/loopx-project/loopx/pull/8516)）。
 分析与种群选择算子在通过匹配完整预算验证前一律保持 `advisory_only`（`execution_authority_granted=false`）。
 
+<a id="policy-evolution"></a>
+
 ### 5.9 沿同一 owner 演进策略
 
 | 阶段 | 下一项有用结果 | 保留的边界 |
@@ -431,6 +433,22 @@ Bellman 表达式不会提供状态转移模型；事后峰值不能成为决策
 策略价值主张使用前瞻匹配接续，或明确论证离线策略评估的假设。保留失败、取消和未知结果。
 原始任务数据留在研究边界内，不因记录轨迹就进入生产 memory 或训练语料。
 
+为后续学习消费这些记录时，按[动作价值证据](../../research/budgeted-research-planning.zh-CN.md#action-value-evidence)
+区分三件事：实际路线上的进展、给定后续规则与剩余预算的价值预测、相对可行替代的因果差异。
+`switch` 后涨分只能直接支持第一项；动作名不能代替具体方法，未选路线不能补成零分。
+
+在选定的决策片段中，已有 provenance/followthrough 应支持恢复：
+
+- 选择时可见的状态／证据与剩余预算，以及所比较路线、具体所选方法、后续策略版本和预测期限。
+- 结果可见前记录的关键预测、依据或未知项，以及会支持继续或修订的观察；后续修订保留原预测。
+- 实际方法、版本、资源与计划的差异；返回观察的原候选／评测归属、可见时刻及由此产生的下一决定。
+- 相关前置和接续工作，以及冻结期限／选择规则下的终局；失败、取消、pending 与覆盖缺失分别保留。
+
+这些是拟议学习样本的语义，不为所有 Turn 新增必填项。现有引用不能恢复的事实标为缺失，
+不要从后来摘要倒填，或为满足表格额外触发评测。分开检验预测校准、实际采用、局部配对差异与
+冻结策略的新任务收益；留出划分隔离共享任务／来源运行或分叉家族，不随机拆散相邻 Turn。
+有证据支持原路线时，继续也是采用；提示送达、标签完整或方向改变都不单独证明策略有效。
+
 首个调用方不需要新策略 registry、计划库、scheduler 或通用标量排序。
 以后若修改 schema，先证明缺失的生产者/消费者事实，再扩展既有版本化 owner，
 验证读回、恢复和关闭状态。Controller–Worker 组合以后可消费同一决策，
@@ -508,6 +526,8 @@ Provider 只暴露授权证据。原始任务、trace、凭据、私有 evaluato
 | C14 | 同样证据、不同剩余时长 | 比较包含确认的可行终局结果，不要求选择同一路线或使用固定的候选自身分数。 |
 | C15 | 前置工作不立即涨分，但使后续改善成为可能 | 考虑条件序列与有界的首个判别切片；相互依赖的里程碑只作为状态证据，不当成独立奖励。 |
 | C16 | 确认仍在进行，或无法在终局协议内完成 | 保留不可变结果归属和真实 unknown；比较独立工作或可行的已验证路线，不重置 cooldown 或虚构收益。 |
+| C17 | 下一次测量涨分，但无替代路线结果，且更早工作共同贡献 | 只记录所观测进展；动作价值注明后续策略／预算，因果差异保持未知，关联前置工作，不把全部增量当作最后动作标签。 |
+| C18 | 预测被事后修订、反馈迟到，或同源片段跨训练与评测 | 恢复结果可见前的预测和证据；修订不覆盖原记录，局部测量不冒充终局，评估按任务／来源运行或分叉家族隔离。 |
 
 若涉及持久化，用合成证据在真实 File/SQLite owner 上重放 typed 场景。
 首次采用要覆盖实际 host/CLI settlement 和 packaged readback；schema 单测不足以验收。