derived-belief-pipeline-achieves-code-enforced-quality
OUT derived (depth 3)
The derived belief pipeline — creation via defensive derivation with structural validation, Jaccard retraction guards, and environment isolation, followed by independent review with scope restricted to derived beliefs and mutation gated behind dry-run — achieves completely code-enforced quality assurance including logical soundness validation, only when inference soundness checking is implemented in code rather than relying solely on LLM prompt instructions.
Summary
The derive and review pipelines together would provide end-to-end quality assurance that is enforced by code rather than by trusting LLM prompts, but only if inference soundness checking is actually implemented programmatically. This belief is currently marked OUT, meaning one or both of its supporting claims about pipeline safety/completeness or review scope/mutation-safety are not holding, so the overall quality assurance guarantee cannot be relied upon right now.
Justifications
SL — Creation-phase structural safety + evaluation-phase scoped review achieve full code enforcement only when logical soundness moves from prompt-only to programmatic validation
Antecedents (all must be IN):
- derive-pipeline-is-safe-and-complete — The derive pipeline simultaneously provides safety (fail-soft validation, Jaccard retraction guards, environment isolation) and completeness (exhaustive exploration with guaranteed cycle-free termination), ensuring LLM-driven belief generation discovers all derivable conclusions without corruption risk.
- review-pipeline-is-scoped-and-mutation-safe — The belief review pipeline restricts evaluation to derived beliefs only (premises excluded) and gates auto-retraction behind the dry-run flag, ensuring review operations are scope-limited and mutation-safe by default.
Unless (any of these IN defeats this justification):
- derived-belief-soundness-is-llm-only — Structural validation ensures justification references exist and are IN, but the logical soundness of the inference from antecedents to derived conclusion is validated only by the proposing LLM — no code-level check verifies that the reasoning step is logically valid.