Five More Scenarios Make Operating Boundaries Visible

Release at a glance

The public Scenario library now contains sixteen reviewed entries. Five new scenarios widen the collection into software delivery, electric-utility restoration, port logistics, classroom evidence revision, and insurance claim review. Each starts with a plausible green signal—a healthy aggregate, a feasible topology, a discharge event, a familiar answer, or a high confidence score—and then exposes the evidence or authority that signal cannot supply.

The release record also names two maintained-bundle reference Scenarios: Course Echo: One Transport Disappears and The Factory Was Already There. Their deterministic Grid FYI publication fixtures have retained R3 verification evidence, and their selected public artifacts have passed editorial, product-boundary, accessibility, and Vercel-build gates with owners and review dates. That combination advances the Scenario packages to R6; it does not turn publication-fixture proof into Grid-runtime, defense-integration, plant-execution, deployment, or outcome evidence.

The Finding That Changed After Publication also advances to R3. Its eighteen-test deterministic publication fixture, independently reviewed oracle, retained execution, and distinct final comparison preserve the exact 70/100 to 55/85 correction, eight-object stale cone, authority sequence, and immutable predecessor release. This is verification of a wholly synthetic Grid FYI research-correction trace—not scientific validity, peer review, replication, repository integration, publication acceptance, or a real finding.

The five additions remain R2. Their sources, domain context, product boundaries, authority contracts, acceptance cases, and derivative opportunities have been reviewed, while their package-owned executable fixtures have not yet been implemented or run. Public availability and fixture verification remain separate states.

Two maintained public bundles

Course Echo's maintained bundle contains the Scenario page, released film, and Change One Fact interactive. The bundle is pinned to source and fixture revision 2026-08-27.2, has a named owner and November 27 review date, and retains passing editorial, product-boundary, accessibility, and Vercel-build evidence.

The manufacturing bundle contains The Factory Was Already There, its 12-slide presentation, two-page Scenario brief, and interactive factory fixture. The artifacts are pinned to source revision 2026-08-26.2 and fixture revision 2026-08-27.2, with the same four release gates, owner, and review date. The presentation and brief explicitly identify the verified publication-fixture state and the absent runtime, plant-integration, physical-execution, quality-release, energy-delivery, and outcome evidence.

In both cases, “maintained” means the selected Grid FYI editorial artifacts are public, gated, owned, and reviewable. It does not mean that every possible derivative exists or that the fictional composition is an available product deployment.

Five operating boundaries

1. The Release That Had to Explain Its Rollback separates a passing blended service metric from a failing canary cohort. Seven external delivery effects remain indeterminate while a human authorizes one exact rollback plan. Deployment request acceptance, observed workload state, validation, and provider reconciliation answer different questions; returning code to a prior revision cannot erase work already sent outside the service.
2. The Feeder That Could Not Be Restored Yet lets a synthetic partial-restoration plan pass a simple capacity screen while current isolation and field-clearance evidence remain missing or contradictory. The model may expose the gap and assemble a conditional packet. It cannot determine electrical safety, issue switching, release a clearance, energize equipment, or publish service restoration as fact.
3. The Container That Arrived in Only One System connects carrier, customs-broker, terminal, appointment, motor-carrier, gate, and consignee records without turning them into one mutable master status. A discharge event and two release assertions do not create terminal availability. A corrected stack location, freshness limit, named dispatch authority, external pickup report, and consignee receipt remain distinct.
4. The Lesson That Changed When the Evidence Did follows a learner’s private assumption branch, a source steward’s later correction, and the affected cone across an answer, chart, explanation, slide, translation, alt text, feedback, and next question. AI may draft replacements, but source validity, science review, accessibility, language parity, curriculum release, assessment, and learner progression retain separate human owners.
5. The Claim That a Confidence Score Could Not Close keeps a 0.94 image-model score inside the question it was designed to answer. Corrected inspection evidence changes image membership, draft scope, a reserve candidate, and review state. It does not determine cause, coverage, fraud, policy meaning, payment authority, settlement, notice, or fair treatment.

A reusable Scenario pattern

Across the five additions, a Scenario is not a loose narrative. It is one maintained contract with:

• an exact setting, timeframe, trigger, decision, and authority boundary;
• eight ordered beats that preserve revisions, contradictions, corrections, and unresolved states;
• a capability ledger separating documented Grid primitives, authored composition, and missing or unqualified work;
• official primary sources used only for narrow domain-context propositions;
• an authored deterministic fixture contract and negative cases that identify the next proof without pretending it already exists;
• explicit proposal, human authorization, submission acknowledgment, execution report, and outcome-observation states; and
• derivative opportunities for scripts, films, presentations, briefs, and interactives pinned to the same source and fixture revisions.

The five stories deliberately test the same discipline in different consequence classes. A model result is not authority. Authentication is not delegation. A request acknowledgment is not execution. Reported execution is not an observed outcome. A correction advances the current state without rewriting the evidence and decision context that came before it.

How to verify this release

1. Open the Scenario index and confirm that it contains sixteen addressable Scenario cards.
2. Open each of the five new pages and inspect its semantic contract, eight-beat trace, capability ledger, proof state, evidence boundary, and declared companion links.
3. Confirm that each new proof panel identifies an authored R2 fixture whose next step is implementation, independent oracle review, retained execution, and verification.
4. Compare those pages with Course Echo and The Factory Was Already There. Confirm that their R6 state names a maintained public bundle, while the R3 fixture basis applies only to retained Grid FYI publication-fixture evidence and does not claim a domain deployment or external outcome.
5. Open The Finding That Changed After Publication and confirm that its R3 proof names the retained deterministic run, independent oracle review, and distinct verification while keeping scientific and institutional proof explicitly out of scope.
6. Follow the declared Use Case, Insight, and film links and confirm that the Scenario remains a first-class editorial form rather than being collapsed into another collection.
7. Confirm that Grid FYI continues to use the repository’s existing Vercel project and grids365.fyi routes, with no secondary host, mirror, or hosting migration.

Evidence, availability, and remaining proof

Public means the pages, package records, relationships, and this permanent release record are part of the Grid FYI static production build. The evidence classification applies to the inspectable publication experience, not to the authored operating events inside the Scenarios.

The new sources contain no real customer, learner, claimant, shipment, utility, release, production system, credential, control endpoint, protected record, or operating instruction. Their official sources ground only bounded domain context. Their Grid claims remain pinned to separately reviewed product documentation. Their calculations and outcomes are synthetic authored facts.

Moving any pattern toward an intended environment would require responsible organizations to qualify data contracts, mappings, identity, delegation, policy, security, privacy, accessibility, records, domain rules, external-system semantics, failure handling, reconciliation, monitoring, and acceptance evidence. Software, utility, logistics, education, and insurance owners retain the real authority to decide whether such work is appropriate. This release offers inspectable questions and reusable boundaries, not permission to act.