{
  "date": "2026-10-19",
  "standard": "restricted-frozen-portfolio-review-1",
  "nature": "restricted simulated",
  "status": "complete_restricted",
  "method_complete": true,
  "seats": 4,
  "blind_established": false,
  "certified_blind": false,
  "human_research": false,
  "totals": {
    "fixed": 6,
    "accepted": 8,
    "rejected": 3,
    "findings": 17,
    "open": 0,
    "defects": 6,
    "novel": 4,
    "multi_seat_defects": 4
  },
  "findings": [
    {
      "id": "RP01",
      "view": "D02/D03/D11",
      "seats": [
        1,
        2,
        3
      ],
      "consensus": 3,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": 1,
          "text": "There is no breakdown of that group by client or recipient to turn it into an evidence chase."
        },
        {
          "seat": 2,
          "text": "The view explains their evidence limitations but does not show an owner or plan for resolving them."
        },
        {
          "seat": 3,
          "text": "There is no list here of the particular trips to chase or the next action for each one."
        }
      ],
      "defect": true,
      "novel": true,
      "disposition": "fixed",
      "reason": "Added an evidence-follow-up guide: use existing client filters and route mapping, inspect component/target deliveries, obtain supported decision times, and open the frozen uncovered/obligations evidence. Suggested role actions are distinct from performed outreach. A new recipient-level metric or real escalation agreement is not invented."
    },
    {
      "id": "RP02",
      "view": "D05",
      "seats": [
        1,
        3
      ],
      "consensus": 2,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": 1,
          "text": "There is no open work item or named owner for chasing that unresolved outcome, despite the record still lacking an acceptance decision."
        },
        {
          "seat": 3,
          "text": "There is no plain explanation of why the final outcome is unresolved or what would settle it."
        }
      ],
      "defect": true,
      "novel": false,
      "disposition": "fixed",
      "reason": "Added delivery-level guidance for a received unresolved final response: receipt timing is satisfied, outcome is not acceptance, encounter operations would request a resolved source decision from the displayed recipient. No new counted work item, invented cause or automatic transport-company correction."
    },
    {
      "id": "RP03",
      "view": "D10",
      "seats": [
        1,
        2
      ],
      "consensus": 2,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": 1,
          "text": "The page names the blocked probe but does not explain its practical effect on confidence in the claims evidence."
        },
        {
          "seat": 2,
          "text": "The consequence of that blocked probe is not explained here in terms of which conclusions remain unsupported."
        }
      ],
      "defect": true,
      "novel": false,
      "disposition": "fixed",
      "reason": "Explained that unavailable independent custody leaves an independently controlled unseen evaluation and final-control effectiveness unsubstantiated. It does not negate the separate numerical comparison. N/A is tied to those unmade claims; the raw probe stays not_evaluated."
    },
    {
      "id": "RP04",
      "view": "D11",
      "seats": [
        2,
        3
      ],
      "consensus": 2,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": 2,
          "text": "The page discloses missed and unrepresented classes from the historical evaluation, but does not identify those classes or show their current disposition."
        },
        {
          "seat": 3,
          "text": "There is no concrete trip or payment example showing what those missed targets would mean for the company."
        }
      ],
      "defect": true,
      "novel": true,
      "disposition": "fixed",
      "reason": "Added all six historical class names, all ten unrepresented class IDs, their exact result link and a plain interpretation of timing/coverage risks. Historical misses are not rescored or attributed to final controls."
    },
    {
      "id": "RP05",
      "view": "D01",
      "seats": [
        3
      ],
      "consensus": 1,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": 3,
          "text": "There is no example of the actual record to send to clear this hold."
        }
      ],
      "defect": true,
      "novel": true,
      "disposition": "fixed",
      "reason": "Extended vendor-payment help with typed amount, service link, source and effective/received times, plus a payment-ledger example. A bank transfer alone needs allocation. Explicitly a model example rather than an actual client documentation requirement."
    },
    {
      "id": "RP06",
      "view": "D01/D07/D11",
      "seats": [
        1
      ],
      "consensus": 1,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": 1,
          "text": "The view names the owner role, but there is no named supplier or contact for the missing payment evidence."
        },
        {
          "seat": 1,
          "text": "The reference value is shown, but the person or team that supplied it is not."
        },
        {
          "seat": 1,
          "text": "The page explains that the acceptance stays visible without coverage credit, but gives no route or owner for obtaining the missing decision time."
        }
      ],
      "defect": false,
      "novel": null,
      "disposition": "accepted",
      "reason": "The frozen synthetic pack does not establish real people, contacts or originator teams. Role/route guidance is added under RP01, but personal contacts or a claim about who supplied the source cannot be fabricated."
    },
    {
      "id": "RP07",
      "view": "D08",
      "seats": [
        3
      ],
      "consensus": 1,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": 3,
          "text": "There is no recognizable company name or bank payment reference to match that amount against the company\u2019s books."
        }
      ],
      "defect": false,
      "novel": null,
      "disposition": "accepted",
      "reason": "Synthetic vendor-payment observations are not a bank reconciliation or proof of money received by a real company. The interface keeps typed amounts/source identities. Real party and bank matching belongs to a different data contract."
    },
    {
      "id": "RP08",
      "view": "D09",
      "seats": [
        2
      ],
      "consensus": 1,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": 2,
          "text": "The view gives an owner role and next action, but no record of follow-up already performed or recipient reply."
        }
      ],
      "defect": false,
      "novel": null,
      "disposition": "accepted",
      "reason": "No such operational outreach log exists in frozen v1. Suggested next action is not execution evidence. Adding one would invent historical activity."
    },
    {
      "id": "RP09",
      "view": "D06",
      "seats": [
        2
      ],
      "consensus": 1,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": 2,
          "text": "The rejection has no reason code or wording, and the view explicitly says none was supplied, so the cause cannot be established here."
        }
      ],
      "defect": false,
      "novel": null,
      "disposition": "accepted",
      "reason": "The missing cause is already disclosed and absent from the source. Keeping the rejection unresolved is more accurate than supplying a synthetic explanation after freezing."
    },
    {
      "id": "RP10",
      "view": "D04",
      "seats": [
        2
      ],
      "consensus": 1,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": 2,
          "text": "Recipient acceptance or rejection is not shown here; claim-to-source conformity alone does not answer that."
        }
      ],
      "defect": false,
      "novel": null,
      "disposition": "rejected",
      "reason": "D04 is a claim-family slice; the same record page has separate downstream and response sections. It correctly does not treat claim-to-source conformity as recipient acceptance. The complete record and delivery inspection remain linked."
    },
    {
      "id": "RP11",
      "view": "D10",
      "seats": [
        3
      ],
      "consensus": 1,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": 3,
          "text": "There is no confirmation from an actual transport-company reader that the record requirements and payment amounts make sense to them; the page says zero new reader seats ran."
        }
      ],
      "defect": false,
      "novel": null,
      "disposition": "accepted",
      "reason": "The current panel is simulated, not human-user research. The updated page reports four actual simulated processes and explicitly avoids a transport-company-reader claim. Actual operations readers remain a next-iteration item."
    },
    {
      "id": "RP12",
      "view": "V02",
      "seats": [
        4
      ],
      "consensus": 1,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": 4,
          "text": "The wide version has small category labels and footnotes, but no obvious clipping or overlap."
        }
      ],
      "defect": false,
      "novel": null,
      "disposition": "accepted",
      "reason": "All measured visible text is at least 12 px; labels remain legible in the attached wide/phone renders. No clipping or failed read was identified. Independent human legibility certification is outside the method."
    },
    {
      "id": "RP13",
      "view": "V02",
      "seats": [
        4
      ],
      "consensus": 1,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": 4,
          "text": "The phone version makes the text accessible by placing labels above bars, although the introduction is long and the chart requires substantial vertical scrolling."
        },
        {
          "seat": 4,
          "text": "The extra gap after the leading category on the phone slightly interrupts the otherwise regular list."
        }
      ],
      "defect": false,
      "novel": null,
      "disposition": "accepted",
      "reason": "Phone layout reserves a separate line for the leading-category share annotation. Required population, rule-order and rounding explanations remain on the figure. Scrolling is preferable to dropping those meanings; no actionable overlap was found."
    },
    {
      "id": "RP14",
      "view": "V02",
      "seats": [
        4
      ],
      "consensus": 1,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": 4,
          "text": "The **33.3% of uncovered legs** annotation states a share, but no whole is drawn against which to see that proportion."
        }
      ],
      "defect": false,
      "novel": null,
      "disposition": "rejected",
      "reason": "The chart claims a ranking, not a part-to-whole visual. The numeric annotation names its denominator; the table supplies both denominators. A whole mark is not required to support the largest-category claim."
    },
    {
      "id": "RP15",
      "view": "V02",
      "seats": [
        4
      ],
      "consensus": 1,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": 4,
          "text": "The smallest bar, \u201c9. Evidence received, outcome unresolved,\u201d is barely wider than its baseline; its **45** label is essential."
        }
      ],
      "defect": false,
      "novel": null,
      "disposition": "rejected",
      "reason": "Exact linear bar lengths and a zero baseline necessarily make a 45-count bar small beside 3,659. Its direct label and exact readout preserve access. Enlarging the bar would distort the scale."
    },
    {
      "id": "RP16",
      "view": "D02",
      "seats": [
        1
      ],
      "consensus": 1,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": 1,
          "text": "3,659 legs have no usable outcome evidence; that exact count comes from the first row of the \u201cUncovered completed legs by explanation\u201d table beneath the chart."
        }
      ],
      "defect": false,
      "novel": null,
      "disposition": "accepted",
      "reason": "Recorded as a table-sourced number, not a mark-sourced chart read. The separate chart reader located 3.66k on the longest bar. Exact-count preference is served by the table and readout; rounding is disclosed. No claim that all domain readers sourced a number from marks."
    },
    {
      "id": "RP17",
      "view": "payment-action follow-up",
      "seats": [
        "directed follow-up"
      ],
      "consensus": 1,
      "quotes": [
        {
          "seat": "directed follow-up",
          "source": "governance/review-2026-10-19/follow-up-first-return.md",
          "text": "Specify whether every displayed unit has passed its applicable stage deadline, or both deadlines, and identify what \u201cthis position\u201d means."
        }
      ],
      "defect": true,
      "novel": true,
      "disposition": "fixed",
      "reason": "Removed the unsupported blanket lateness statement. Suggested outreach is explicitly not recorded activity, and readers open the unit to inspect its own applicable due time/state at the selected business and knowledge cutoffs. A missing fact alone does not establish lateness."
    }
  ],
  "metrics": {
    "chart_subpanel": {
      "charts": 1,
      "defects": 0,
      "D": 0,
      "N": null,
      "reason": "Only the visualization seat was assigned V02 alone. Domain packets included informational sections; their counts cannot be relabeled defects/chart."
    },
    "mixed_review": {
      "views": 12,
      "D_per_view": 0.5,
      "N": 0.6666666666666666,
      "R": 0.17647058823529413,
      "note": "Includes one additional actionable clarification from directed post-fix verification; not a second naive read."
    },
    "retirement_trigger": "Not evaluated. This restricted mixed chart/section review is not a comparable three-module blind series."
  },
  "limits": [
    "Four separate model processes, not four human or independently held evaluators.",
    "One shared model service/workstation. Full provider-request and hidden-system-context audit not established.",
    "Prompts and images frozen before returns. At most three concurrent processes; fourth queued automatically.",
    "Domain images show expanded information sections, not only the collapsed initial viewport. Browser checks separately cover interactive behavior.",
    "Completed method and dispositions do not certify absence of every possible misunderstanding."
  ]
}