Add controlled request-acceptance derivation experiment

docs/experiments.md

@@ -1627,6 +1627,59 @@ structural validity. This conclusion applies only to the minimal V3 first
 stage and does not determine model choice for any later semantic derivation.
 No production integration, derivation implementation or Progeo run occurred.
 
+## EXP-0031 — Controlled Semantic Derivation H V0
+
+Date: 2026-08-19
+
+This isolated experiment tested the first controlled second-stage derivation
+using only the accepted `qwen3.5:9B` V3 observations for case H. The derivation
+LLM received the two V3 observations, not the transcript or Gold expectation.
+Its deliberately narrow task was limited to recognizing whether `obs_1` is a
+concrete request and whether `obs_2` explicitly commits its speaker to
+substantially the same work. Its strict output schema forbids responsibility,
+requested actor, establishment/status, Action Item, protocol, confidence and
+generic relation/graph fields.
+
+Deterministic code validates observation/evidence provenance, obtains the
+requested actor only from the request observation's addressee, requires the
+acceptance to follow the request, requires the accepting speaker to equal that
+addressee, and establishes responsibility only after all semantic and
+structural gates pass. A bounded weekday normalizer reconciles `Friday` and
+`Freitag`, rejects conflicting weekdays, and separates the supported due date
+from the normalized action text. No general temporal or action ontology was
+introduced.
+
+Twenty focused deterministic tests cover the positive H path and the required
+negative invariants: request alone, acknowledgement/non-commitment, tentative
+acceptance, different response speaker, different work, reversed order,
+speaker/name/addressee alone, conflicting deadlines, unknown observation IDs,
+inconsistent evidence provenance, forbidden semantic fields, malformed JSON
+and persistent artifacts. The complete non-LLM suite passed 192/192.
+
+Configuration: one `qwen3.5:9B` call, temperature 0, `think=false`,
+`num_ctx=16384`, `num_predict=1024`, no retries or voting. The call took 11.765
+seconds, with 469 prompt-evaluation and 124 evaluation tokens. The model
+returned a valid recognition object: `obs_1` is a concrete request, `obs_2` is
+an explicit commitment, and both concern substantially the same work. It
+returned no responsibility or establishment judgment.
+
+All deterministic gates passed. The final derived result is an established
+action `Prüfung der Messdaten`, requested from and assigned to Nina, due
+`Freitag`, supported by request `obs_1/e1` and acceptance `obs_2/e2`. The model
+included `bis Friday` in its normalized request text; after the single call, a
+deterministic-only bounded correction separated that already-recognized due
+phrase from action content without changing the prompt, recognition schema,
+semantic result or call count. Focused and complete non-LLM suites still
+passed after this correction.
+
+Artifacts are preserved under
+`artifacts/experiments/controlled_semantic_derivation_h/20260819_h_qwen35_9b_single_run/`.
+Result: the H mechanism succeeded. This establishes only that the narrow
+request-plus-explicit-acceptance pattern can be recognized and gated for H; it
+does not generalize the derivation architecture to other cases or semantic
+categories. No production integration, other case run, semantic graph,
+protocol derivation or Progeo run occurred.
+
 ## EXP-0026 — Topic-oriented Discussion Subject reconstruction V2 prototype
 
 Date: 2026-08-11