{
  "scan_root": "C:\\Users\\wangq\\Documents\\Codex\\work-projects\\the-mindscape-of-bro-tsong",
  "config_path": "C:\\Users\\wangq\\Documents\\Codex\\work-projects\\the-mindscape-of-bro-tsong\\local_ccra_reviews\\round-04\\pilot-02\\lifecycle-guard-config.yaml",
  "files_scanned": [
    "AGENTS.md",
    "cards/card_index.md",
    "cards/intellectual_archaeology.md",
    "cards/qpi.md",
    "cards/README.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-02_2026-06-16_second-audit/00_OPEN_THIS_FIRST_CCRA_REVIEW_BRIEF.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-02_2026-06-16_second-audit/01_GUIDANCE_PACK_AND_COMPLIANCE_MATRIX.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-02_2026-06-16_second-audit/02_CURRENT_ASSET_PACK.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-02_2026-06-16_second-audit/03_REPORTS_DIFF_AND_COMMAND_LOG.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-02_2026-06-16_second-audit/BUNDLE_FILE_MANIFEST.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.1_2026-06-17_selector-no-call-regression-patch/00_OPEN_THIS_FIRST_CCRA_REVIEW_BRIEF03.1.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.1_2026-06-17_selector-no-call-regression-patch/01_PATCH_MATRIX_03.1.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.1_2026-06-17_selector-no-call-regression-patch/02_CURRENT_ASSET_PACK03.1.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.1_2026-06-17_selector-no-call-regression-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG03.1.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.1_2026-06-17_selector-no-call-regression-patch/04_REVIEW_QUESTIONS_FOR_GPT03.1.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.1_2026-06-17_selector-no-call-regression-patch/BUNDLE_FILE_MANIFEST03.1.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2_2026-06-17_selector-negative-gate-patch/00_OPEN_THIS_FIRST_CCRA_REVIEW_BRIEF_03.2.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2_2026-06-17_selector-negative-gate-patch/01_PATCH_MATRIX_03.2.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2_2026-06-17_selector-negative-gate-patch/02_CURRENT_ASSET_PACK_03.2.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2_2026-06-17_selector-negative-gate-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2_2026-06-17_selector-negative-gate-patch/04_REVIEW_QUESTIONS_FOR_GPT_03.2.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2_2026-06-17_selector-negative-gate-patch/BUNDLE_FILE_MANIFEST_03.2.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2a_2026-06-17_depth-limiting-qpi-override-patch/00_OPEN_THIS_FIRST_CCRA_REVIEW_BRIEF_03.2a.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2a_2026-06-17_depth-limiting-qpi-override-patch/01_PATCH_MATRIX_03.2a.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2a_2026-06-17_depth-limiting-qpi-override-patch/02_CURRENT_ASSET_PACK_03.2a.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2a_2026-06-17_depth-limiting-qpi-override-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2a.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2a_2026-06-17_depth-limiting-qpi-override-patch/04_REVIEW_QUESTIONS_FOR_GPT_03.2a.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2a_2026-06-17_depth-limiting-qpi-override-patch/BUNDLE_FILE_MANIFEST_03.2a.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03_2026-06-17_contract-hardening-selector-calibration/00_OPEN_THIS_FIRST_CCRA_REVIEW_BRIEF.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03_2026-06-17_contract-hardening-selector-calibration/01_GUIDANCE_PACK_AND_COMPLIANCE_MATRIX.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03_2026-06-17_contract-hardening-selector-calibration/02_CURRENT_ASSET_PACK.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03_2026-06-17_contract-hardening-selector-calibration/03_REPORTS_DIFF_AND_COMMAND_LOG.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03_2026-06-17_contract-hardening-selector-calibration/04_QPI_CASE_PROMOTION_SUMMARY_AND_REVIEW_GUIDE.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03_2026-06-17_contract-hardening-selector-calibration/05_REVIEW_QUESTIONS_FOR_GPT.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-03_2026-06-17_contract-hardening-selector-calibration/BUNDLE_FILE_MANIFEST.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-04.1_2026-06-18_selector-rule-patch/00_OPEN_THIS_FIRST_CCRA_REVIEW_BRIEF_04.1.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-04.1_2026-06-18_selector-rule-patch/01_RULE_PATCH_SUMMARY_AND_DIFF_04.1.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-04.1_2026-06-18_selector-rule-patch/02_EXPECTED_ROUTING_LABELS_04.1.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-04.1_2026-06-18_selector-rule-patch/03_POST_PATCH_ROUTING_VERIFICATION_REPORT_04.1.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-04.1_2026-06-18_selector-rule-patch/04_REGRESSION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_04.1.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-04.1_2026-06-18_selector-rule-patch/BUNDLE_FILE_MANIFEST_04.1.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-04.1_2026-06-18_selector-rule-patch/optional_raw_changed_files_04.1.zip.validation.json",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-04_2026-06-18_blind-input-routing-evaluation/00_OPEN_THIS_FIRST_CCRA_REVIEW_BRIEF_04.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-04_2026-06-18_blind-input-routing-evaluation/01_ROUND03_CLOSURE_AND_ROUND04_SCOPE_04.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-04_2026-06-18_blind-input-routing-evaluation/02_BLIND_INPUT_SET_04.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-04_2026-06-18_blind-input-routing-evaluation/03_ROUTING_EVALUATION_REPORT_04.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-04_2026-06-18_blind-input-routing-evaluation/04_REVIEW_QUESTIONS_FOR_GPT_04.md",
    "ccra_review_bundle/round-04_2026-06-18_blind-input-routing-evaluation/BUNDLE_FILE_MANIFEST_04.md",
    "docs/CHATGPT_HANDOFF_RULES.md",
    "docs/CONTENT_STABILIZATION_PROTOCOL.md",
    "docs/DATA_CONTRACT.md",
    "docs/DECISIONS.md",
    "docs/FILE_TAXONOMY.md",
    "docs/GPT_PLAN_LOCALIZATION_PROTOCOL.md",
    "docs/HANDOFF_TEMPLATE.md",
    "docs/INDEX_MAINTENANCE_PROTOCOL.md",
    "docs/INTELLECTUAL_ARCHAEOLOGY_DEPTH_GATE.md",
    "docs/KNOWLEDGE_ASSET_RULES.md",
    "docs/MODEL_CARD_CONTRACT.md",
    "docs/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/CASE_PREPROCESSING_WORKFLOW.md",
    "docs/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/README.md",
    "docs/model_case_preprocessing/README.md",
    "docs/MODEL_EXTRACTION_RULES.md",
    "docs/MODEL_EXTRACTION_WORKFLOW.md",
    "docs/NON_GOALS.md",
    "docs/PROJECT_BRIEF.md",
    "docs/QPI_CONTEXTUAL_ROUTING_RULES.md",
    "docs/superpowers/plans/2026-06-16-model-extraction-contract-and-workflow.md",
    "docs/superpowers/plans/2026-06-16-project-initialization.md",
    "docs/superpowers/plans/2026-06-17-contract-hardening-selector-calibration.md",
    "docs/superpowers/plans/2026-06-18-round04-1-selector-rule-patch.md",
    "docs/superpowers/plans/2026-06-18-round04-blind-routing-evaluation.md",
    "docs/WORKFLOW.md",
    "knowledge_assets/00_用户背景与产品上下文.md",
    "knowledge_assets/01_核心模型地图.md",
    "knowledge_assets/02_模型卡结构规范.md",
    "knowledge_assets/03_核心模型抽取样板.md",
    "knowledge_assets/06_模型稳固性评级规则.md",
    "knowledge_assets/07_产品规划过程记录.md",
    "knowledge_assets/08_CCRA模型库MVP质量门与交接协议.md",
    "knowledge_assets/09_数据治理与模型调用机制说明.md",
    "knowledge_assets/10_本地CCRA评审机制说明.md",
    "knowledge_assets/README.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/README.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/04_LOCAL_CCRA_REVIEW_REPORT.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/05_WEB_LOCAL_CCRA_COMPARISON.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/agent-invocation-packet.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/gate-manifest.yaml",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/bundle-audit.json",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/bundle-audit.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/gate-run-report.json",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/gate-run-report.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/lifecycle-guard-config.yaml",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/owner-decision.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/prompt-to-send.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/returned-output.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/review-context.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/review-file-manifest.json",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/review-metadata.json",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/run-notes.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/agent-invocation-packet.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/gate-manifest.yaml",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/helper-outputs/bundle-audit.json",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/helper-outputs/bundle-audit.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/helper-outputs/gate-run-report.json",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/helper-outputs/gate-run-report.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/lifecycle-guard-config.yaml",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/owner-decision.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/prompt-to-send.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/review-metadata.json",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/run-notes.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/turn-prompts/comparison-turn.prompt.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/turn-prompts/planning-turn.prompt.md",
    "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/turn-prompts/review-turn.prompt.md",
    "models/intellectual_archaeology.model.json",
    "models/model_index.json",
    "models/qpi.model.json",
    "models/README.md",
    "PROJECTS.md",
    "README.md",
    "reports/baseline_before_content_stabilization_v0.2.md",
    "reports/changed_files_manifest.md",
    "reports/ChatGPT交接文档_模型库MVP_2026-06-16.md",
    "reports/ChatGPT交接文档_模型库MVP_第二轮内容稳定化_2026-06-16.md",
    "reports/Codex_工程产物摘要_v0.1.md",
    "reports/Codex_本地CCRA规划落地_2026-06-19.md",
    "reports/Codex_模型资产链路摘要_v0.1.md",
    "reports/Codex新会话交接文档_CCRA评审后处理_2026-06-16.md",
    "reports/Codex新会话交接文档_QPI案例草稿审阅与第三轮后续_2026-06-17.md",
    "reports/Codex新会话交接文档_Round03.1评审后续_2026-06-17.md",
    "reports/Codex新会话交接文档_Round03.2a评审准备_2026-06-17.md",
    "reports/Codex新会话交接文档_Round03.2评审准备_2026-06-17.md",
    "reports/Codex新会话交接文档_Round04.1关闭与Round05准备_2026-06-18.md",
    "reports/Codex新会话交接文档_模型库MVP_2026-06-16.md",
    "reports/command_log.md",
    "reports/content_review_report.md",
    "reports/content_review_report_v0.2.md",
    "reports/evidence_coverage_matrix.md",
    "reports/evidence_coverage_report_v0.2.md",
    "reports/GPT规划落地差异检查_v0.1.md",
    "reports/GPT讨论上下文_QPI草稿案例审阅_2026-06-17.md",
    "reports/index_check_report.md",
    "reports/index_rebuild_report.md",
    "reports/model_card_sync_report_v0.2.md",
    "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md",
    "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/flow-redesign.cases.md",
    "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/README.md",
    "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
    "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-development-office.cases.md",
    "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md",
    "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-engineering-center.cases.md",
    "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md",
    "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-research-office.cases.md",
    "reports/model_review_status.json",
    "reports/next_action_register_v0.2.md",
    "reports/open_questions_for_CCRA.md",
    "reports/README.md",
    "reports/Round04_1_post_patch_routing_verification_report_2026-06-18.md",
    "reports/Round04_blind_input_candidates_2026-06-18.md",
    "reports/Round04_blind_routing_evaluation_report_2026-06-18.md",
    "reports/schema_change_notes.md",
    "reports/selector_calibration_smoke_report.md",
    "reports/selector_regression_report.md",
    "reports/selector_regression_report_v0.2.md",
    "reports/selector_score_breakdown.md",
    "reports/validation_report.md",
    "reports/内容修复检查摘要_v0.1.md",
    "reports/内容修复检查摘要_v0.2.md",
    "reports/规则Schema工作流检查摘要_v0.1.md",
    "requirements/ccpe/2026-06-19-ccra-local-reviewer-runtime-patch1.md",
    "requirements/ccpe/2026-06-19-ccra-local-reviewer-runtime.md",
    "requirements/ccpe/README.md",
    "requirements/skills-vault/2026-06-18-review-bundle-zip-packager.md",
    "requirements/skills-vault/README.md",
    "schemas/card_index.schema.json",
    "schemas/model_card.schema.json",
    "schemas/model_index.schema.json",
    "schemas/model_spec.schema.json",
    "schemas/README.md",
    "schemas/regression_case.schema.json",
    "schemas/source_article.schema.json",
    "schemas/source_excerpt.schema.json",
    "scripts/README.md",
    "selector/qpi_case_digests.json",
    "selector/README.md",
    "selector/round04_blind_inputs.json",
    "selector/selector_calibration_inputs.json",
    "selector/selector_examples.json",
    "selector/selector_rules.json",
    "sources/evidence_coverage.matrix.json",
    "sources/README.md",
    "sources/source_articles.json",
    "sources/source_excerpts.json",
    "tests/intellectual_archaeology.regression.json",
    "tests/qpi.regression.json",
    "tests/README.md",
    "tests/regression_cases.json",
    "tests/regression_index.json"
  ],
  "possible_overclaims": [
    {
      "file": "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2_2026-06-17_selector-negative-gate-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 59,
      "column": 58,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "on_report.md` - `reports/selector_regression_report_v0.2.md` - `reports/selector_calibration_smoke_report.md` - `reports/model_card_sync_report_v0.2.md` ## Important Interpretation Validation pass does not mean model content is stable or owner-approved. It only means the Round 03.2 selector negative-gate patch is structurally consistent and passes current local checks.",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2a_2026-06-17_depth-limiting-qpi-override-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2a.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 47,
      "column": 58,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ct: PASS - Selector demo: PASS - Selector regression: PASS - Selector calibration smoke: PASS, 95 inputs, 0 failures, 0 warnings - Model/card sync: PASS ## Important Interpretation Validation pass does not mean model content is stable or owner-approved. It only means the Round 03.2a selector precedence patch is structurally consistent and passes current local checks.",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "docs/DECISIONS.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 175,
      "column": 154,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "such as `先不要思想考古` could still lose to positive IA signals and QPI-completed bonuses. A user instruction that names a model and refuses it should not be represented as a normal score penalty. It must hard-exclude that model unless a later owner-approved rule defines an explicit reversal phrase. The current Round 03.2 implementation keeps this scoped: - It rejects only the explicitly refused model. - It does not create a global no-call. - It does not add an LLM selector, RAG, database, s",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "docs/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/CASE_PREPROCESSING_WORKFLOW.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 160,
      "column": 27,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "Do not: - write selector JSON directly; - update regression cases directly; - upgrade model status; - create a third model; - summarize the whole source instead of extracting cases; - quote long source passages; - pretend draft cases are owner-approved. ## 7. Promotion Path The promotion path is: ```text raw source -> Markdown case drafts -> owner review and correction -> case digest JSON -> selector calibration inputs or regression cases ``` Only owner-reviewed cases may become mach",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 204,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"ct: PASS - Selector demo: PASS - Selector regression: PASS - Selector calibration smoke: PASS, 95 inputs, 0 failures, 0 warnings - Model/card sync: PASS ## Important Interpretation Validation pass does not mean model content is stable or owner-approved. It only means the Round 03.2a selector precedence patch is structurally consistent and passes current local checks.\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"docs/DECISIONS.md\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 210,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "precedence patch is structurally consistent and passes current local checks.\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"docs/DECISIONS.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 175, \"column\": 154, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"such as `先不要思想考古` could still lose to positive IA signals and QPI-completed bonuses. A user instruction that names a",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 215,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"such as `先不要思想考古` could still lose to positive IA signals and QPI-completed bonuses. A user instruction that names a model and refuses it should not be represented as a normal score penalty. It must hard-exclude that model unless a later owner-approved rule defines an explicit reversal phrase. The current Round 03.2 implementation keeps this scoped: - It rejects only the explicitly refused model. - It does not create a global no-call. - It does not add an LLM selector, RAG, database, s\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 221,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "LLM selector, RAG, database, s\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"docs/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/CASE_PREPROCESSING_WORKFLOW.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 160, \"column\": 27, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"Do not: - write selector JSON directly; - update regression cases directly; - upgrade model status; - create a third",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 226,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"Do not: - write selector JSON directly; - update regression cases directly; - upgrade model status; - create a third model; - summarize the whole source instead of extracting cases; - quote long source passages; - pretend draft cases are owner-approved. ## 7. Promotion Path The promotion path is: ```text raw source -> Markdown case drafts -> owner review and correction -> case digest JSON -> selector calibration inputs or regression cases ``` Only owner-reviewed cases may become mach\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 232,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "mach\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 263, \"column\": 8, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"w Questions - Should QPI explicitly mark \\\"single-cause reduction\\\" as a subtype of violent reduction? - Should this c",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 237,
      "column": 260,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "Questions - Should QPI explicitly mark \\\"single-cause reduction\\\" as a subtype of violent reduction? - Should this case be used to test that QPI does not output a single definitive cause when the source provides coupled mechanisms? - What owner-approved language should be used to distinguish explanatory usefulness from causal finality? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - Keep the case, but avoid the overbroad rule \\\"all single-cause attribution is wrong.\\\" - Rename the risk to `single_facto\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 243,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "facto\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 275, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"n. - Prevent QPI from outputting a single definitive root cause when coupled mechanisms are already present. - Require",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 248,
      "column": 255,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\": \"n. - Prevent QPI from outputting a single definitive root cause when coupled mechanisms are already present. - Require distinction between trigger, maintaining condition, high-weight factor, current action lever, and causal totality. - Owner-approved language: - \\\"This factor has explanatory usefulness, but it is not causal finality.\\\" - \\\"It may be a high-weight factor or current lever, not the complete cause.\\\" - \\\"It can be prioritized in this context, but it cannot replace the sys\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 254,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "it cannot replace the sys\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/flow-redesign.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 11, \"column\": 150, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"h: `C:\\\\Users\\\\wangq\\\\Documents\\\\Codex\\\\knowledge-vault\\\\work\\\\internal\\\\强哥的思想宇宙\\\\QPI案例分析\\\\流程改造.md` source_note: Raw",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 259,
      "column": 268,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "sers\\\\wangq\\\\Documents\\\\Codex\\\\knowledge-vault\\\\work\\\\internal\\\\强哥的思想宇宙\\\\QPI案例分析\\\\流程改造.md` source_note: Raw source remains outside this repository. These are reviewable QPI case drafts only; they are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. ## Case qpi-draft-001: Outline Review Was Not The Real Entry Point status: owner_reviewed owner_approved_for_digest: true digest_role: supporting_evidence_for_context_engineering_entry_point_case source_path: `C:\\\\Use\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 265,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "C:\\\\Use\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 11, \"column\": 436, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"locations, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style c",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 270,
      "column": 258,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"locations, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive-anchor names from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. anonymization_note: People are represented as generic roles such as `decision_maker`, `execution_lead`, `technical_staff`, `frontline_staff`, and `affected_learners`. The organization is represented as `the organization`\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 276,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "zation`\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 100, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"overnance. - Keep `classification: mixed` because the same case contains data scarcity and governance scarcity. - Use",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 281,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "overnance. - Keep `classification: mixed` because the same case contains data scarcity and governance scarcity. - Use as selector calibration and high-priority regression for AI/tool requests that must not be treated as simple execution. - Owner-approved wording: \\\"AI can organize evidence, but must not manufacture the evidentiary relationship.\\\" - Current anonymization is sufficient. ## Case qpi-draft-002: Credential Metric Repair Creates Staffing Ratio Deadlock status: owner_reviewed o\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 287,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "iewed o\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 357, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"rtability and application feasibility. - Market-facing frame sees communication and enrollment value. - Long-term orga",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 292,
      "column": 255,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\": \"rtability and application feasibility. - Market-facing frame sees communication and enrollment value. - Long-term organization frame sees strategic myopia risk. - Keep `classification: issue` and `dominant_scarcity: consensus_order`. - Owner-approved wording: \\\"A resource-feasible compromise becomes strategic myopia if it is not tested against long-term positioning.\\\" - Use as calibration for short-term reportability or packaging substituting for long-term strategic planning. ## Case q",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 298,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "Case qp\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 519, \"column\": 8, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"as dominant scarcity] - Should isolated achievements be treated as evidence of latent capability or as masking signals",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 303,
      "column": 258,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"as dominant scarcity] - Should isolated achievements be treated as evidence of latent capability or as masking signals? [answered: prioritize as masking signal; they may indicate local capability but cannot offset systemic decline] - What owner-approved wording should be used to avoid over-claiming causal responsibility? [answered: input conditions may affect outcomes but cannot replace audit of management levers] ### 13. Owner Review Decision - Keep `classification: mixed` and `dominan\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 309,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "dominan\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 528, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"upported or whether academic affairs is treated as cost, revenue, or reporting function. - Treat isolated achievements",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 314,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"upported or whether academic affairs is treated as cost, revenue, or reporting function. - Treat isolated achievements primarily as masking signals. - They may indicate local capability, but they cannot offset systemic outcome decline. - Owner-approved wording: - \\\"Input conditions may affect outcomes, but cannot replace audit of management levers.\\\" - \\\"Learner quality can explain part of the difficulty, but it cannot automatically exempt quality-assurance responsibility.\\\" - \\\"Isolate\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 320,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "Isolate\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 618, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"y, adoption incentives, and digital governance level. - Keep `dominant_scarcity: consensus_order`. - Path/resource cos",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 325,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"y, adoption incentives, and digital governance level. - Keep `dominant_scarcity: consensus_order`. - Path/resource cost exists, but the missing object is shared governance criteria and authority. - Local versus cloud detail can remain. - Owner-approved wording: \\\"Define digital governance criteria before platform selection.\\\" ## Case qpi-draft-008: Public Safety Compliance Gap Reveals Bottom-Line Control Failure status: owner_reviewed owner_approved_for_digest: true digest_role: botto\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 331,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "botto\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-development-office.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 11, \"column\": 408, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"s, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, and exact numeric details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-s",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 336,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "s, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, and exact numeric details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive anchors from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. anonymization_note: People are represented as roles such as `decision_maker`, `execution_lead`, `strategy_staff`, `functional_department`, and `frontline_staff`. The organization is represented as `the organization`; the\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 342,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 7, \"column\": 428, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"estamps, places, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-st",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 347,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "estamps, places, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive anchors from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. owner_review_source: `C:/Users/wangq/Documents/Codex/knowledge-vault/work/internal/强哥的思想宇宙/QPI案例审阅/QPI提炼审核/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases-GPT.md` owner_review_note: Owner/GPT review approved all eight\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 353,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 698, \"column\": 8, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"ich replace education value with transactional output metrics. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is this case too broad",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 358,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"ich replace education value with transactional output metrics. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is this case too broad for calibration, or useful as an Issue anchor? - Should it be decomposed into several narrower P/I mixed cases? - What owner-approved wording should be used for the anonymized identity-shift risk? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: transactional_education_issue_anchor - selector_calibrati\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 364,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ti\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 81, \"column\": 64, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"nant scarcity here correctly placed on consensus/order rather than path/resource? - Should this be treated as Issue ra",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 369,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "nant scarcity here correctly placed on consensus/order rather than path/resource? - Should this be treated as Issue rather than mixed because the compliance boundary dominates? - Which details, if any, are safe enough to retain in a future owner-approved case digest? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: compliance_boundary_retention_issue_regression_case - regression_candidate: high_priority - classification:\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 375,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "n:\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 618, \"column\": 8, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"e design without killing execution energy. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is \\\"privatization of organizational capab",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 380,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "e design without killing execution energy. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is \\\"privatization of organizational capability\\\" the right abstraction here? - Should this case be connected with the role-inflation case or kept separate? - What owner-approved signal distinguishes healthy recognition from dangerous private capture? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: non_institutionalized_capability_calibration_ca\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 386,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ation_ca\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-research-office.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 7, \"column\": 397, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"departments, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, ancient-style cognitive anchors, exact numeric details, and",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 391,
      "column": 258,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"departments, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, ancient-style cognitive anchors, exact numeric details, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. owner_review_source: `C:/Users/wangq/Documents/Codex/knowledge-vault/work/internal/强哥的思想宇宙/QPI案例审阅/QPI提炼审核/year-end-review-research-office.cases-GPT.md` owner_review_note: Owner/GPT review approved all eight cases for d\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 397,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ner_review_note: Owner/GPT review approved all eight cases for d\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"selector/qpi_case_digests.json\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 1261, \"column\": 42, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"into an upstream authority over teaching.\\\", \\\"routing_notes\\\": [ \\\"hard outcome metric hiding authority redesign\\\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 402,
      "column": 237,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "se, \"context\": \"into an upstream authority over teaching.\\\", \\\"routing_notes\\\": [ \\\"hard outcome metric hiding authority redesign\\\", \\\"separate outcome improvement from teaching authority transfer\\\", \\\"reverse accountability power is owner-approved wording\\\" ], \\\"recommended_next_step\\\": \\\"Define shared outcome governance, evidence standards, and limits on reverse accountability before redesigning authority.\\\", \\\"misclassification_risk\\\": [ \\\"violent_reduction\\\",\", \"message\": \"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 408,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "thority.\\\", \\\"misclassification_risk\\\": [ \\\"violent_reduction\\\",\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"selector/qpi_case_digests.json\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 2187, \"column\": 42, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"mulate research identity through people, expenses, patents, papers, and evidence packaging to obtain external prefer",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 413,
      "column": 243,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"context\": \"mulate research identity through people, expenses, patents, papers, and evidence packaging to obtain external preferential status.\\\", \\\"routing_notes\\\": [ \\\"umbrella case for this source\\\", \\\"research identity simulation is owner-approved\\\", \\\"capability building must be separated from evidence simulation\\\" ], \\\"recommended_next_step\\\": \\\"Separate legitimate research capability building from identity simulation and compliance red-line risk.\\\", \\\"misclassif\", \"message\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 438,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"ct: PASS - Selector demo: PASS - Selector regression: PASS - Selector calibration smoke: PASS, 95 inputs, 0 failures, 0 warnings - Model/card sync: PASS ## Important Interpretation Validation pass does not mean model content is stable or owner-approved. It only means the Round 03.2a selector precedence patch is structurally consistent and passes current local checks.\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"docs/DECISIONS.md\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 444,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "precedence patch is structurally consistent and passes current local checks.\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"docs/DECISIONS.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 175, \"column\": 154, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"such as `先不要思想考古` could still lose to positive IA signals and QPI-completed bonuses. A user instruction that names a",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 449,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"such as `先不要思想考古` could still lose to positive IA signals and QPI-completed bonuses. A user instruction that names a model and refuses it should not be represented as a normal score penalty. It must hard-exclude that model unless a later owner-approved rule defines an explicit reversal phrase. The current Round 03.2 implementation keeps this scoped: - It rejects only the explicitly refused model. - It does not create a global no-call. - It does not add an LLM selector, RAG, database, s\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 455,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "LLM selector, RAG, database, s\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"docs/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/CASE_PREPROCESSING_WORKFLOW.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 160, \"column\": 27, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"Do not: - write selector JSON directly; - update regression cases directly; - upgrade model status; - create a third",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 460,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"Do not: - write selector JSON directly; - update regression cases directly; - upgrade model status; - create a third model; - summarize the whole source instead of extracting cases; - quote long source passages; - pretend draft cases are owner-approved. ## 7. Promotion Path The promotion path is: ```text raw source -> Markdown case drafts -> owner review and correction -> case digest JSON -> selector calibration inputs or regression cases ``` Only owner-reviewed cases may become mach\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 466,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "mach\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 263, \"column\": 8, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"w Questions - Should QPI explicitly mark \\\"single-cause reduction\\\" as a subtype of violent reduction? - Should this c",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 471,
      "column": 260,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "Questions - Should QPI explicitly mark \\\"single-cause reduction\\\" as a subtype of violent reduction? - Should this case be used to test that QPI does not output a single definitive cause when the source provides coupled mechanisms? - What owner-approved language should be used to distinguish explanatory usefulness from causal finality? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - Keep the case, but avoid the overbroad rule \\\"all single-cause attribution is wrong.\\\" - Rename the risk to `single_facto\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 477,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "facto\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 275, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"n. - Prevent QPI from outputting a single definitive root cause when coupled mechanisms are already present. - Require",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 482,
      "column": 255,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\": \"n. - Prevent QPI from outputting a single definitive root cause when coupled mechanisms are already present. - Require distinction between trigger, maintaining condition, high-weight factor, current action lever, and causal totality. - Owner-approved language: - \\\"This factor has explanatory usefulness, but it is not causal finality.\\\" - \\\"It may be a high-weight factor or current lever, not the complete cause.\\\" - \\\"It can be prioritized in this context, but it cannot replace the sys\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 488,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "it cannot replace the sys\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/flow-redesign.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 11, \"column\": 150, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"h: `C:\\\\Users\\\\wangq\\\\Documents\\\\Codex\\\\knowledge-vault\\\\work\\\\internal\\\\强哥的思想宇宙\\\\QPI案例分析\\\\流程改造.md` source_note: Raw",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 493,
      "column": 268,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "sers\\\\wangq\\\\Documents\\\\Codex\\\\knowledge-vault\\\\work\\\\internal\\\\强哥的思想宇宙\\\\QPI案例分析\\\\流程改造.md` source_note: Raw source remains outside this repository. These are reviewable QPI case drafts only; they are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. ## Case qpi-draft-001: Outline Review Was Not The Real Entry Point status: owner_reviewed owner_approved_for_digest: true digest_role: supporting_evidence_for_context_engineering_entry_point_case source_path: `C:\\\\Use\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 499,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "C:\\\\Use\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 11, \"column\": 436, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"locations, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style c",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 504,
      "column": 258,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"locations, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive-anchor names from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. anonymization_note: People are represented as generic roles such as `decision_maker`, `execution_lead`, `technical_staff`, `frontline_staff`, and `affected_learners`. The organization is represented as `the organization`\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 510,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "zation`\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 100, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"overnance. - Keep `classification: mixed` because the same case contains data scarcity and governance scarcity. - Use",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 515,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "overnance. - Keep `classification: mixed` because the same case contains data scarcity and governance scarcity. - Use as selector calibration and high-priority regression for AI/tool requests that must not be treated as simple execution. - Owner-approved wording: \\\"AI can organize evidence, but must not manufacture the evidentiary relationship.\\\" - Current anonymization is sufficient. ## Case qpi-draft-002: Credential Metric Repair Creates Staffing Ratio Deadlock status: owner_reviewed o\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 521,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "iewed o\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 357, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"rtability and application feasibility. - Market-facing frame sees communication and enrollment value. - Long-term orga",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 526,
      "column": 255,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\": \"rtability and application feasibility. - Market-facing frame sees communication and enrollment value. - Long-term organization frame sees strategic myopia risk. - Keep `classification: issue` and `dominant_scarcity: consensus_order`. - Owner-approved wording: \\\"A resource-feasible compromise becomes strategic myopia if it is not tested against long-term positioning.\\\" - Use as calibration for short-term reportability or packaging substituting for long-term strategic planning. ## Case q",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 532,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "Case qp\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 519, \"column\": 8, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"as dominant scarcity] - Should isolated achievements be treated as evidence of latent capability or as masking signals",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 537,
      "column": 258,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"as dominant scarcity] - Should isolated achievements be treated as evidence of latent capability or as masking signals? [answered: prioritize as masking signal; they may indicate local capability but cannot offset systemic decline] - What owner-approved wording should be used to avoid over-claiming causal responsibility? [answered: input conditions may affect outcomes but cannot replace audit of management levers] ### 13. Owner Review Decision - Keep `classification: mixed` and `dominan\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 543,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "dominan\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 528, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"upported or whether academic affairs is treated as cost, revenue, or reporting function. - Treat isolated achievements",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 548,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"upported or whether academic affairs is treated as cost, revenue, or reporting function. - Treat isolated achievements primarily as masking signals. - They may indicate local capability, but they cannot offset systemic outcome decline. - Owner-approved wording: - \\\"Input conditions may affect outcomes, but cannot replace audit of management levers.\\\" - \\\"Learner quality can explain part of the difficulty, but it cannot automatically exempt quality-assurance responsibility.\\\" - \\\"Isolate\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 554,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "Isolate\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 618, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"y, adoption incentives, and digital governance level. - Keep `dominant_scarcity: consensus_order`. - Path/resource cos",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 559,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"y, adoption incentives, and digital governance level. - Keep `dominant_scarcity: consensus_order`. - Path/resource cost exists, but the missing object is shared governance criteria and authority. - Local versus cloud detail can remain. - Owner-approved wording: \\\"Define digital governance criteria before platform selection.\\\" ## Case qpi-draft-008: Public Safety Compliance Gap Reveals Bottom-Line Control Failure status: owner_reviewed owner_approved_for_digest: true digest_role: botto\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 565,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "botto\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-development-office.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 11, \"column\": 408, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"s, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, and exact numeric details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-s",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 570,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "s, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, and exact numeric details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive anchors from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. anonymization_note: People are represented as roles such as `decision_maker`, `execution_lead`, `strategy_staff`, `functional_department`, and `frontline_staff`. The organization is represented as `the organization`; the\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 576,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 7, \"column\": 428, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"estamps, places, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-st",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 581,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "estamps, places, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive anchors from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. owner_review_source: `C:/Users/wangq/Documents/Codex/knowledge-vault/work/internal/强哥的思想宇宙/QPI案例审阅/QPI提炼审核/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases-GPT.md` owner_review_note: Owner/GPT review approved all eight\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 587,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 698, \"column\": 8, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"ich replace education value with transactional output metrics. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is this case too broad",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 592,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"ich replace education value with transactional output metrics. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is this case too broad for calibration, or useful as an Issue anchor? - Should it be decomposed into several narrower P/I mixed cases? - What owner-approved wording should be used for the anonymized identity-shift risk? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: transactional_education_issue_anchor - selector_calibrati\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 598,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ti\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 81, \"column\": 64, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"nant scarcity here correctly placed on consensus/order rather than path/resource? - Should this be treated as Issue ra",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 603,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "nant scarcity here correctly placed on consensus/order rather than path/resource? - Should this be treated as Issue rather than mixed because the compliance boundary dominates? - Which details, if any, are safe enough to retain in a future owner-approved case digest? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: compliance_boundary_retention_issue_regression_case - regression_candidate: high_priority - classification:\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 609,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "n:\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 618, \"column\": 8, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"e design without killing execution energy. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is \\\"privatization of organizational capab",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 614,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "e design without killing execution energy. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is \\\"privatization of organizational capability\\\" the right abstraction here? - Should this case be connected with the role-inflation case or kept separate? - What owner-approved signal distinguishes healthy recognition from dangerous private capture? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: non_institutionalized_capability_calibration_ca\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 620,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ation_ca\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-research-office.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 7, \"column\": 397, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"departments, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, ancient-style cognitive anchors, exact numeric details, and",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 625,
      "column": 258,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"departments, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, ancient-style cognitive anchors, exact numeric details, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. owner_review_source: `C:/Users/wangq/Documents/Codex/knowledge-vault/work/internal/强哥的思想宇宙/QPI案例审阅/QPI提炼审核/year-end-review-research-office.cases-GPT.md` owner_review_note: Owner/GPT review approved all eight cases for d\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 631,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ner_review_note: Owner/GPT review approved all eight cases for d\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"selector/qpi_case_digests.json\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 1261, \"column\": 42, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"into an upstream authority over teaching.\\\", \\\"routing_notes\\\": [ \\\"hard outcome metric hiding authority redesign\\\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 636,
      "column": 237,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "se, \"context\": \"into an upstream authority over teaching.\\\", \\\"routing_notes\\\": [ \\\"hard outcome metric hiding authority redesign\\\", \\\"separate outcome improvement from teaching authority transfer\\\", \\\"reverse accountability power is owner-approved wording\\\" ], \\\"recommended_next_step\\\": \\\"Define shared outcome governance, evidence standards, and limits on reverse accountability before redesigning authority.\\\", \\\"misclassification_risk\\\": [ \\\"violent_reduction\\\",\", \"message\": \"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 642,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "thority.\\\", \\\"misclassification_risk\\\": [ \\\"violent_reduction\\\",\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"selector/qpi_case_digests.json\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 2187, \"column\": 42, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"mulate research identity through people, expenses, patents, papers, and evidence packaging to obtain external prefer",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 647,
      "column": 243,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"context\": \"mulate research identity through people, expenses, patents, papers, and evidence packaging to obtain external preferential status.\\\", \\\"routing_notes\\\": [ \\\"umbrella case for this source\\\", \\\"research identity simulation is owner-approved\\\", \\\"capability building must be separated from evidence simulation\\\" ], \\\"recommended_next_step\\\": \\\"Separate legitimate research capability building from identity simulation and compliance red-line risk.\\\", \\\"misclassif\", \"message\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 16,
      "column": 81,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "d` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `docs/DECISIONS.md` line 175: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `docs/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/CASE_PREPROCESSING_WORKFLOW.md` line 160: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md` line 263: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `report",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 17,
      "column": 106,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ase_preprocessing/qpi/CASE_PREPROCESSING_WORKFLOW.md` line 160: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md` line 263: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md` line 275: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `report",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 18,
      "column": 106,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md` line 263: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md` line 275: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/flow-redesign.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preproces",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 19,
      "column": 84,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ase_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md` line 275: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/flow-redesign.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/m",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 20,
      "column": 103,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "l_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/flow-redesign.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 100: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 21,
      "column": 104,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 100: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 357: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 22,
      "column": 104,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 100: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 357: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 519: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 23,
      "column": 104,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 357: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 519: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 528: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 24,
      "column": 104,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 519: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 528: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 618: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 25,
      "column": 104,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 528: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 618: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-development-office.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 26,
      "column": 105,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "pi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 618: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-development-office.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md` line 7: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. -",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 27,
      "column": 113,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "01/year-end-review-development-office.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md` line 7: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md` line 698: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 28,
      "column": 115,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "d-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md` line 7: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md` line 698: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md` line 81: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `repo",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 29,
      "column": 108,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ar-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md` line 698: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md` line 81: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md` line 618: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `rep",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 30,
      "column": 109,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md` line 81: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md` line 618: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-research-office.cases.md` line 7: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `selector/qp",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 31,
      "column": 101,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "i/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md` line 618: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-research-office.cases.md` line 7: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `selector/qpi_case_digests.json` line 1261: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `selector/qpi_case_digests.json` line 2187: `owner-approved` - Ap",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 263,
      "column": 8,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "w Questions - Should QPI explicitly mark \"single-cause reduction\" as a subtype of violent reduction? - Should this case be used to test that QPI does not output a single definitive cause when the source provides coupled mechanisms? - What owner-approved language should be used to distinguish explanatory usefulness from causal finality? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - Keep the case, but avoid the overbroad rule \"all single-cause attribution is wrong.\" - Rename the risk to `single_facto",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 275,
      "column": 3,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "n. - Prevent QPI from outputting a single definitive root cause when coupled mechanisms are already present. - Require distinction between trigger, maintaining condition, high-weight factor, current action lever, and causal totality. - Owner-approved language: - \"This factor has explanatory usefulness, but it is not causal finality.\" - \"It may be a high-weight factor or current lever, not the complete cause.\" - \"It can be prioritized in this context, but it cannot replace the sys",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/flow-redesign.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 11,
      "column": 150,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "h: `C:\\Users\\wangq\\Documents\\Codex\\knowledge-vault\\work\\internal\\强哥的思想宇宙\\QPI案例分析\\流程改造.md` source_note: Raw source remains outside this repository. These are reviewable QPI case drafts only; they are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. ## Case qpi-draft-001: Outline Review Was Not The Real Entry Point status: owner_reviewed owner_approved_for_digest: true digest_role: supporting_evidence_for_context_engineering_entry_point_case source_path: `C:\\Use",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 11,
      "column": 436,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "locations, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive-anchor names from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. anonymization_note: People are represented as generic roles such as `decision_maker`, `execution_lead`, `technical_staff`, `frontline_staff`, and `affected_learners`. The organization is represented as `the organization`",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 100,
      "column": 3,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "overnance. - Keep `classification: mixed` because the same case contains data scarcity and governance scarcity. - Use as selector calibration and high-priority regression for AI/tool requests that must not be treated as simple execution. - Owner-approved wording: \"AI can organize evidence, but must not manufacture the evidentiary relationship.\" - Current anonymization is sufficient. ## Case qpi-draft-002: Credential Metric Repair Creates Staffing Ratio Deadlock status: owner_reviewed o",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 357,
      "column": 3,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "rtability and application feasibility. - Market-facing frame sees communication and enrollment value. - Long-term organization frame sees strategic myopia risk. - Keep `classification: issue` and `dominant_scarcity: consensus_order`. - Owner-approved wording: \"A resource-feasible compromise becomes strategic myopia if it is not tested against long-term positioning.\" - Use as calibration for short-term reportability or packaging substituting for long-term strategic planning. ## Case qp",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 519,
      "column": 8,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "as dominant scarcity] - Should isolated achievements be treated as evidence of latent capability or as masking signals? [answered: prioritize as masking signal; they may indicate local capability but cannot offset systemic decline] - What owner-approved wording should be used to avoid over-claiming causal responsibility? [answered: input conditions may affect outcomes but cannot replace audit of management levers] ### 13. Owner Review Decision - Keep `classification: mixed` and `dominan",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 528,
      "column": 3,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "upported or whether academic affairs is treated as cost, revenue, or reporting function. - Treat isolated achievements primarily as masking signals. - They may indicate local capability, but they cannot offset systemic outcome decline. - Owner-approved wording: - \"Input conditions may affect outcomes, but cannot replace audit of management levers.\" - \"Learner quality can explain part of the difficulty, but it cannot automatically exempt quality-assurance responsibility.\" - \"Isolate",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 618,
      "column": 3,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "y, adoption incentives, and digital governance level. - Keep `dominant_scarcity: consensus_order`. - Path/resource cost exists, but the missing object is shared governance criteria and authority. - Local versus cloud detail can remain. - Owner-approved wording: \"Define digital governance criteria before platform selection.\" ## Case qpi-draft-008: Public Safety Compliance Gap Reveals Bottom-Line Control Failure status: owner_reviewed owner_approved_for_digest: true digest_role: botto",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-development-office.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 11,
      "column": 408,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "s, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, and exact numeric details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive anchors from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. anonymization_note: People are represented as roles such as `decision_maker`, `execution_lead`, `strategy_staff`, `functional_department`, and `frontline_staff`. The organization is represented as `the organization`; the",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 7,
      "column": 428,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "estamps, places, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive anchors from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. owner_review_source: `C:/Users/wangq/Documents/Codex/knowledge-vault/work/internal/强哥的思想宇宙/QPI案例审阅/QPI提炼审核/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases-GPT.md` owner_review_note: Owner/GPT review approved all eight",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 698,
      "column": 8,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ich replace education value with transactional output metrics. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is this case too broad for calibration, or useful as an Issue anchor? - Should it be decomposed into several narrower P/I mixed cases? - What owner-approved wording should be used for the anonymized identity-shift risk? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: transactional_education_issue_anchor - selector_calibrati",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 81,
      "column": 64,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "nant scarcity here correctly placed on consensus/order rather than path/resource? - Should this be treated as Issue rather than mixed because the compliance boundary dominates? - Which details, if any, are safe enough to retain in a future owner-approved case digest? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: compliance_boundary_retention_issue_regression_case - regression_candidate: high_priority - classification:",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 618,
      "column": 8,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "e design without killing execution energy. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is \"privatization of organizational capability\" the right abstraction here? - Should this case be connected with the role-inflation case or kept separate? - What owner-approved signal distinguishes healthy recognition from dangerous private capture? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: non_institutionalized_capability_calibration_ca",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-research-office.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 7,
      "column": 397,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "departments, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, ancient-style cognitive anchors, exact numeric details, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. owner_review_source: `C:/Users/wangq/Documents/Codex/knowledge-vault/work/internal/强哥的思想宇宙/QPI案例审阅/QPI提炼审核/year-end-review-research-office.cases-GPT.md` owner_review_note: Owner/GPT review approved all eight cases for d",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "selector/qpi_case_digests.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 1261,
      "column": 42,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "into an upstream authority over teaching.\", \"routing_notes\": [ \"hard outcome metric hiding authority redesign\", \"separate outcome improvement from teaching authority transfer\", \"reverse accountability power is owner-approved wording\" ], \"recommended_next_step\": \"Define shared outcome governance, evidence standards, and limits on reverse accountability before redesigning authority.\", \"misclassification_risk\": [ \"violent_reduction\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "selector/qpi_case_digests.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 2187,
      "column": 42,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "mulate research identity through people, expenses, patents, papers, and evidence packaging to obtain external preferential status.\", \"routing_notes\": [ \"umbrella case for this source\", \"research identity simulation is owner-approved\", \"capability building must be separated from evidence simulation\" ], \"recommended_next_step\": \"Separate legitimate research capability building from identity simulation and compliance red-line risk.\", \"misclassif",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    }
  ],
  "field_level_findings": [],
  "phrase_level_findings": [
    {
      "file": "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2_2026-06-17_selector-negative-gate-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 59,
      "column": 58,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "on_report.md` - `reports/selector_regression_report_v0.2.md` - `reports/selector_calibration_smoke_report.md` - `reports/model_card_sync_report_v0.2.md` ## Important Interpretation Validation pass does not mean model content is stable or owner-approved. It only means the Round 03.2 selector negative-gate patch is structurally consistent and passes current local checks.",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2a_2026-06-17_depth-limiting-qpi-override-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2a.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 47,
      "column": 58,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ct: PASS - Selector demo: PASS - Selector regression: PASS - Selector calibration smoke: PASS, 95 inputs, 0 failures, 0 warnings - Model/card sync: PASS ## Important Interpretation Validation pass does not mean model content is stable or owner-approved. It only means the Round 03.2a selector precedence patch is structurally consistent and passes current local checks.",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "docs/DECISIONS.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 175,
      "column": 154,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "such as `先不要思想考古` could still lose to positive IA signals and QPI-completed bonuses. A user instruction that names a model and refuses it should not be represented as a normal score penalty. It must hard-exclude that model unless a later owner-approved rule defines an explicit reversal phrase. The current Round 03.2 implementation keeps this scoped: - It rejects only the explicitly refused model. - It does not create a global no-call. - It does not add an LLM selector, RAG, database, s",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "docs/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/CASE_PREPROCESSING_WORKFLOW.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 160,
      "column": 27,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "Do not: - write selector JSON directly; - update regression cases directly; - upgrade model status; - create a third model; - summarize the whole source instead of extracting cases; - quote long source passages; - pretend draft cases are owner-approved. ## 7. Promotion Path The promotion path is: ```text raw source -> Markdown case drafts -> owner review and correction -> case digest JSON -> selector calibration inputs or regression cases ``` Only owner-reviewed cases may become mach",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 204,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"ct: PASS - Selector demo: PASS - Selector regression: PASS - Selector calibration smoke: PASS, 95 inputs, 0 failures, 0 warnings - Model/card sync: PASS ## Important Interpretation Validation pass does not mean model content is stable or owner-approved. It only means the Round 03.2a selector precedence patch is structurally consistent and passes current local checks.\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"docs/DECISIONS.md\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 210,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "precedence patch is structurally consistent and passes current local checks.\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"docs/DECISIONS.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 175, \"column\": 154, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"such as `先不要思想考古` could still lose to positive IA signals and QPI-completed bonuses. A user instruction that names a",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 215,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"such as `先不要思想考古` could still lose to positive IA signals and QPI-completed bonuses. A user instruction that names a model and refuses it should not be represented as a normal score penalty. It must hard-exclude that model unless a later owner-approved rule defines an explicit reversal phrase. The current Round 03.2 implementation keeps this scoped: - It rejects only the explicitly refused model. - It does not create a global no-call. - It does not add an LLM selector, RAG, database, s\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 221,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "LLM selector, RAG, database, s\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"docs/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/CASE_PREPROCESSING_WORKFLOW.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 160, \"column\": 27, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"Do not: - write selector JSON directly; - update regression cases directly; - upgrade model status; - create a third",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 226,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"Do not: - write selector JSON directly; - update regression cases directly; - upgrade model status; - create a third model; - summarize the whole source instead of extracting cases; - quote long source passages; - pretend draft cases are owner-approved. ## 7. Promotion Path The promotion path is: ```text raw source -> Markdown case drafts -> owner review and correction -> case digest JSON -> selector calibration inputs or regression cases ``` Only owner-reviewed cases may become mach\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 232,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "mach\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 263, \"column\": 8, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"w Questions - Should QPI explicitly mark \\\"single-cause reduction\\\" as a subtype of violent reduction? - Should this c",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 237,
      "column": 260,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "Questions - Should QPI explicitly mark \\\"single-cause reduction\\\" as a subtype of violent reduction? - Should this case be used to test that QPI does not output a single definitive cause when the source provides coupled mechanisms? - What owner-approved language should be used to distinguish explanatory usefulness from causal finality? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - Keep the case, but avoid the overbroad rule \\\"all single-cause attribution is wrong.\\\" - Rename the risk to `single_facto\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 243,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "facto\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 275, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"n. - Prevent QPI from outputting a single definitive root cause when coupled mechanisms are already present. - Require",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 248,
      "column": 255,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\": \"n. - Prevent QPI from outputting a single definitive root cause when coupled mechanisms are already present. - Require distinction between trigger, maintaining condition, high-weight factor, current action lever, and causal totality. - Owner-approved language: - \\\"This factor has explanatory usefulness, but it is not causal finality.\\\" - \\\"It may be a high-weight factor or current lever, not the complete cause.\\\" - \\\"It can be prioritized in this context, but it cannot replace the sys\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 254,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "it cannot replace the sys\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/flow-redesign.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 11, \"column\": 150, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"h: `C:\\\\Users\\\\wangq\\\\Documents\\\\Codex\\\\knowledge-vault\\\\work\\\\internal\\\\强哥的思想宇宙\\\\QPI案例分析\\\\流程改造.md` source_note: Raw",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 259,
      "column": 268,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "sers\\\\wangq\\\\Documents\\\\Codex\\\\knowledge-vault\\\\work\\\\internal\\\\强哥的思想宇宙\\\\QPI案例分析\\\\流程改造.md` source_note: Raw source remains outside this repository. These are reviewable QPI case drafts only; they are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. ## Case qpi-draft-001: Outline Review Was Not The Real Entry Point status: owner_reviewed owner_approved_for_digest: true digest_role: supporting_evidence_for_context_engineering_entry_point_case source_path: `C:\\\\Use\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 265,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "C:\\\\Use\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 11, \"column\": 436, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"locations, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style c",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 270,
      "column": 258,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"locations, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive-anchor names from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. anonymization_note: People are represented as generic roles such as `decision_maker`, `execution_lead`, `technical_staff`, `frontline_staff`, and `affected_learners`. The organization is represented as `the organization`\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 276,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "zation`\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 100, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"overnance. - Keep `classification: mixed` because the same case contains data scarcity and governance scarcity. - Use",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 281,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "overnance. - Keep `classification: mixed` because the same case contains data scarcity and governance scarcity. - Use as selector calibration and high-priority regression for AI/tool requests that must not be treated as simple execution. - Owner-approved wording: \\\"AI can organize evidence, but must not manufacture the evidentiary relationship.\\\" - Current anonymization is sufficient. ## Case qpi-draft-002: Credential Metric Repair Creates Staffing Ratio Deadlock status: owner_reviewed o\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 287,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "iewed o\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 357, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"rtability and application feasibility. - Market-facing frame sees communication and enrollment value. - Long-term orga",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 292,
      "column": 255,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\": \"rtability and application feasibility. - Market-facing frame sees communication and enrollment value. - Long-term organization frame sees strategic myopia risk. - Keep `classification: issue` and `dominant_scarcity: consensus_order`. - Owner-approved wording: \\\"A resource-feasible compromise becomes strategic myopia if it is not tested against long-term positioning.\\\" - Use as calibration for short-term reportability or packaging substituting for long-term strategic planning. ## Case q",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 298,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "Case qp\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 519, \"column\": 8, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"as dominant scarcity] - Should isolated achievements be treated as evidence of latent capability or as masking signals",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 303,
      "column": 258,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"as dominant scarcity] - Should isolated achievements be treated as evidence of latent capability or as masking signals? [answered: prioritize as masking signal; they may indicate local capability but cannot offset systemic decline] - What owner-approved wording should be used to avoid over-claiming causal responsibility? [answered: input conditions may affect outcomes but cannot replace audit of management levers] ### 13. Owner Review Decision - Keep `classification: mixed` and `dominan\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 309,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "dominan\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 528, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"upported or whether academic affairs is treated as cost, revenue, or reporting function. - Treat isolated achievements",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 314,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"upported or whether academic affairs is treated as cost, revenue, or reporting function. - Treat isolated achievements primarily as masking signals. - They may indicate local capability, but they cannot offset systemic outcome decline. - Owner-approved wording: - \\\"Input conditions may affect outcomes, but cannot replace audit of management levers.\\\" - \\\"Learner quality can explain part of the difficulty, but it cannot automatically exempt quality-assurance responsibility.\\\" - \\\"Isolate\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 320,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "Isolate\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 618, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"y, adoption incentives, and digital governance level. - Keep `dominant_scarcity: consensus_order`. - Path/resource cos",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 325,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"y, adoption incentives, and digital governance level. - Keep `dominant_scarcity: consensus_order`. - Path/resource cost exists, but the missing object is shared governance criteria and authority. - Local versus cloud detail can remain. - Owner-approved wording: \\\"Define digital governance criteria before platform selection.\\\" ## Case qpi-draft-008: Public Safety Compliance Gap Reveals Bottom-Line Control Failure status: owner_reviewed owner_approved_for_digest: true digest_role: botto\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 331,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "botto\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-development-office.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 11, \"column\": 408, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"s, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, and exact numeric details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-s",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 336,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "s, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, and exact numeric details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive anchors from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. anonymization_note: People are represented as roles such as `decision_maker`, `execution_lead`, `strategy_staff`, `functional_department`, and `frontline_staff`. The organization is represented as `the organization`; the\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 342,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 7, \"column\": 428, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"estamps, places, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-st",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 347,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "estamps, places, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive anchors from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. owner_review_source: `C:/Users/wangq/Documents/Codex/knowledge-vault/work/internal/强哥的思想宇宙/QPI案例审阅/QPI提炼审核/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases-GPT.md` owner_review_note: Owner/GPT review approved all eight\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 353,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 698, \"column\": 8, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"ich replace education value with transactional output metrics. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is this case too broad",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 358,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"ich replace education value with transactional output metrics. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is this case too broad for calibration, or useful as an Issue anchor? - Should it be decomposed into several narrower P/I mixed cases? - What owner-approved wording should be used for the anonymized identity-shift risk? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: transactional_education_issue_anchor - selector_calibrati\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 364,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ti\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 81, \"column\": 64, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"nant scarcity here correctly placed on consensus/order rather than path/resource? - Should this be treated as Issue ra",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 369,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "nant scarcity here correctly placed on consensus/order rather than path/resource? - Should this be treated as Issue rather than mixed because the compliance boundary dominates? - Which details, if any, are safe enough to retain in a future owner-approved case digest? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: compliance_boundary_retention_issue_regression_case - regression_candidate: high_priority - classification:\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 375,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "n:\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 618, \"column\": 8, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"e design without killing execution energy. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is \\\"privatization of organizational capab",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 380,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "e design without killing execution energy. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is \\\"privatization of organizational capability\\\" the right abstraction here? - Should this case be connected with the role-inflation case or kept separate? - What owner-approved signal distinguishes healthy recognition from dangerous private capture? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: non_institutionalized_capability_calibration_ca\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 386,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ation_ca\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-research-office.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 7, \"column\": 397, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"departments, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, ancient-style cognitive anchors, exact numeric details, and",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 391,
      "column": 258,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"departments, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, ancient-style cognitive anchors, exact numeric details, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. owner_review_source: `C:/Users/wangq/Documents/Codex/knowledge-vault/work/internal/强哥的思想宇宙/QPI案例审阅/QPI提炼审核/year-end-review-research-office.cases-GPT.md` owner_review_note: Owner/GPT review approved all eight cases for d\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 397,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ner_review_note: Owner/GPT review approved all eight cases for d\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"selector/qpi_case_digests.json\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 1261, \"column\": 42, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"into an upstream authority over teaching.\\\", \\\"routing_notes\\\": [ \\\"hard outcome metric hiding authority redesign\\\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 402,
      "column": 237,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "se, \"context\": \"into an upstream authority over teaching.\\\", \\\"routing_notes\\\": [ \\\"hard outcome metric hiding authority redesign\\\", \\\"separate outcome improvement from teaching authority transfer\\\", \\\"reverse accountability power is owner-approved wording\\\" ], \\\"recommended_next_step\\\": \\\"Define shared outcome governance, evidence standards, and limits on reverse accountability before redesigning authority.\\\", \\\"misclassification_risk\\\": [ \\\"violent_reduction\\\",\", \"message\": \"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 408,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "thority.\\\", \\\"misclassification_risk\\\": [ \\\"violent_reduction\\\",\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"selector/qpi_case_digests.json\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 2187, \"column\": 42, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"mulate research identity through people, expenses, patents, papers, and evidence packaging to obtain external prefer",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 413,
      "column": 243,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"context\": \"mulate research identity through people, expenses, patents, papers, and evidence packaging to obtain external preferential status.\\\", \\\"routing_notes\\\": [ \\\"umbrella case for this source\\\", \\\"research identity simulation is owner-approved\\\", \\\"capability building must be separated from evidence simulation\\\" ], \\\"recommended_next_step\\\": \\\"Separate legitimate research capability building from identity simulation and compliance red-line risk.\\\", \\\"misclassif\", \"message\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 438,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"ct: PASS - Selector demo: PASS - Selector regression: PASS - Selector calibration smoke: PASS, 95 inputs, 0 failures, 0 warnings - Model/card sync: PASS ## Important Interpretation Validation pass does not mean model content is stable or owner-approved. It only means the Round 03.2a selector precedence patch is structurally consistent and passes current local checks.\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"docs/DECISIONS.md\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 444,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "precedence patch is structurally consistent and passes current local checks.\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"docs/DECISIONS.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 175, \"column\": 154, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"such as `先不要思想考古` could still lose to positive IA signals and QPI-completed bonuses. A user instruction that names a",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 449,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"such as `先不要思想考古` could still lose to positive IA signals and QPI-completed bonuses. A user instruction that names a model and refuses it should not be represented as a normal score penalty. It must hard-exclude that model unless a later owner-approved rule defines an explicit reversal phrase. The current Round 03.2 implementation keeps this scoped: - It rejects only the explicitly refused model. - It does not create a global no-call. - It does not add an LLM selector, RAG, database, s\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 455,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "LLM selector, RAG, database, s\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"docs/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/CASE_PREPROCESSING_WORKFLOW.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 160, \"column\": 27, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"Do not: - write selector JSON directly; - update regression cases directly; - upgrade model status; - create a third",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 460,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"Do not: - write selector JSON directly; - update regression cases directly; - upgrade model status; - create a third model; - summarize the whole source instead of extracting cases; - quote long source passages; - pretend draft cases are owner-approved. ## 7. Promotion Path The promotion path is: ```text raw source -> Markdown case drafts -> owner review and correction -> case digest JSON -> selector calibration inputs or regression cases ``` Only owner-reviewed cases may become mach\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 466,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "mach\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 263, \"column\": 8, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"w Questions - Should QPI explicitly mark \\\"single-cause reduction\\\" as a subtype of violent reduction? - Should this c",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 471,
      "column": 260,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "Questions - Should QPI explicitly mark \\\"single-cause reduction\\\" as a subtype of violent reduction? - Should this case be used to test that QPI does not output a single definitive cause when the source provides coupled mechanisms? - What owner-approved language should be used to distinguish explanatory usefulness from causal finality? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - Keep the case, but avoid the overbroad rule \\\"all single-cause attribution is wrong.\\\" - Rename the risk to `single_facto\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 477,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "facto\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 275, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"n. - Prevent QPI from outputting a single definitive root cause when coupled mechanisms are already present. - Require",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 482,
      "column": 255,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\": \"n. - Prevent QPI from outputting a single definitive root cause when coupled mechanisms are already present. - Require distinction between trigger, maintaining condition, high-weight factor, current action lever, and causal totality. - Owner-approved language: - \\\"This factor has explanatory usefulness, but it is not causal finality.\\\" - \\\"It may be a high-weight factor or current lever, not the complete cause.\\\" - \\\"It can be prioritized in this context, but it cannot replace the sys\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 488,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "it cannot replace the sys\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/flow-redesign.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 11, \"column\": 150, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"h: `C:\\\\Users\\\\wangq\\\\Documents\\\\Codex\\\\knowledge-vault\\\\work\\\\internal\\\\强哥的思想宇宙\\\\QPI案例分析\\\\流程改造.md` source_note: Raw",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 493,
      "column": 268,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "sers\\\\wangq\\\\Documents\\\\Codex\\\\knowledge-vault\\\\work\\\\internal\\\\强哥的思想宇宙\\\\QPI案例分析\\\\流程改造.md` source_note: Raw source remains outside this repository. These are reviewable QPI case drafts only; they are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. ## Case qpi-draft-001: Outline Review Was Not The Real Entry Point status: owner_reviewed owner_approved_for_digest: true digest_role: supporting_evidence_for_context_engineering_entry_point_case source_path: `C:\\\\Use\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 499,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "C:\\\\Use\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 11, \"column\": 436, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"locations, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style c",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 504,
      "column": 258,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"locations, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive-anchor names from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. anonymization_note: People are represented as generic roles such as `decision_maker`, `execution_lead`, `technical_staff`, `frontline_staff`, and `affected_learners`. The organization is represented as `the organization`\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 510,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "zation`\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 100, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"overnance. - Keep `classification: mixed` because the same case contains data scarcity and governance scarcity. - Use",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 515,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "overnance. - Keep `classification: mixed` because the same case contains data scarcity and governance scarcity. - Use as selector calibration and high-priority regression for AI/tool requests that must not be treated as simple execution. - Owner-approved wording: \\\"AI can organize evidence, but must not manufacture the evidentiary relationship.\\\" - Current anonymization is sufficient. ## Case qpi-draft-002: Credential Metric Repair Creates Staffing Ratio Deadlock status: owner_reviewed o\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 521,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "iewed o\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 357, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"rtability and application feasibility. - Market-facing frame sees communication and enrollment value. - Long-term orga",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 526,
      "column": 255,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\": \"rtability and application feasibility. - Market-facing frame sees communication and enrollment value. - Long-term organization frame sees strategic myopia risk. - Keep `classification: issue` and `dominant_scarcity: consensus_order`. - Owner-approved wording: \\\"A resource-feasible compromise becomes strategic myopia if it is not tested against long-term positioning.\\\" - Use as calibration for short-term reportability or packaging substituting for long-term strategic planning. ## Case q",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 532,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "Case qp\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 519, \"column\": 8, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"as dominant scarcity] - Should isolated achievements be treated as evidence of latent capability or as masking signals",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 537,
      "column": 258,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"as dominant scarcity] - Should isolated achievements be treated as evidence of latent capability or as masking signals? [answered: prioritize as masking signal; they may indicate local capability but cannot offset systemic decline] - What owner-approved wording should be used to avoid over-claiming causal responsibility? [answered: input conditions may affect outcomes but cannot replace audit of management levers] ### 13. Owner Review Decision - Keep `classification: mixed` and `dominan\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 543,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "dominan\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 528, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"upported or whether academic affairs is treated as cost, revenue, or reporting function. - Treat isolated achievements",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 548,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"upported or whether academic affairs is treated as cost, revenue, or reporting function. - Treat isolated achievements primarily as masking signals. - They may indicate local capability, but they cannot offset systemic outcome decline. - Owner-approved wording: - \\\"Input conditions may affect outcomes, but cannot replace audit of management levers.\\\" - \\\"Learner quality can explain part of the difficulty, but it cannot automatically exempt quality-assurance responsibility.\\\" - \\\"Isolate\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 554,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "Isolate\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 618, \"column\": 3, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"y, adoption incentives, and digital governance level. - Keep `dominant_scarcity: consensus_order`. - Path/resource cos",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 559,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"y, adoption incentives, and digital governance level. - Keep `dominant_scarcity: consensus_order`. - Path/resource cost exists, but the missing object is shared governance criteria and authority. - Local versus cloud detail can remain. - Owner-approved wording: \\\"Define digital governance criteria before platform selection.\\\" ## Case qpi-draft-008: Public Safety Compliance Gap Reveals Bottom-Line Control Failure status: owner_reviewed owner_approved_for_digest: true digest_role: botto\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 565,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "botto\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-development-office.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 11, \"column\": 408, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"s, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, and exact numeric details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-s",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 570,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "s, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, and exact numeric details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive anchors from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. anonymization_note: People are represented as roles such as `decision_maker`, `execution_lead`, `strategy_staff`, `functional_department`, and `frontline_staff`. The organization is represented as `the organization`; the\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 576,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 7, \"column\": 428, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"estamps, places, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-st",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 581,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "estamps, places, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive anchors from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. owner_review_source: `C:/Users/wangq/Documents/Codex/knowledge-vault/work/internal/强哥的思想宇宙/QPI案例审阅/QPI提炼审核/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases-GPT.md` owner_review_note: Owner/GPT review approved all eight\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 587,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 698, \"column\": 8, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"ich replace education value with transactional output metrics. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is this case too broad",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 592,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"ich replace education value with transactional output metrics. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is this case too broad for calibration, or useful as an Issue anchor? - Should it be decomposed into several narrower P/I mixed cases? - What owner-approved wording should be used for the anonymized identity-shift risk? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: transactional_education_issue_anchor - selector_calibrati\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 598,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ti\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 81, \"column\": 64, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"nant scarcity here correctly placed on consensus/order rather than path/resource? - Should this be treated as Issue ra",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 603,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "nant scarcity here correctly placed on consensus/order rather than path/resource? - Should this be treated as Issue rather than mixed because the compliance boundary dominates? - Which details, if any, are safe enough to retain in a future owner-approved case digest? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: compliance_boundary_retention_issue_regression_case - regression_candidate: high_priority - classification:\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 609,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "n:\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 618, \"column\": 8, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"e design without killing execution energy. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is \\\"privatization of organizational capab",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 614,
      "column": 259,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "e design without killing execution energy. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is \\\"privatization of organizational capability\\\" the right abstraction here? - Should this case be connected with the role-inflation case or kept separate? - What owner-approved signal distinguishes healthy recognition from dangerous private capture? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: non_institutionalized_capability_calibration_ca\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 620,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ation_ca\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-research-office.cases.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 7, \"column\": 397, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"departments, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, ancient-style cognitive anchors, exact numeric details, and",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 625,
      "column": 258,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"departments, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, ancient-style cognitive anchors, exact numeric details, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. owner_review_source: `C:/Users/wangq/Documents/Codex/knowledge-vault/work/internal/强哥的思想宇宙/QPI案例审阅/QPI提炼审核/year-end-review-research-office.cases-GPT.md` owner_review_note: Owner/GPT review approved all eight cases for d\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 631,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ner_review_note: Owner/GPT review approved all eight cases for d\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"selector/qpi_case_digests.json\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 1261, \"column\": 42, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"into an upstream authority over teaching.\\\", \\\"routing_notes\\\": [ \\\"hard outcome metric hiding authority redesign\\\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 636,
      "column": 237,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "se, \"context\": \"into an upstream authority over teaching.\\\", \\\"routing_notes\\\": [ \\\"hard outcome metric hiding authority redesign\\\", \\\"separate outcome improvement from teaching authority transfer\\\", \\\"reverse accountability power is owner-approved wording\\\" ], \\\"recommended_next_step\\\": \\\"Define shared outcome governance, evidence standards, and limits on reverse accountability before redesigning authority.\\\", \\\"misclassification_risk\\\": [ \\\"violent_reduction\\\",\", \"message\": \"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 642,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "thority.\\\", \\\"misclassification_risk\\\": [ \\\"violent_reduction\\\",\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"selector/qpi_case_digests.json\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 2187, \"column\": 42, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"mulate research identity through people, expenses, patents, papers, and evidence packaging to obtain external prefer",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 647,
      "column": 243,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "\"context\": \"mulate research identity through people, expenses, patents, papers, and evidence packaging to obtain external preferential status.\\\", \\\"routing_notes\\\": [ \\\"umbrella case for this source\\\", \\\"research identity simulation is owner-approved\\\", \\\"capability building must be separated from evidence simulation\\\" ], \\\"recommended_next_step\\\": \\\"Separate legitimate research capability building from identity simulation and compliance red-line risk.\\\", \\\"misclassif\", \"message\"",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 16,
      "column": 81,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "d` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `docs/DECISIONS.md` line 175: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `docs/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/CASE_PREPROCESSING_WORKFLOW.md` line 160: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md` line 263: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `report",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 17,
      "column": 106,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ase_preprocessing/qpi/CASE_PREPROCESSING_WORKFLOW.md` line 160: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md` line 263: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md` line 275: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `report",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 18,
      "column": 106,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md` line 263: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md` line 275: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/flow-redesign.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preproces",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 19,
      "column": 84,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ase_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md` line 275: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/flow-redesign.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/m",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 20,
      "column": 103,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "l_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/flow-redesign.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 100: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 21,
      "column": 104,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 100: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 357: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 22,
      "column": 104,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 100: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 357: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 519: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 23,
      "column": 104,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 357: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 519: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 528: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 24,
      "column": 104,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 519: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 528: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 618: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 25,
      "column": 104,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 528: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 618: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-development-office.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 26,
      "column": 105,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "pi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md` line 618: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-development-office.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md` line 7: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. -",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 27,
      "column": 113,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "01/year-end-review-development-office.cases.md` line 11: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md` line 7: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md` line 698: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 28,
      "column": 115,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "d-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md` line 7: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md` line 698: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md` line 81: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `repo",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 29,
      "column": 108,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ar-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md` line 698: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md` line 81: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md` line 618: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `rep",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 30,
      "column": 109,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md` line 81: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md` line 618: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-research-office.cases.md` line 7: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `selector/qp",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 31,
      "column": 101,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "i/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md` line 618: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-research-office.cases.md` line 7: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `selector/qpi_case_digests.json` line 1261: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `selector/qpi_case_digests.json` line 2187: `owner-approved` - Ap",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 263,
      "column": 8,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "w Questions - Should QPI explicitly mark \"single-cause reduction\" as a subtype of violent reduction? - Should this case be used to test that QPI does not output a single definitive cause when the source provides coupled mechanisms? - What owner-approved language should be used to distinguish explanatory usefulness from causal finality? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - Keep the case, but avoid the overbroad rule \"all single-cause attribution is wrong.\" - Rename the risk to `single_facto",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 275,
      "column": 3,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "n. - Prevent QPI from outputting a single definitive root cause when coupled mechanisms are already present. - Require distinction between trigger, maintaining condition, high-weight factor, current action lever, and causal totality. - Owner-approved language: - \"This factor has explanatory usefulness, but it is not causal finality.\" - \"It may be a high-weight factor or current lever, not the complete cause.\" - \"It can be prioritized in this context, but it cannot replace the sys",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/flow-redesign.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 11,
      "column": 150,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "h: `C:\\Users\\wangq\\Documents\\Codex\\knowledge-vault\\work\\internal\\强哥的思想宇宙\\QPI案例分析\\流程改造.md` source_note: Raw source remains outside this repository. These are reviewable QPI case drafts only; they are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. ## Case qpi-draft-001: Outline Review Was Not The Real Entry Point status: owner_reviewed owner_approved_for_digest: true digest_role: supporting_evidence_for_context_engineering_entry_point_case source_path: `C:\\Use",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 11,
      "column": 436,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "locations, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive-anchor names from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. anonymization_note: People are represented as generic roles such as `decision_maker`, `execution_lead`, `technical_staff`, `frontline_staff`, and `affected_learners`. The organization is represented as `the organization`",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 100,
      "column": 3,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "overnance. - Keep `classification: mixed` because the same case contains data scarcity and governance scarcity. - Use as selector calibration and high-priority regression for AI/tool requests that must not be treated as simple execution. - Owner-approved wording: \"AI can organize evidence, but must not manufacture the evidentiary relationship.\" - Current anonymization is sufficient. ## Case qpi-draft-002: Credential Metric Repair Creates Staffing Ratio Deadlock status: owner_reviewed o",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 357,
      "column": 3,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "rtability and application feasibility. - Market-facing frame sees communication and enrollment value. - Long-term organization frame sees strategic myopia risk. - Keep `classification: issue` and `dominant_scarcity: consensus_order`. - Owner-approved wording: \"A resource-feasible compromise becomes strategic myopia if it is not tested against long-term positioning.\" - Use as calibration for short-term reportability or packaging substituting for long-term strategic planning. ## Case qp",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 519,
      "column": 8,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "as dominant scarcity] - Should isolated achievements be treated as evidence of latent capability or as masking signals? [answered: prioritize as masking signal; they may indicate local capability but cannot offset systemic decline] - What owner-approved wording should be used to avoid over-claiming causal responsibility? [answered: input conditions may affect outcomes but cannot replace audit of management levers] ### 13. Owner Review Decision - Keep `classification: mixed` and `dominan",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 528,
      "column": 3,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "upported or whether academic affairs is treated as cost, revenue, or reporting function. - Treat isolated achievements primarily as masking signals. - They may indicate local capability, but they cannot offset systemic outcome decline. - Owner-approved wording: - \"Input conditions may affect outcomes, but cannot replace audit of management levers.\" - \"Learner quality can explain part of the difficulty, but it cannot automatically exempt quality-assurance responsibility.\" - \"Isolate",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 618,
      "column": 3,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "y, adoption incentives, and digital governance level. - Keep `dominant_scarcity: consensus_order`. - Path/resource cost exists, but the missing object is shared governance criteria and authority. - Local versus cloud detail can remain. - Owner-approved wording: \"Define digital governance criteria before platform selection.\" ## Case qpi-draft-008: Public Safety Compliance Gap Reveals Bottom-Line Control Failure status: owner_reviewed owner_approved_for_digest: true digest_role: botto",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-development-office.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 11,
      "column": 408,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "s, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, and exact numeric details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive anchors from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. anonymization_note: People are represented as roles such as `decision_maker`, `execution_lead`, `strategy_staff`, `functional_department`, and `frontline_staff`. The organization is represented as `the organization`; the",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 7,
      "column": 428,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "estamps, places, titles, exact numbers, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. Ancient-style cognitive anchors from the source are intentionally omitted. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. owner_review_source: `C:/Users/wangq/Documents/Codex/knowledge-vault/work/internal/强哥的思想宇宙/QPI案例审阅/QPI提炼审核/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases-GPT.md` owner_review_note: Owner/GPT review approved all eight",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 698,
      "column": 8,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "ich replace education value with transactional output metrics. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is this case too broad for calibration, or useful as an Issue anchor? - Should it be decomposed into several narrower P/I mixed cases? - What owner-approved wording should be used for the anonymized identity-shift risk? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: transactional_education_issue_anchor - selector_calibrati",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 81,
      "column": 64,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "nant scarcity here correctly placed on consensus/order rather than path/resource? - Should this be treated as Issue rather than mixed because the compliance boundary dominates? - Which details, if any, are safe enough to retain in a future owner-approved case digest? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: compliance_boundary_retention_issue_regression_case - regression_candidate: high_priority - classification:",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 618,
      "column": 8,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "e design without killing execution energy. ### 12. Owner Review Questions - Is \"privatization of organizational capability\" the right abstraction here? - Should this case be connected with the role-inflation case or kept separate? - What owner-approved signal distinguishes healthy recognition from dangerous private capture? ### 13. Owner Review Decision - owner_review_status: owner_reviewed - owner_approved_for_digest: true - digest_role: non_institutionalized_capability_calibration_ca",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-research-office.cases.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 7,
      "column": 397,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "departments, institutions, timestamps, locations, titles, ancient-style cognitive anchors, exact numeric details, and sensitive operational details have been removed or generalized. These drafts are not selector JSON, regression cases, or owner-approved calibration data. owner_review_source: `C:/Users/wangq/Documents/Codex/knowledge-vault/work/internal/强哥的思想宇宙/QPI案例审阅/QPI提炼审核/year-end-review-research-office.cases-GPT.md` owner_review_note: Owner/GPT review approved all eight cases for d",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "selector/qpi_case_digests.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 1261,
      "column": 42,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "into an upstream authority over teaching.\", \"routing_notes\": [ \"hard outcome metric hiding authority redesign\", \"separate outcome improvement from teaching authority transfer\", \"reverse accountability power is owner-approved wording\" ], \"recommended_next_step\": \"Define shared outcome governance, evidence standards, and limits on reverse accountability before redesigning authority.\", \"misclassification_risk\": [ \"violent_reduction\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    },
    {
      "file": "selector/qpi_case_digests.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 2187,
      "column": 42,
      "severity": "blocking",
      "evidence_present": false,
      "context": "mulate research identity through people, expenses, patents, papers, and evidence packaging to obtain external preferential status.\", \"routing_notes\": [ \"umbrella case for this source\", \"research identity simulation is owner-approved\", \"capability building must be separated from evidence simulation\" ], \"recommended_next_step\": \"Separate legitimate research capability building from identity simulation and compliance red-line risk.\", \"misclassif",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
    }
  ],
  "missing_evidence_markers": [
    {
      "file": "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2_2026-06-17_selector-negative-gate-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2.md",
      "line": 59,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2a_2026-06-17_depth-limiting-qpi-override-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2a.md",
      "line": 47,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "docs/DECISIONS.md",
      "line": 175,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "docs/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/CASE_PREPROCESSING_WORKFLOW.md",
      "line": 160,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 204,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 210,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 215,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 221,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 226,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 232,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 237,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 243,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 248,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 254,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 259,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 265,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 270,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 276,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 281,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 287,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 292,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 298,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 303,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 309,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 314,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 320,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 325,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 331,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 336,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 342,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 347,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 353,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 358,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 364,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 369,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 375,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 380,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 386,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 391,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 397,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 402,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 408,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 413,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 438,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 444,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 449,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 455,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 460,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 466,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 471,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 477,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 482,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 488,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 493,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 499,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 504,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 510,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 515,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 521,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 526,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 532,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 537,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 543,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 548,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 554,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 559,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 565,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 570,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 576,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 581,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 587,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 592,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 598,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 603,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 609,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 614,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 620,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 625,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 631,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 636,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 642,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "line": 647,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "line": 16,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "line": 17,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "line": 18,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "line": 19,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "line": 20,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "line": 21,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "line": 22,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "line": 23,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "line": 24,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "line": 25,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "line": 26,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "line": 27,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "line": 28,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "line": 29,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "line": 30,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "line": 31,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md",
      "line": 263,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md",
      "line": 275,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/flow-redesign.cases.md",
      "line": 11,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "line": 11,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "line": 100,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "line": 357,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "line": 519,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "line": 528,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md",
      "line": 618,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-development-office.cases.md",
      "line": 11,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md",
      "line": 7,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md",
      "line": 698,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md",
      "line": 81,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md",
      "line": 618,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-research-office.cases.md",
      "line": 7,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "selector/qpi_case_digests.json",
      "line": 1261,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    },
    {
      "file": "selector/qpi_case_digests.json",
      "line": 2187,
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "required_evidence_markers": [
        "owner_decision",
        "owner decision",
        "ccra_review",
        "ccra review",
        "web ccra"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "warnings": [],
  "blocking_errors": [
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.",
    "Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker."
  ],
  "observations": [
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/README.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 119,
      "column": 125,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "ature run is roughly 5-10 minutes, comparable to Web CCRA review and dependent on the client/runtime configuration. - The child reviewer may use local tools to inspect archives, query manifests, run deterministic helper Skills, and execute owner-approved regression or validation gates. - The main session should avoid interrupting a running child review only because it spends several minutes reading files or running tools. - `run-notes.md` should record observed duration when available so l",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 188,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": ", \"tests/regression_index.json\" ], \"possible_overclaims\": [ { \"file\": \"ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2_2026-06-17_selector-negative-gate-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 59, \"column\": 58, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"on_report.md` - `reports/selector_regression_report_v0.2.md` - `reports/selector_calibration_smoke_report.md` - `repor",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 193,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "\"on_report.md` - `reports/selector_regression_report_v0.2.md` - `reports/selector_calibration_smoke_report.md` - `reports/model_card_sync_report_v0.2.md` ## Important Interpretation Validation pass does not mean model content is stable or owner-approved. It only means the Round 03.2 selector negative-gate patch is structurally consistent and passes current local checks.\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"ccra_review_bundle/",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 199,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "\"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2a_2026-06-17_depth-limiting-qpi-override-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2a.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 47, \"column\": 58, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"ct: PASS - Selector demo: PASS - Selector regression: PASS - Selector calibration smoke: PASS, 95 inputs, 0 failures,",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 422,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "} ], \"field_level_findings\": [], \"phrase_level_findings\": [ { \"file\": \"ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2_2026-06-17_selector-negative-gate-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 59, \"column\": 58, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"on_report.md` - `reports/selector_regression_report_v0.2.md` - `reports/selector_calibration_smoke_report.md` - `repor",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 427,
      "column": 257,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "\"on_report.md` - `reports/selector_regression_report_v0.2.md` - `reports/selector_calibration_smoke_report.md` - `reports/model_card_sync_report_v0.2.md` ## Important Interpretation Validation pass does not mean model content is stable or owner-approved. It only means the Round 03.2 selector negative-gate patch is structurally consistent and passes current local checks.\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"ccra_review_bundle/",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 433,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "\"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" }, { \"file\": \"ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2a_2026-06-17_depth-limiting-qpi-override-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2a.md\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 47, \"column\": 58, \"severity\": \"blocking\", \"evidence_present\": false, \"context\": \"ct: PASS - Selector demo: PASS - Selector regression: PASS - Selector calibration smoke: PASS, 95 inputs, 0 failures,",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 655,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "lacks nearby evidence marker.\" } ], \"missing_evidence_markers\": [ { \"file\": \"ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2_2026-06-17_selector-negative-gate-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2.md\", \"line\": 59, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2a_2026-06-17_depth",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 667,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2a_2026-06-17_depth-limiting-qpi-override-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2a.md\", \"line\": 47, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"docs/DECISIONS.md\", \"line\": 175, \"p",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 679,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "\"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"docs/DECISIONS.md\", \"line\": 175, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"docs/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/CASE_PREPROCE",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 691,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "ecision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"docs/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/CASE_PREPROCESSING_WORKFLOW.md\", \"line\": 160, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/d",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 703,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md\", \"line\": 263, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/d",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 715,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/disappointment-emotional-isolation.cases.md\", \"line\": 275, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/f",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 727,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "sion\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/flow-redesign.cases.md\", \"line\": 11, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/y",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 739,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "er decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"line\": 11, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/y",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 751,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "r decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"line\": 100, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/y",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 763,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "r decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"line\": 357, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/y",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 775,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "r decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"line\": 519, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/y",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 787,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "r decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"line\": 528, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/y",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 799,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "r decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-academic-affairs.cases.md\", \"line\": 618, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/y",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 811,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-development-office.cases.md\", \"line\": 11, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/y",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 823,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "n\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md\", \"line\": 7, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/y",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 835,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": ", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-employment-entrepreneurship.cases.md\", \"line\": 698, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/y",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 847,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "cision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md\", \"line\": 81, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/y",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 859,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "ision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-international-college.cases.md\", \"line\": 618, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/y",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 871,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "wner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-research-office.cases.md\", \"line\": 7, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"selector/qpi_case_digests.json\", \"line\":",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 883,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "ence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"selector/qpi_case_digests.json\", \"line\": 1261, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"selector/qpi_case_digests.json\", \"line\":",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 895,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "ence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] }, { \"file\": \"selector/qpi_case_digests.json\", \"line\": 2187, \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"required_evidence_markers\": [ \"owner_decision\", \"owner decision\", \"ccra_review\", \"ccra review\", \"web ccra\" ] } ], \"warnings\": [], \"blocking_errors\": [ \"Approval claim phr",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 933,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "s nearby evidence marker.\", \"Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker.\" ], \"observations\": [ { \"file\": \"local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/lifecycle-guard-config.yaml\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"owner-approved\", \"line\": 14, \"column\": 5, \"severity\": \"observation\", \"evidence_present\": true, \"context\": \"watched_paths: - \\\"**/*.md\\\" - \\\"**/*.json\\\" - \\\"**/*.yaml\\\" - \\\"**/*.yml\\\" status_fields: - status - lifecycle - mod",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 938,
      "column": 211,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "\"evidence_present\": true, \"context\": \"watched_paths: - \\\"**/*.md\\\" - \\\"**/*.json\\\" - \\\"**/*.yaml\\\" - \\\"**/*.yml\\\" status_fields: - status - lifecycle - model.status - model.lifecycle forbidden_status_values: - stable - accepted - owner-approved - ccra-approved warning_status_values: - candidate - ready-for-review required_evidence_markers: - owner_decision - owner decision - ccra_review - ccra review - web ccra approved_phrases: - owner-approved - ccra-approve\", \"message\":",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 938,
      "column": 416,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "atus_values: - stable - accepted - owner-approved - ccra-approved warning_status_values: - candidate - ready-for-review required_evidence_markers: - owner_decision - owner decision - ccra_review - ccra review - web ccra approved_phrases: - owner-approved - ccra-approve\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.\", \"kind\": \"evidence_present_claim\" }, { \"file\": \"local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/l",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 950,
      "column": 211,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "\"evidence_present\": true, \"context\": \"watched_paths: - \\\"**/*.md\\\" - \\\"**/*.json\\\" - \\\"**/*.yaml\\\" - \\\"**/*.yml\\\" status_fields: - status - lifecycle - model.status - model.lifecycle forbidden_status_values: - stable - accepted - owner-approved - ccra-approved warning_status_values: - candidate - ready-for-review required_evidence_markers: - owner_decision - owner decision - ccra_review - ccra review - web ccra approved_phrases: - owner-approved - ccra-approved - Owner approv\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 950,
      "column": 416,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "atus_values: - stable - accepted - owner-approved - ccra-approved warning_status_values: - candidate - ready-for-review required_evidence_markers: - owner_decision - owner decision - ccra_review - ccra review - web ccra approved_phrases: - owner-approved - ccra-approved - Owner approv\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.\", \"kind\": \"evidence_present_claim\" } ], \"machine_readable_summary\": { \"st",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "ccra-approved",
      "line": 938,
      "column": 228,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "sent\": true, \"context\": \"watched_paths: - \\\"**/*.md\\\" - \\\"**/*.json\\\" - \\\"**/*.yaml\\\" - \\\"**/*.yml\\\" status_fields: - status - lifecycle - model.status - model.lifecycle forbidden_status_values: - stable - accepted - owner-approved - ccra-approved warning_status_values: - candidate - ready-for-review required_evidence_markers: - owner_decision - owner decision - ccra_review - ccra review - web ccra approved_phrases: - owner-approved - ccra-approve\", \"message\": \"Approval claim",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "ccra-approved",
      "line": 945,
      "column": 18,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "vidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.\", \"kind\": \"evidence_present_claim\" }, { \"file\": \"local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/lifecycle-guard-config.yaml\", \"source\": \"text\", \"phrase\": \"ccra-approved\", \"line\": 15, \"column\": 5, \"severity\": \"observation\", \"evidence_present\": true, \"context\": \"watched_paths: - \\\"**/*.md\\\" - \\\"**/*.json\\\" - \\\"**/*.yaml\\\" - \\\"**/*.yml\\\" status_fields: - status - lifecycle - mod",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "ccra-approved",
      "line": 950,
      "column": 228,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "sent\": true, \"context\": \"watched_paths: - \\\"**/*.md\\\" - \\\"**/*.json\\\" - \\\"**/*.yaml\\\" - \\\"**/*.yml\\\" status_fields: - status - lifecycle - model.status - model.lifecycle forbidden_status_values: - stable - accepted - owner-approved - ccra-approved warning_status_values: - candidate - ready-for-review required_evidence_markers: - owner_decision - owner decision - ccra_review - ccra review - web ccra approved_phrases: - owner-approved - ccra-approved - Owner approv\", \"message\":",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "ccra-approved",
      "line": 950,
      "column": 433,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "able - accepted - owner-approved - ccra-approved warning_status_values: - candidate - ready-for-review required_evidence_markers: - owner_decision - owner decision - ccra_review - ccra review - web ccra approved_phrases: - owner-approved - ccra-approved - Owner approv\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.\", \"kind\": \"evidence_present_claim\" } ], \"machine_readable_summary\": { \"status\": \"FAIL\",",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "CCRA approved",
      "line": 938,
      "column": 391,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "el.lifecycle forbidden_status_values: - stable - accepted - owner-approved - ccra-approved warning_status_values: - candidate - ready-for-review required_evidence_markers: - owner_decision - owner decision - ccra_review - ccra review - web ccra approved_phrases: - owner-approved - ccra-approve\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.\", \"kind\": \"evidence_present_claim\" }, { \"file\": \"local_ccra_r",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.json",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "CCRA approved",
      "line": 950,
      "column": 391,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "el.lifecycle forbidden_status_values: - stable - accepted - owner-approved - ccra-approved warning_status_values: - candidate - ready-for-review required_evidence_markers: - owner_decision - owner decision - ccra_review - ccra review - web ccra approved_phrases: - owner-approved - ccra-approved - Owner approv\", \"message\": \"Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.\", \"kind\": \"evidence_present_claim\" } ], \"machine_re",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 13,
      "column": 123,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "- Files scanned: 178 - Blocking findings: 21 - Warnings: 0 - Evidence-present observations: 2 ## Blocking Findings - `ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2_2026-06-17_selector-negative-gate-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2.md` line 59: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2a_2026-06-17_depth-limiting-qpi-override-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2a.md` line 47: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby ev",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 14,
      "column": 130,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "ATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2.md` line 59: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2a_2026-06-17_depth-limiting-qpi-override-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2a.md` line 47: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `docs/DECISIONS.md` line 175: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `docs/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/CASE_PREPROCESSING_WORKFLOW.md` line 160: `o",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 15,
      "column": 34,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "marker. - `ccra_review_bundle/round-03.2a_2026-06-17_depth-limiting-qpi-override-patch/03_VALIDATION_AND_COMMAND_LOG_03.2a.md` line 47: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `docs/DECISIONS.md` line 175: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `docs/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/CASE_PREPROCESSING_WORKFLOW.md` line 160: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessin",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 32,
      "column": 48,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "earby evidence marker. - `reports/model_case_preprocessing/qpi/round-01/year-end-review-research-office.cases.md` line 7: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `selector/qpi_case_digests.json` line 1261: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `selector/qpi_case_digests.json` line 2187: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. ## Warnings - None ## Observations - `local_ccra_reviews/round-",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 33,
      "column": 48,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "e 7: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `selector/qpi_case_digests.json` line 1261: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. - `selector/qpi_case_digests.json` line 2187: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. ## Warnings - None ## Observations - `local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/lifecycle-guard-config.yaml` line 14: `owner-approved` - evidence marker present; approval validity not d",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 41,
      "column": 80,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "ker. - `selector/qpi_case_digests.json` line 2187: `owner-approved` - Approval claim phrase lacks nearby evidence marker. ## Warnings - None ## Observations - `local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/lifecycle-guard-config.yaml` line 14: `owner-approved` - evidence marker present; approval validity not decided. - `local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/lifecycle-guard-config.yaml` line 15: `ccra-approved` - evidence marker present; approval validity not decided. ## Files Scanned - `AGENTS",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/helper-outputs/lifecycle-status-guard-scan.md",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "ccra-approved",
      "line": 42,
      "column": 80,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "ations - `local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/lifecycle-guard-config.yaml` line 14: `owner-approved` - evidence marker present; approval validity not decided. - `local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/lifecycle-guard-config.yaml` line 15: `ccra-approved` - evidence marker present; approval validity not decided. ## Files Scanned - `AGENTS.md` - `cards/card_index.md` - `cards/intellectual_archaeology.md` - `cards/qpi.md` - `cards/README.md` - `ccra_review_bundle/round-02_2026-06-16_second",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/lifecycle-guard-config.yaml",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 14,
      "column": 5,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "watched_paths: - \"**/*.md\" - \"**/*.json\" - \"**/*.yaml\" - \"**/*.yml\" status_fields: - status - lifecycle - model.status - model.lifecycle forbidden_status_values: - stable - accepted - owner-approved - ccra-approved warning_status_values: - candidate - ready-for-review required_evidence_markers: - owner_decision - owner decision - ccra_review - ccra review - web ccra approved_phrases: - owner-approved - ccra-approve",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/lifecycle-guard-config.yaml",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "ccra-approved",
      "line": 15,
      "column": 5,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "watched_paths: - \"**/*.md\" - \"**/*.json\" - \"**/*.yaml\" - \"**/*.yml\" status_fields: - status - lifecycle - model.status - model.lifecycle forbidden_status_values: - stable - accepted - owner-approved - ccra-approved warning_status_values: - candidate - ready-for-review required_evidence_markers: - owner_decision - owner decision - ccra_review - ccra review - web ccra approved_phrases: - owner-approved - ccra-approved - Owner approv",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/lifecycle-guard-config.yaml",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "owner-approved",
      "line": 14,
      "column": 5,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "watched_paths: - \"**/*.md\" - \"**/*.json\" - \"**/*.yaml\" - \"**/*.yml\" status_fields: - status - lifecycle - model.status - model.lifecycle forbidden_status_values: - stable - accepted - owner-approved - ccra-approved warning_status_values: - candidate - ready-for-review required_evidence_markers: - owner_decision - owner decision - ccra_review - ccra review - web ccra approved_phrases: - owner-approved - ccra-approve",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    },
    {
      "file": "local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/lifecycle-guard-config.yaml",
      "source": "text",
      "phrase": "ccra-approved",
      "line": 15,
      "column": 5,
      "severity": "observation",
      "evidence_present": true,
      "context": "watched_paths: - \"**/*.md\" - \"**/*.json\" - \"**/*.yaml\" - \"**/*.yml\" status_fields: - status - lifecycle - model.status - model.lifecycle forbidden_status_values: - stable - accepted - owner-approved - ccra-approved warning_status_values: - candidate - ready-for-review required_evidence_markers: - owner_decision - owner decision - ccra_review - ccra review - web ccra approved_phrases: - owner-approved - ccra-approved - Owner approv",
      "message": "Approval claim phrase has nearby evidence marker; approval validity is not decided by this scan.",
      "kind": "evidence_present_claim"
    }
  ],
  "machine_readable_summary": {
    "status": "FAIL",
    "files_scanned_count": 200,
    "field_finding_count": 0,
    "phrase_finding_count": 115,
    "missing_evidence_count": 115,
    "warning_count": 0,
    "blocking_count": 115,
    "observation_count": 50
  }
}