# Round 04 Review Questions for GPT / CCRA

## 1. Scope Check

1. Did Round 04 preserve the rule that selector rules are not modified before the first blind run?
2. Did the blind input set avoid expected routing labels before first execution?
3. Is it acceptable that model-name-exposed control cases are retained as controls rather than natural blind inputs?

## 2. Routing Evaluation

For each observed routing result, classify failures or risks as needed:

- selector false positive
- selector false negative
- no-call false positive
- no-call false negative
- QPI over-selection
- QPI under-selection
- IA over-selection
- IA under-selection
- QPI-before-IA gate failure
- model-level exclusion failure
- depth-limiting override failure
- insufficient-context handling risk
- control-case-only behavior, not natural-input behavior

## 3. Specific Review Prompts

1. Which Round 04 cases should become regression cases?
2. Which cases should become calibration inputs?
3. Which cases should remain as non-regression discussion examples?
4. Does any observed routing require a selector rule patch?
5. If a rule patch is needed, should it be Round 04.1 rather than part of Round 04?
6. Does any result imply that QPI or Intellectual Archaeology model content needs revision?
7. Are any blind inputs too artificial and should be removed from future rounds?

## 4. Lifecycle Guard

Do not upgrade QPI or Intellectual Archaeology model lifecycle status from this Round 04 result alone.

Model status changes still require evidence review, content review, regression review, selector review, and owner / CCRA review.
