P(DOOM) INDEX — METHODOLOGY v0.1

Governing methodology for pdoomcount.org. Dated 2026-09-16. Clinical register: this document is a protocol, not an argument for a conclusion.

v0.1 integrates docs/MISSION.md, the locked forks in docs/METHODOLOGY-DRAFT-v0.md, the verified seed ledger in docs/RESEARCH-PASS-v1.md, and the adopted findings in docs/CRITIQUE-R1.md / docs/CRITIQUE-R1-VERDICTS.md. The v0 draft remains in the repo as history; do not build from it.

Companion extract: docs/SOURCE-LEDGER-TIER-A.md (verified values plus v0.1 scoring columns).

This document does not publish a live index number. It states how a number is computed. Static snapshot v1.0 (as-of 2026-09-16) lives in docs/SNAPSHOT-v1.md and snapshots/v1.json; the frontpage mockup renders that snapshot. The design-preview figures that used to sit on the mockup (headline 4.7%, G2 1.2%, G3 3.9%, conditions ×1.08) were ILLUSTRATIVE and are not v0.1 outputs.

0. Document control

Site judgments in this text are labeled [SJ-…]. Verified source facts are labeled [VF] and point at the research pass. Mixing the two unlabeled is a protocol error.

1. Locked forks (do not reopen)

Ruled 2026-09-15 by the operator. The critique attacked M1 as instructed; amendments fold around these forks.

1. Headline gauge = G1 catastrophe [LOCK: G1]. G2 extinction is a displayed sub-gauge. G3 is displayed and is not folded silently into G1.
2. News mechanism = M1 bounded conditioning multiplier [LOCK: M1], with a public event ledger, per-category bounds, and movement caps. v0.1’s work is to make that multiplier attributable, bounded against forecaster disagreement, quantized, and symmetrically falsifiable.
3. Source universe includes high outliers [LOCK: include]. They are shown individually. UNVERIFIED or paraphrased outliers stay in the ledger and do not score (§5). Inclusion in the universe is not inclusion in the statistic.
4. v1 ships as a static, fully-documented snapshot [LOCK: static]. The live pipeline is a v2 work item. Front-page language says snapshot, as-of date, next refresh date.

Also ratified via MISSION and unchanged: public site, no ads, no monetized fear, clinical language.

2. What the site publishes

An index of published judgments, conditioned by a documented news rubric. Not a measurement. The front page says so.

Published surfaces, each with uncertainty:

• G1 headline — point, source band, conditioning envelope, unconditioned aggregate, conditions comparison against forecaster disagreement, down-move eligibility.
• G2 — same machinery, own mapping, own minimum-n outcome.
• G3 — labeled constructed estimate (§4.3). Never presented as a conditioned aggregate of published forecasts.
• Source ledger — every candidate, scoring or not.
• Event ledger — every multiplier movement, including zeros, clips, decays, resets, and down-triggers.
• Corrections log.
• Method page — this protocol, leave-one-out table, weighting-scheme range, mapping table, genesis row.

Why this shape: the chance that AI causes a terminal catastrophe cannot be observed. A single author’s number is one credence. What can be built honestly is a reproducible aggregation of named estimates, with every site judgment written down, and with current conditions applied only inside a bound that is smaller than the disagreement already on the record.

3. Honesty rules, operationalized

From MISSION, made checkable:

1. Index, not measurement — front page sentence, permanent.
2. Attributable — every scored value cites a ledger ID; every movement cites an event ID and a rule ID from R0.1; every site judgment has an [SJ-…] tag.
3. Uncertainty always displayed — a point with no band is not publishable. The band’s components are labeled. What the band excludes is stated (§9.3).
4. Symmetric falsifiability — “what would move this down” is not a caption. Numeric down-triggers in §13 have the same force as up-steps. A down-move eligibility line sits beside the number.
5. No bombast — clinical language; absolute percentage-point deltas; resolution floor (§14.3).
6. Mundane-deployment path is first-class — G3 is always on the page; categories C2 and C7 exist; they are capped so they cannot dominate the multiplier (§4.4, §11.4).

4. The gauges

All gauges are AI-caused. Horizon for G1 and G2 mixtures: 2100, with as-stated values shown beside any standardized use (§6.2).

4.1 G1 — Catastrophe (headline) [LOCK: G1]

An AI-caused event that kills ≥10% of humanity or irreversibly collapses industrial civilization, by 2100.

This is broader than literal extinction. It is meant to capture both an alignment-lab failure and a mundane deployment cascade that ends in collapse. Those two routes are not extra gauges inside G1; they are covered by the definition. G3 exists so the second route is not only a clause in G1.

4.2 G2 — Extinction

Literal human extinction from AI, or the FRI operationalization where it is the source’s own definition: global population < 5,000. Horizon for the mixture: 2100. Near-term extinction statements are a separate panel (§6.2).

4.3 G3 — Deployment cascade (constructed estimate)

[SJ-G3-CONSTRUCT] G3 is the founding thesis as its own gauge: premature deployment of insufficiently-verified AI into critical systems (grid, military command, health, finance, logistics), producing compounding failures that neither market nor regulator catches in time. Collapse-shaped, not extinction-shaped by necessity. Always displayed. Never folded silently into G1.

The verified Tier A table contains no published forecast of this event [VF: RESEARCH-PASS-v1]. Therefore G3 has n = 0 scoring sources.

v0.1 rendering rule: G3 is a labeled constructed estimate, not a conditioned aggregate. It must not look like G1/G2.

Allowed on the G3 surface:

• a short scenario narrative;
• a Carlsmith-style factor list (deployment into named system classes; verification lag; liability lag; compounding; terminality), each qualitative or sourced as indicator, not as P(G3);
• pointers to event-ledger rows in C2 and C7, which instrument the same thesis as conditions, not as a G3 probability.

Not allowed on the G3 surface:

• a percentage presented as an aggregate of published forecasts;
• headline_G3 = aggregate(TierA, TierB) × conditioning(TierC);
• silent reuse of the G1 number.

If a later version shows a G3 percentage, the label SITE-CONSTRUCTED, NOT AN AGGREGATE is mandatory, the construction recipe is a versioned appendix, and n=0 remains on the page until a primary numeric forecast of this definition exists. The mockup’s 3.9% is illustrative only and is not that recipe.

4.4 Overlap (G1 collapse limb, G3, C2, C7)

[SJ-OVERLAP] The mundane-deployment thesis appears in three places by design: G1’s collapse limb, G3’s whole definition, and scoring categories C2 and C7. That is overweighting if left unnamed.

Controls:

• G3 is not a second G1 number (section 4.3).
• C2+C7 together may use at most 2/7 of the overall conditioning log-span (§11.4), equal to two categories’ share of seven, not more.
• G1’s mixture is published forecasts of catastrophe/existential catastrophe, not a constructed G3.

The thesis is first-class. It is not allowed to count three times as if it were three independent quantitative inputs.

5. Scoring eligibility — primary numeric utterances

[SJ-UTTER] Only a primary numeric utterance scores. A primary numeric utterance is a percentage, odds, or clearly numeric interval spoken or written by the named person or instrument, in a citable primary (book, paper, survey table, recorded interview, dated post).

Excluded from every statistic, retained in the ledger with flags:

• third-party conversions (LeCun’s asteroid comparison converted to <0.01% [VF]);
• UNVERIFIED high percentages without a pinned primary quote (Yudkowsky [VF]);
• qualitative institutional language with no number (International AI Safety Report [VF]);
• a different question treated as if it were this one (Hinton “50%” good-vs-bad [VF]).

LOCK include-outliers means those rows are shown, not deleted. It does not mean a journalist’s paraphrase becomes a data point.

Interval utterances (Hinton “10% to 20%”) score as intervals, not as a silently chosen midpoint. Bound utterances (Hubinger “>10%”) score as bounds, not as 10%. Carlsmith’s later “>10%” is a bound companion to the main-text product ~5%; the mixture point for that row is the main-text 5% [SJ-CARL-POINT], because it is the only exact product; the bound is displayed beside it.

6. Normalization

Every source probability is mapped to a gauge before it enters a mixture. Where the definition does not map cleanly, the row stays in the ledger with a reason and is excluded from that mixture.

6.1 Gauge mapping

[SJ-MAP] Mapping is a site judgment. It can move the headline more than a typical source. It is therefore a published table with decision-maker (this document), an ambiguity flag, and a sensitivity line — not an implicit cleanup.

No face-value dump of G2 numbers into G1. Extinction ⊆ catastrophe, so P(G1) ≥ P(G2) for nested events in one mind, but mixing Hinton’s 10–20% extinction with XPT’s 12% catastrophe as if they named the same event is the inflation the critique named.

Published G2→G1 factor (sensitivity only): XPT is the only verified instrument that reports both definitions on one panel [VF].

• Superforecasters: 2.13 / 0.38 ≈ 5.61
• Domain experts: 12 / 3 = 4.00

[SJ-M-FACTOR] v0.1 records m = 4, the domain-expert ratio, as the sensitivity factor. It is not applied to the headline. The required sensitivity line is: “G1 if native-G2 rows were up-mapped by m=4” versus “G1 if native-G2 rows were included at face value” versus the actual headline (native-G1 rows only).

Per-source mapping lives in docs/SOURCE-LEDGER-TIER-A.md. Changing a map is a methodology version bump.

6.2 Horizon standardization

Verified horizons [VF]: Hubinger 10y, Hinton ~30y, Carlsmith ~2070, XPT 2100, Ord ~100y, AI Impacts open / 100y variant, Bengio unspecified. They are not all “2100.”

[SJ-HORIZON] v0.1 does not invent a hazard rate. Converting 10-year probabilities into 2100 probabilities would be a larger judgment than most sources. Two columns are always shown: as-stated and mixture-eligible.

Horizon classes:

As-stated and mixture-eligible values sit side by side on the method page. This standardization rule is [SJ-HORIZON], not a source claim.

6.3 Minimum-n

[SJ-MIN-N]

v0.1 expected membership (not a computed headline): G1-2100 has five scoring rows (A-XPT-SF catastrophe, A-XPT-DE catastrophe, A-CARL-2022, A-ORD-2020, A-AII-2024) → full aggregate eligible. G2-2100 has two scoring rows (the two XPT extinction medians) → thin panel. G3 has zero → constructed.

7. Tiers

7.1 Tier A — published forecasts (backbone)

Named, dated, cited. Seed: docs/SOURCE-LEDGER-TIER-A.md. Each scoring row carries: value, gauge map, horizon class, family, weight, COI note, utterance type.

Weights are published here and fixed between quarterly reviews. They are not tuned to hit a preferred headline.

7.2 Tier B — live aggregates (slot; not in the v1 snapshot)

Metaculus community questions in the AI catastrophe/extinction family, and prediction markets where active. The research pass left question IDs and values UNVERIFIED.

[SJ-TIERB-V1] Static v1 excludes Tier B from the mixture. The slot remains in the protocol. When a later version verifies IDs, each series needs: question ID, operational definition, horizon, liquidity/volume, and a two-tier flag if it overlaps Tier A people or questions.

Markets (play-money or thin books) are out of v1. A future recency function, if any, must be numeric and versioned; v0.1 defines none, so none is applied.

7.3 Tier C — news-conditioning rubric (M1)

A fixed set of indicator categories. Events move G1/G2 only through pre-declared rules, quantized steps, and bounds. G3 does not receive this product as if it were an aggregate.

Categories (R0.1 — seven, same list as the draft, now with declared sign and precedence):

C2 and C7 are the founding thesis’s live instrumentation. They are not a third G3 probability.

8. Weights

8.1 Class weights and the survey–superforecaster tie

Draft v0 loaded “surveys and superforecasters” as the heaviest classes. Those classes disagree by a large factor (XPT superforecasters 0.38% extinction vs domain experts 3% vs surveys 5–10% [VF]). Whichever intra-pair tie-break wins dominates the headline.

[SJ-TIE] v0.1 sets equal class weight for the current AI Impacts wave and the XPT family as a whole (both 3.0). That is the tie-break: equality. Residual disagreement is shown as a weighting-scheme range, not absorbed into a silent winner. Calibration is not used as a cross-task license for the superforecaster panel to dominate; both XPT panels answered the same AI questions in the same tournament, and that is the comparability note.

8.2 Instrument-family caps

[SJ-FAM] Correlated rows are not independent.

• Combined weight inside a family ≤ the class weight of that family.
• FAM-AII: 2024 in the mixture at 3.0; 2023 weight 0.0 in the mixture; 2023 remains for substitute-wave sensitivity.
• FAM-XPT: superforecasters 1.5 + domain experts 1.5 = 3.0.
• A row that also appears in Tier B (later) is flagged two-tier and does not collect both weights.

Per-source mixture weights: see the ledger. Sum of G1-2100 mixture weights under v0.1: 1.5+1.5+2.0+2.0+3.0 = 10.0.

8.3 Named-statement line (required)

[SJ-NAMED-LINE] Named statements can sit 2–5× above the survey class and pull a median even at small weight. The method page always shows:

• headline with the named-statement class (for 2100: that class is empty under §6.2, so the line reads “no named-statement rows in this mixture”);
• headline without that class;
• the difference in percentage points.

Near-term named statements (Hinton, Hubinger) appear on the near-term panel, not as a quiet tug on G1-2100.

9. Aggregation

Per gauge that meets minimum-n:

unconditioned = W( {scoring rows mapped to this gauge and horizon class} )
headline      = unconditioned × conditioning
conditioning  = clip( exp( Σ_c log m_c ) )   # §11

W is defined next. The unconditioned aggregate is a permanent second displayed line. Conditioning is its own line. A reader can always separate the expert baseline from the news adjustment.

9.1 Headline statistic

[SJ-STAT] The headline is the untrimmed weighted median of mixture-eligible values, weights as in §8.

• Untrimmed because LOCK include-outliers forbids quietly trimming the same outliers the site promised to keep. There is no trim rule.
• The weighted mean is shown beside the median. It is not the headline.
• “Which is the number?” — the untrimmed weighted median. The mockup’s “trimmed weighted median” caption is illustrative and predates this rule; it must be corrected on the live page at snapshot build, not by relabeling the mockup in this docs pass.

Weighted median: order the scoring values; the headline is the smallest value for which cumulative weight is at least half the total weight (standard weighted-median convention). Ties and even splits: the midpoint of the two central weighted observations. State the convention on the compute printout.

9.2 Leave-one-out and other required sensitivities

On the method page, every published snapshot includes:

1. Leave-one-out: headline with each scoring row removed, one at a time.
2. Substitute-wave: G1 with A-AII-2023 (5%) in place of A-AII-2024 (10.0%).
3. Weighting-scheme range: v0.1 weights; equal weights; survey-only; XPT-only; structured-only.
4. Mapping lines: native-G1 only (headline); native-G2 at face value added; native-G2 up-mapped by m=4 added.
5. Named-statement on/off (§8.3).
6. Unconditioned vs conditioned.

Small n makes the weighted median jumpy. Leave-one-out is how that is shown instead of pretended away.

9.3 The band

[SJ-BAND] The source band is computed only over same-gauge-mapped, mixture-eligible rows. It is not an IQR dumped across extinction, disempowerment, and catastrophe as if they were one variable.

Band composition (labeled):

• Included in the source band: disagreement among mixture-eligible rows for that gauge.
• Not included in the source band: mapping uncertainty, weighting-scheme uncertainty, horizon-standardization uncertainty, conditioning.
• Conditioning envelope (separate, required): unconditioned point × overall bound [0.65, 1.54], drawn and labeled so the largest single judgment in the system is inside the picture (critique A14).
• Mapping-induced shift (separate line): headline versus the face-value and m=4 counterfactuals.

After conditioning, the source band is multiplied by the current combined multiplier so the displayed IQR/range moves with conditions. The envelope uses the bounds, not the current multiplier. Both are on the page.

10. Conditioning bound, derived from forecaster disagreement

M1 stays. The overall bound is the primary judgment. Per-category caps are derived so their worst-case product equals that overall bound. Decorative per-category caps that compose to ×4.77 while an overall ×1.6 quietly does all the work are not R0.1.

10.1 Reference disagreement

[VF] Same instrument, same PDF, same horizon, two definitions:

v0.1 uses the G1-matched pair as the reference for the G1 multiplier, because G1 is the headline. D_ref = 5.63.

A ~4% baseline moved by the draft’s 0.7–1.6 span becomes 2.8–6.4% — a swing on the same order, in percentage points, as the 0.38–3 extinction dispute. The site’s job is to aggregate other people’s judgments. News may update for recency; it may not replace that dispute.

10.2 Derivation [SJ-BOUND]

Principle: the log-span of the overall conditioning bound is at most half the log-span of D_ref.

D_ref     = 12 / 2.13 ≈ 5.6338
S_max     = √D_ref    ≈ 2.3736

Log-symmetric about 1 (equal up and down in ratio; critique A3):

H = √S_max ≈ 1.5406   →  rounded 1.54
L = 1/H    ≈ 0.6491   →  rounded 0.65
overall multiplier ∈ [0.65, 1.54]
span H/L              ≈ 2.37

Rounding to two decimals is [SJ-BOUND-ROUND]. Asymmetry 25% up / 15% down is withdrawn. If a later version wants alarm-side asymmetry, it needs a named justification and a rubric bump; v0.1 has none.

10.3 Permanent comparison line

Beside the number, always:

Conditions currently multiply the aggregate by ×M (span allowed:

×0.65–×1.54, ratio 2.37). Reference disagreement (XPT catastrophe,

superforecasters vs domain experts) is 5.63×. Conditions move the

number less / comparably / more than that disagreement:

compare |M − 1| against (√D_ref − 1), and compare M to D_ref.

Worked wording at M = 1.00: “conditions currently move this less than the forecaster disagreement (neutral multiplier; disagreement remains 5.63×).”

This line is not decorative. If a snapshot cannot print it, the snapshot is not publishable.

10.4 Per-category bounds, derived from the overall bound

Seven categories. Worst-case product equals the overall bound:

1.54^(1/7) ≈ 1.0636
0.65^(1/7) ≈ 0.9403

Per-category multiplier ∈ [0.94, 1.06] before quantization. The overall clip remains primary if arithmetic ever exceeds it. Clip order when the overall bound binds: categories are listed by descending |log m_c|; the suppressed log-amount is written on the event row.

The draft’s example steps 1.10, 1.15, 1.20, 1.25 belonged to a decorative 1.25 per-category cap. They are not R0.1 steps. Using them would make the overall bound the only real constraint again.

11. Multiplier mechanics

11.1 Quantized steps [SJ-QUANT]

Default is no movement (1.00). Allowed per-category values:

{0.94, 0.97, 1.00, 1.03, 1.06}

There is no 1.17. Intermediate wishes round toward 1.00 (the default). Evidence needed for each step is in §12.5. Worst-case 1.06⁷ ≈ 1.50, inside the 1.54 overall cap; 0.94⁷ ≈ 0.65.

11.2 Combination: log-sum, then one cap (order-independent)

[SJ-LOGSUM] Do not multiply in an event-order sequence.

M_raw = exp( Σ_{c=1..7} log m_c )
M     = clip( M_raw, 0.65, 1.54 )

If a clip hits, ledger the suppressed amount log(M_raw) − log(M) and the clip-order list. Application order of events therefore cannot change M except via timestamps that the decay function already uses.

11.3 Cap precedence

Numeric, in this order (later binds harder):

1. Quantized step on the event (§11.1).
2. C2+C7 share cap (§11.4).
3. Per-quarter cap: combined M may not move by more than a **log-symmetric factor 1.15** within a calendar quarter (up to ×1.15 or down to ×1/1.15 from the quarter-open M). [SJ-QCAP]
4. Overall bound [0.65, 1.54].

Whichever cap truncates, the row logs the suppressed amount. Mid-quarter reviews use the event’s effective date (publication date of the primary source), not the date a human typed the row, so logging delay is not an arbitrage.

11.4 C2+C7 share cap

[SJ-C27] Let L_all = log(1.54/0.65). Then

|log m_C2 + log m_C7|  ≤  (2/7) × L_all  ≈ 0.246

so m_C2 × m_C7 stays inside about [0.78, 1.28]. Excess is clipped toward 1.00 on C2 and C7 equally in log space, then logged. This is the numeric control on thesis overweight inside M1.

11.5 Reference period and the meaning of 1.00

[SJ-REF] Neutral (all m_c = 1.00, M = 1.00) means: no news-conditioning relative to the information environment of the scored Tier A set as a whole.

Reference window: 2020-01-01 through 2026-09-15 (Ord through the research pass). Events inside that window do not score unless they are clearly after the relevant source’s own information set and still news relative to the set median date; v1 snapshot default is M = 1.00 at genesis with an empty qualifying event list, unless the genesis pass explicitly scores post-window or post-median events. The unconditioned aggregate is always shown, so “neutral” cannot hide the baseline.

11.6 Decay and reversion

[SJ-DECAY] Multipliers ratchet without a decay rule. Each category reverts toward 1.00 in log space with half-life 180 days, floor/ceiling 1.00 (decay never crosses neutral). Effective daily:

log m(t) = log m(t0) × (1/2)^{Δt / 180d}

then re-quantized toward 1.00 onto the allowed set. Decay emits a ledger row on each snapshot date (static v1: one decay-to-date row at compute, not a theater of daily ticks).

11.7 Reset on Tier A refresh

A Tier A refresh does not silently reset M to 1.00. If a reset is intended (new reference window), it is an event row RESET-* citing R-RESET, with before/after M and a new [SJ-REF] window. No reset, no row, no change.

11.8 External instruments for C1; vendor-only bar

[SJ-C1-EXT] C1 scores only if an external instrument moves:

• a named independent task-horizon series (e.g. METR-style time-horizon) doubles relative to the last scored C1 baseline, or
• a named independent benchmark family shows a comparable leap, replicated or reported outside the vendor’s own blog.

Vendor self-reports, demo videos, and un-audited evals do not score. They may be non-scoring annotations.

12. Rubric R0.1 — frozen rulebook

This section is the versioned rulebook the draft lacked. Ledger rows cite a rule ID. Changing eligibility, precedence, signs, steps, or down-triggers requires R0.2 and a visible history discontinuity on the method page.

12.1 Eligibility checklist (every event)

An event scores only if all of the following hold. Failed checks produce a non-scoring ledger row (still public) with the failed item named.

12.2 Precedence (one event, one category)

First matching wins. Lower items become annotations.

1. C6 if the event is an incident (harm, near-miss, or documented failure in deployment or evaluation at the severity threshold).
2. C2 if it is a deployment into a named sensitive system and not already scored as C6.
3. C7 if it is a measured autonomy-without-verification share/handoff and not already C2/C6.
4. C1 if it is a capability leap on an external instrument.
5. C5 if it is racing (compute buildout, alliance fracture, Manhattan-style program) and not already C1.
6. C3 if it is governance/regime change.
7. C4 if it is safety/interpretability research results.

12.3 Direction (sign)

Declared below. A sign flip is a rubric version bump, not a clever row.

12.4 Rule IDs (movement)

Every scoring row: event_id, source, date, category, rule_id, delta, m_before, m_after, M_before, M_after, suppressed, rationale.

12.5 Evidence steps (what 1.03 vs 1.06 means)

[SJ-EVID] Default R-NULL. The burden is on movement.

Ordinary thresholds (R0.1):

• C1: external task-horizon doubling, or equivalent named-benchmark leap (§11.8).
• C2: documented adoption of frontier-class or safety-critical AI into grid, military command, clinical decision, core finance plumbing, or logistics control, with verification/liability gap named in the primary.
• C3: statute, treaty, binding agency rule, or their repeal/expiry; not a blog post.
• C4: paper with independent replication, or a pre-registered independent replication failure of a previously scored up-result (down would be elsewhere if we had scored that result; v1 may have none).
• C5: public, quantified compute/alliance move of frontier scale; “we are racing” rhetoric does not score.
• C6: incident in AIID / OECD / equivalent with severity ≥ S2 (named harm or safety-critical near-miss; S1 chatter is non-scoring). Exact S2 codebook is a v1 compute annex; until that annex exists, C6 does not score upward (down-triggers may still run on the empty clock).
• C7: measured share, mandate, or contract language handing a named critical operation to AI without human-in-loop verification.

12.6 Negative-evidence windows (mechanism, not prose)

Loud events are discrete. Quiet good news is slow. Without clocks, M1 only moves up.

The incident-free clock is the one the critique demanded as a mechanical peer to incident up-moves.

12.7 Hash stamp and discontinuity

R0.1 is this §12 plus §11 and §13. After the commit that adds this file:

• record git hash-object docs/METHODOLOGY-v0.1.md as BLOB-R0.1;
• record the commit SHA as COMMIT-R0.1;
• print both on the method page of any snapshot.

Any edit to §11–§13 after that stamp is R0.2 even if someone forgets to rename it. Snapshots must not mix event rows from two rubric IDs without a discontinuity marker on the sparkline.

12.8 Stamp

R0.1 rule text is the §11–§13 bytes in commit 051565a (blob below). This stamp table is metadata pointing at that freeze; editing only this subsection does not bump the rubric. Launch freeze on main still requires the operator to accept the stamp.

13. Mechanical down-triggers

Prose “what would move this down” is not a commitment. These triggers fire unconditionally when their predicates are met, with the same quantized force as up-steps. They do not wait for a human to feel that good news counts.

Beside the number, a down-move eligibility line lists each trigger as MET / UNMET and the INC-CLOCK value.

Unmet triggers are listed, not implied. At genesis, unless a predicate is already true on the as-of date, all four read UNMET and INC-CLOCK starts at the as-of date (or at the last S2+ incident if one is scored that day).

14. Display requirements

A snapshot that omits these is not a v0.1 snapshot.

14.1 Beside G1

1. “Index of judgments, not a measurement.”
2. Point (untrimmed weighted median, conditioned).
3. Source band, labeled, same-gauge only.
4. Conditioning envelope [unconditioned × 0.65, unconditioned × 1.54].
5. Unconditioned aggregate.
6. Current M and the forecaster-disagreement comparison (§10.3).
7. Down-move eligibility (§13).
8. Absolute percentage-point delta since last snapshot, not a relative “+12%.”
9. Static snapshot as-of date and next refresh date. Automation = v2.

14.2 G2 and G3

• G2: thin-panel or aggregate per minimum-n; near-term extinction panel as-stated; never a silent G1 copy.
• G3: constructed-estimate treatment (§4.3). If the mockup-style percentage is still on a design preview, it stays labeled ILLUSTRATIVE.

14.3 Resolution floor [SJ-RES]

Material change: ≥ 0.5 percentage points in the headline. Smaller absolute moves are recorded in the ledger and labeled no material change on the sparkline. A 5.0% → 5.6% move is +0.6 pt, not “up 12%.”

14.4 Genesis

v1’s founding number has no predecessor event. [SJ-GENESIS] The first snapshot emits row GENESIS-001: unconditioned aggregate, M (default 1.00), rationale (“founding static snapshot under methodology v0.1”), and day-one down-move eligibility. Subsequent movements cite events. This document is not GENESIS-001; compute is a later work item.

15. Cadence and v1 shape

Tech shape is unchanged in spirit: a versioned compute script writes JSON; pages render it. This PR does not build that.

16. Operator prior and site incentive

COI labeling that covers only sources is incomplete.

Both rows print on the method page.

17. Corrections and retractions

18. Non-comparability

[SJ-NOCOMP] This index is not Metaculus question N, not a market price, not a personal p(doom) poll, and not Ord’s or Carlsmith’s number. Definitions, horizons, weights, and M1 conditioning differ. A comparability note lives on the method page. Matching a market is not a success criterion.

Appendix A — Critique disposition (R1 → v0.1)

All 41 findings adopted in principle (verdicts). Mapping to this text:

Three insist-amendments: (1) §10, (2) §12, (3) §13.

Appendix B — v0.1 mixture membership (no headline computed)

G1-2100 scoring rows (n=5, full aggregate eligible):

G2-2100 scoring rows (n=2, thin panel): A-XPT-SF 0.38%, A-XPT-DE 3%.

Near-term panel (not mixed): A-HINT-2024 10–20% / ~30y; A-HUB-2026 >10% / 10y.

Ledger only: A-BENG-2023; A-AII-2023 (sensitivity substitute); A-LECUN-2023; A-YUD.

This appendix is a membership list. Running W(·) is the static v1 compute in compute/snapshot.py; the printout is docs/SNAPSHOT-v1.md.

Appendix C — Site-judgment index