# β review — cycle/412

**Cycle:** 412
**Issue:** [cnos#412](https://github.com/usurobor/cnos/issues/412)
**Reviewer:** β (collapsed with α+γ on δ)
**Date:** 2026-05-22
**Round:** 1
**Verdict:** APPROVED

## Surface under review

`src/packages/cnos.cds/docs/empirical-anchor-cdd.md` — new file, 355 lines. The empirical-anchor doc for CDS.

## CLP form

### Claims

**C1.** The CDS surface family (per [`CDS.md`](../../../src/packages/cnos.cds/skills/cds/CDS.md)) can host cnos's own software-cycle practice without contradiction. The new doc verifies this surface-by-surface via twelve mapping tables.

**C2.** Every operational CDS surface (numbers 4–16 in the new doc's surface enumeration) has at least one cnos cycle that visibly exercised it.

**C3.** The hard rules from cnos#412 (cnos.cdd untouched, cnos.cdr untouched, CDS.md untouched) are preserved. Only the new doc + close-out artifacts are added.

**C4.** AC1–AC8 PASS mechanically.

### Ask list

Reviewer asks, with α's responses inline:

- **A1: Did the doc cite ≥ 20 distinct cnos cycle numbers?**
  Answer: Yes — 34 distinct cycles cited. Verified by `grep -oE "#[0-9]{3}" empirical-anchor-cdd.md | sort -u | wc -l`.

- **A2: Did the doc cover ≥ 5 CDS surfaces with mapping tables?**
  Answer: Yes — 12 surfaces have mapping tables: §Six-field, §Selection function, §Development lifecycle, §Coordination surfaces, §Artifact contract, §Mechanical vs judgment, §Review CLP, §Gate, §Assessment, §Closure, §Retro-packaging, §Large-file authoring rule.

- **A3: Are cnos.cdd, cnos.cdr, and cnos.cds/skills/cds/CDS.md untouched?**
  Answer: Yes — `git diff origin/main..HEAD -- src/packages/cnos.cdd/` = 0 lines; same for cnos.cdr; same for `src/packages/cnos.cds/skills/cds/CDS.md`. Verified.

- **A4: Does §Related documents cite the four required peers?**
  Answer: Yes — CDS.md, CDD.md, cph empirical-anchor, INDEX.md are all cited. Also cites `extraction-map.md` and `ROLES.md` (additional context; not required by AC8).

- **A5: Does the mapping mirror the cph anchor's structural shape?**
  Answer: Largely. The cph anchor's primary unit is "cph artifact class → CDR field" (a single composite table). The CDS anchor inverts to "CDS surface → cycle table" (twelve tables, one per surface), because the source unit (a cycle) is fundamentally different from the source unit in the cph anchor (an artifact class). The closing section ("AC1–AC8 satisfied"), the anchor-pin section, the open-questions section, and the related-documents section all mirror the cph anchor's shape.

- **A6: Is the citation discipline consistent?**
  Answer: Yes — every cited cycle carries an issue link, a date (issue-open-date or close-out-date), and either a path (`<file>@71b25672`) or a merge SHA. The pin commit `71b25672` is declared in the anchor-pin section.

- **A7: Are the close-out artifacts filed per CDS.md §Artifact contract?**
  Answer: Yes (filed in this cycle's close-out batch under `.cdd/unreleased/412/`): `gamma-scaffold.md`, `self-coherence.md`, `beta-review.md` (this file), `alpha-closeout.md`, `beta-closeout.md`, `gamma-closeout.md`, `cdd-iteration.md` (courtesy stub).

### Mechanical AC verdicts

| AC | Check | Result |
|----|-------|--------|
| AC1 | `wc -l src/packages/cnos.cds/docs/empirical-anchor-cdd.md` ≥ 100 | PASS (355 lines) |
| AC2 | `grep -c "^## " empirical-anchor-cdd.md` ≥ 5 | PASS (6) |
| AC3 | ≥ 5 CDS surfaces with mapping tables | PASS (12) |
| AC4 | ≥ 20 distinct cycle numbers cited | PASS (34) |
| AC5 | `git diff origin/main..HEAD -- src/packages/cnos.cdd/` = 0 lines | PASS |
| AC6 | `git diff origin/main..HEAD -- src/packages/cnos.cdr/` = 0 lines | PASS |
| AC7 | `git diff origin/main..HEAD -- src/packages/cnos.cds/skills/cds/CDS.md` = 0 lines | PASS |
| AC8 | §Related documents cites the four required peers | PASS |

### Judgment AC verdicts

| AC | Judgment | Result |
|----|----------|--------|
| AC3 (judgment side) | Are the cycle-to-surface mappings faithful? Spot-checked: #364 → §Six-field (originated the cell model) ✓; #392 → §Mechanical vs judgment (V passes mechanical / surface-choice judgment) ✓; #393 → §Review CLP exemplar (4 patches via ask-list) ✓; #410 → §Artifact contract + §Large-file (eight-section migration) ✓ | PASS |
| AC4 (judgment side) | Are the 34 cycles representative across the wave (not clustered)? Span: #331 → #412, ~3 weeks. Includes pre-CDS-naming era (#335–#370), the cdr wave (#376/#388–#395), Phase-3-through-Phase-7 of cnos#366 (#392/#397/#398/#400/#401/#402), and the CDS wave (#406–#412). Coverage spans the full bootstrap period. | PASS |

## Verdict

**APPROVED (R1).** Zero round-2 iterations required. No findings; no MCAs; no no-patches.

The doc satisfies cnos#412's invariant: a reader can pick any of the twelve mapped CDS surfaces and find ≥ 2 representative cnos cycles that exercised it. The receipt stream is anchored.

β hands off to γ for close-out.
