Read the Dynamics
Promise: “Interpret the verification dynamics of my network”
What You'll Do
- Open the Summary tab
- Read the Verification Dynamics section
- Count computing vs composting vs transitional promises
- Find the highest composting risk promise
- Check for over-review warnings
The Key Concept
Computing regime (k above 0.7): Promises with numeric, periodic verification. They self-correct under observation.
Composting regime (k below 0.4): Promises with weak or absent verification. They stagnate.
Over-review: the dashboards flag a promise that is reviewed more often than the model says it can change. Treat that flag as a rule of thumb about wasted effort, not as a measured effect. The correlation once cited for it (ρ = -0.191, Benthos Zeno test on MONA dwell times, test9_zeno.py) turned out to be partly built into how attention was measured.
The insight: Computing-regime promises benefit from frequent review. Composting-regime promises need less frequent but more decisive intervention.
What You'll Learn
- k regimes: computing, composting, transitional, pressure
- Over-review flags: a rule of thumb, not a measured effect
- How to read Verification Dynamics
- Verification structure determines dynamics, not domain or content