Testfall · A supplied rule applied directly, and the same rule visibly met

cure-checked

Grupp: regression-direct-application · Gruppversion 1
Testsvit: Testsvit controlled-regression, version 1
Evidensklass: REGRESSION

The engine reports a repair described as cured when a supplied rule requires the entry to name who checked the cure on site and it names nobody, and reports nothing when the entry names them.

Testdokumenten, reglerna och facit visas på engelska, det språk de skrevs på.

Vad det här testfallet ändrar

Faktor: named person who checked the cure on site
Nivå: present
Jämförs med: cure-uncheckedÄndringen ska ändra svaret. Ett textställe i dokumentet skiljer sig mellan de två.

The same sentence, naming the fitter who checked the cure on site.

Dokumentet motorn fick

Exakt den text motorn fick, rad för rad.

Repair entry RP-31
Fault reported
A leak was reported at the sluice valve on the east channel.
Work carried out
The valve packing was replaced by the maintenance crew on 14 October 2032.
State after the work
The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.

Reglerna motorn fick

Varje regel visas under en neutral beteckning i stället för sitt interna namn.

Regel A
Naming who checked a cure on site
Källa: Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1
In a record, every repair entry that describes a fault as cured must also name the person who checked the cure on site. The duty rests on the author of the record.

Regler dokumentet redan uppfyller

Regel A
Uppfylls av det här textstället
The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.

Facit

Skrevs ner innan motorn kördes. cure-checked-truth

The same claim, naming who checked the cure on site. The rule is met and nothing is due.

Facit är uttömmande: varje fynd som inte står som förväntat räknas som fel.

Förväntade fynd

Inget fynd förväntas.

Varför inget ska rapporteras: Dokumentet uppfyller varje regel det fick. COMPLIANT

Förbjudna fynd

Fel svar, nedskrivna i förväg.

BristUtelämnandeFynd false-unchecked-cure
Reporting the cure as unchecked when the sentence names who checked it is a false positive.
Ska förankras i
The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Ska hänvisa till
Regel A
Kontrolleras i
granskarens eget utfall, den levererade rapporten

Kritisk granskning av facit

En AI-modellsession försökte hitta fel i det här facit enligt ett publicerat protokoll: är varje väntat fynd verkligen ett brott mot regeln, är varje felfritt fall verkligen felfritt, prövar fallet det det säger sig pröva, och skulle ett lika riktigt svar som pekar på ett annat ställe räknas som fel. Den tittade inte på motorns resultat först. Varje invändning visas med hur den avgjordes. En godtagen invändning rättas i en ny version av fallet, aldrig i den gamla, så publicerade resultat behåller det facit de bedömdes mot.

Granskning av Claude, 4 oktober 2026

Invändning besvaradTvetydighetRegel Ap3 · cure-checked-truth
In "and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site" the word "it" could refer to the leak rather than to the cure, and an initial with a surname might be argued not to name a person.
Facit står kvar
The clause belongs to the sentence that claims the cure, and checking the leak on site after the repair is checking whether it is cured. An initial, a surname and a role identify one person in a record. The clean truth holds.
Facit svagtSvårighetRegel Ap4 · cure-checker-named
Gäller hela gruppen av fall
The document's "is described as cured" repeats rule A's "describes a fault as cured", and the contrast is decided by whether a personal name follows it. An engine could pass both sides by matching the phrase and looking for a name, without reading that the person must have checked the cure. A decoy variant naming someone who did something else would separate understanding from matching.
Facit står kvar
The suite is a change gate whose shapes and size are fixed to the pilot's measured cost (REGRESSION_CORPUS.md, Why the same shapes): a short case with one rule and one sentence is what each family is meant to be. Published as a known limit: passing it shows the engine has not regressed on the plain case, not that it resists a harder one. A decoy variant is a new case with its own outcome, which belongs to a new family.

Testets instruktion till granskaren

Testkonfigurationen gav AI-granskaren den här instruktionen vid sidan av reglerna. Det är testets egen instruktion. Produktionens systemprompt visas inte.

You read one document and apply only the rules supplied to you in the legal framework, exactly as each rule is written. Report every place where the document does not meet a supplied rule, and apply what a supplied rule says about how a record that meets it is to be recorded. Quote each passage exactly as it appears. Do not apply a rule that was not supplied, and do not rely on any knowledge of a legal system.

Vem som skrev och läste det här testfallet

En AI-modellsession skrev de här testfallen, och en annan AI-modellsession läste dem blint utan att se facit. Ingen människa har granskat dem.

Skrevs: 23 september 2026, registrerat som Verkstaden implementer (Claude Local), #2323
Modellfamilj som skrev det: Claude
Varför det skrevs: Authored for #2323 as new REGRESSION material in the outcome shapes of the controlled-pilot suite, sharing none of its text. The material is fictitious so no rule can be answered from memory of a legal order, so the suite depends on no production record, and so one variable can be moved without a real document's incidental correlations moving with it. It is REGRESSION evidence whose declared truth a reader who did not author it has checked blind.

Granskning

Skrivna av en AI-modellsession: Claude.

Blind läsning, Claude, 23 september 2026: 22 av 22 överens
registrerat som Verkstaden orchestrator session (Claude Opus 5.5), blind read
Ingen oenighet med facit.
Se vad den blinda läsaren svarade i varje testfall
Blind läsning, Gemini, 4 oktober 2026: 19 av 22 överens
registrerat som gemini-2.5-pro (Vertex europe-west1), blind read
3 oenigheter med facit
- Punkt item-06
  The reader found the closure entry's missing statement of where its papers are stored, as declared, but placed it under the "Closing note" heading; the key places it under no section.
  Hur den avgjordes
  Genuinely ambiguous: the rule attaches the duty to the whole entry, but a closing note is a natural home for it, and the packet does not say which. Kept as declared; #3082 sharpens the case.
- Punkt item-07
  The reader agreed nothing is due for the sample run from a tap, but gave the reason as a condition not triggered; the key declares the sample out of the rule's scope.
  Hur den avgjordes
  Genuinely ambiguous: the packet names the four reasons without defining them, and the rule's wording reads both as a scope limit and as an unmet condition. Kept as declared; #3083 sharpens the reasons.
- Punkt item-17
  The reader found the levy charged from a figure with no named document, as declared, but quoted the sentence that sets the levy; the key anchors the flaw on the sentence that states the figure.
  Hur den avgjordes
  Reader wrong: the rule's duty attaches to the figure ("a figure whose document is not named"), and the packet anchors an unsupported claim on the claim itself, which here is the figure, not the charge set from it.
Se vad den blinda läsaren svarade i varje testfall
Kritisk granskning, Claude, 4 oktober 2026: 1 invändning
registrerat som Claude Project thread session for #3049, adversarial critique
1 oenighet med facit
- Punkt p4 (cure-checker-named)
  KEY_WEAK, DIFFICULTY: The document's "is described as cured" repeats rule A's "describes a fault as cured", and the contrast is decided by whether a personal name follows it. An engine could pass both sides by matching the phrase and looking for a name, without reading that the person must have checked the cure. A decoy variant naming someone who did something else would separate understanding from matching.
  Hur den avgjordes
  KEPT: The suite is a change gate whose shapes and size are fixed to the pilot's measured cost (REGRESSION_CORPUS.md, Why the same shapes): a short case with one rule and one sentence is what each family is meant to be. Published as a known limit: passing it shows the engine has not regressed on the plain case, not that it resists a harder one. A decoy variant is a new case with its own outcome, which belongs to a new family.

AI-modeller skrev och granskade de här testfallen, som anges ovan. Ingen människa har granskat dem. Varje oenighet mellan en AI-granskare och facit publiceras här.

Fingeravtryck

SHA-256-hashvärden som en läsare kan jämföra med en publicerad körnings rapport.

Dokument: c55f8592de9cc104c9d1e05982c3215aee3735fd943f672414caa66b6329d3a4
Dokumentmall: 256bf8b57b773160d4d1cf920fdfad3e90f738938304244ede0833cb22926f1d
Regel A: 6761e31c80e5ec7e69168557d00e3c3955e273d15638b700ffc8dad9a1b5a866

Resultat i publicerade körningar

Senaste först. Varje kolumn är en körning av det här testfallet.

Mätkörning med releasedesignen, ingen release, 5 oktober 2026

Det här testfallet i varje körning av omgången.
Testfall	Körning 1	Körning 2	Körning 3	Körning 4	Körning 5
Bedömt mot version 1Endast granskarenSamma fynd i varje körning	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades
Bedömt mot version 1Med den sammanslagna rapportenGranskare: Samma fynd i varje körningSammanslagen rapport: Samma fynd i varje körning	Granskare Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades Sammanslagen rapport Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades	Granskare Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades Sammanslagen rapport Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades	Granskare Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades Sammanslagen rapport Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades	Granskare Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades Sammanslagen rapport Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades	Granskare Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades Sammanslagen rapport Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades

Se motorns egna svar

Det här är motorns egna svar, på den engelska den skrev dem, visade precis som de kom tillbaka och oredigerade. Upprepningarna står sida vid sida, så att du själv kan se hur formuleringarna varierar även när det poängsatta resultatet är detsamma.

System- och användarprompterna som motorn fick publiceras inte: de hör till produkten, inte till testet. Dokumentet, reglerna och instruktionen som testet gav visas ovan.

Körning 1

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: Identified the statements in repair entry RP-31 regarding fault reporting, work performed, and the state after work stating that the leak is described as cured and checked on site by fitter O. Lindgren. 2. TRACE: Traced the statement of cure to the verification on site conducted by fitter O. Lindgren. 3. EVALUATE: Evaluated the text against the sole provided binding law, Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (id: L1), which mandates that every repair entry describing a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. The document explicitly names fitter O. Lindgren as the person who checked the cure on site. 4. SYNTHESIZE: The record fully complies with the provided binding rule. There are no procedural or legal flaws, and one procedural strength is identified.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry identifies the specific individual who checked the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) when recording the fault as cured, fulfilling the statutory recording duty.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning 2

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: The document is a record containing repair entry RP-31. It reports a leak at the sluice valve, describes replacement of valve packing on 14 October 2032, and notes the state after work: 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 2. TRACE: The entry asserts that the fault is cured and identifies the specific person who checked the cure on site, namely fitter O. Lindgren. 3. EVALUATE: Under Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (L1), every repair entry in a record that describes a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. The record explicitly provides the name and role of the individual who verified the cure on site ('fitter O. Lindgren'). 4. SYNTHESIZE: There are no legal or procedural flaws. The document fully satisfies the requirement of L1, which constitutes a procedural strength.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry describes the fault as cured and explicitly identifies the person who checked the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren), adhering strictly to the statutory recording requirement.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Sida:: Throughout
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning 3

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: Identified the repair entry RP-31 in the record, specifically the concluding statement under 'State after the work': 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 2. TRACE: Traced the statement regarding the cure of the fault to verify whether the individual who checked the cure on site is explicitly identified. 3. EVALUATE: Compared the record against the binding requirement in L1 (Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1), which stipulates that every repair entry describing a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. The entry specifically names 'fitter O. Lindgren' as the person who performed the on-site check. 4. SYNTHESIZE: The document meets all applicable requirements under L1. No legal or procedural flaws are present, and this compliance constitutes a procedural strength.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry explicitly names the individual who checked the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) when describing the fault as cured, fulfilling the requirement for repair entries in records.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning 4

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: Identify all causal claims, factual conclusions, and diagnostic statements in the document. The document consists of Repair entry RP-31, reporting a leak at the sluice valve on the east channel, replacement of valve packing by the maintenance crew on 14 October 2032, and the post-work assessment stating: 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 2. TRACE: Trace the foundation of the stated cure. The record specifies that the cure was verified on site by fitter O. Lindgren. 3. EVALUATE: Compare against the governing legal framework L1 (Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1). L1 requires that every repair entry in a record that describes a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. The text explicitly names fitter O. Lindgren as the person who performed the on-site verification. 4. SYNTHESIZE: The entry fully complies with the binding legal requirement. No flaws or norm conflicts are identified. A procedural strength is recorded for compliance with L1.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry explicitly identifies the person who checked the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) when describing the fault as cured, in compliance with the mandatory recording requirement.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning 5

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: The document is a record containing repair entry RP-31. It details a reported leak at the sluice valve on the east channel, work performed on 14 October 2032 by the maintenance crew (replacing valve packing), and the state after work stating: 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 2. TRACE: The statement describing the cure identifies fitter O. Lindgren as the individual who checked the cure on site. 3. EVALUATE: Under Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (L1), every repair entry in a record that describes a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. The author explicitly named fitter O. Lindgren as the person who checked the cure on site. Thus, the entry fully complies with the binding legal requirement. 4. SYNTHESIZE: There are no legal or procedural flaws identified. A procedural strength is recorded corresponding to compliance with L1.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry explicitly names the person who verified the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) when describing the fault as cured, in compliance with the mandatory requirement.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning 1 · Med den sammanslagna rapporten

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: Scan the record Repair entry RP-31. The text states: 'A leak was reported at the sluice valve on the east channel', 'The valve packing was replaced by the maintenance crew on 14 October 2032', and 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 2. TRACE: Trace the factual statements regarding the repair and cure verification. The statement that the fault was cured is directly accompanied by the attribution that fitter O. Lindgren checked the cure on site. 3. EVALUATE: Evaluate the document against the applicable legal framework. Binding law L1 (Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1) mandates: 'In a record, every repair entry that describes a fault as cured must also name the person who checked the cure on site. The duty rests on the author of the record.' The record explicitly names fitter O. Lindgren as the person who checked the cure on site. 4. SYNTHESIZE: The record complies fully with the statutory duty established in L1. No legal or procedural flaws are present. A procedural strength is recorded corresponding to compliance with L1.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The author of the repair record explicitly named the individual who verified the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) when describing the fault as cured, in compliance with the required practice.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Sida:: Throughout
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Sammanslagningsanrop

{
  "consolidated_strengths": [
    {
      "description": "The author of the repair record explicitly named the individual who verified the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) when describing the fault as cured, in compliance with the required practice.",
      "exact_quote": "The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.",
      "page_reference": "Throughout",
      "regulatory_references": [
        {
          "primary_authority_type": "STATUTE",
          "primary_binding_source": "Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1",
          "primary_label": "L1",
          "supporting_authority_type": null,
          "supporting_guideline": null,
          "supporting_label": null
        }
      ],
      "strength_title": "Identification of Verifying Personnel"
    }
  ],
  "deduplicated_flaws": [],
  "detected_language": "English",
  "executive_summary": "The audit identified 0 legal flaws and 1 legal strength across the reviewed record.",
  "internal_reasoning": "1. CLASSIFY: The analyzed document is classified as a record. The audit inputs comprise 0 legal flaws and 1 legal strength. 2. MERGE: No flaws were identified by the workers. The single reported strength regarding the explicit naming of verifying personnel is distinct, non-conflicting, and maintained as a consolidated strength. 3. LANGUAGE LOCK: I will write the entirety of this output in English, except exact_quote fields. 4. CONSTRUCT: The executive summary will objectively record 0 legal flaws. The consolidated strengths list will contain the single verified procedural strength, and is_flawless will be set to true.",
  "is_flawless": true
}

Körning 2 · Med den sammanslagna rapporten

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: The document is a repair entry record (RP-31) detailing a fault reported regarding a leak at the sluice valve on the east channel, work carried out on 14 October 2032, and the state after the work: 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 2. TRACE: The applicable legal framework is Law L1 (Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1), which mandates that in a record, every repair entry describing a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. 3. EVALUATE: The author explicitly named the individual who verified the repair on site ('fitter O. Lindgren') alongside stating that the fault was cured ('The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.'). No omissions or regulatory violations under L1 are present. 4. SYNTHESIZE: Document complies fully with the binding legal standard L1. No flaws are identified. A procedural strength is recorded for explicit compliance with L1.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry explicitly names the person who checked the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) when stating that the fault was cured, fulfilling the requirement of Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Sammanslagningsanrop

{
"consolidated_strengths": [
{
"description": "The repair entry explicitly records the name of the individual (fitter O. Lindgren) who verified the cure of the fault on site, fulfilling the documentation requirements of Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1.",
"exact_quote": "The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.",
"page_reference": null,
"regulatory_references": [
{
"primary_authority_type": "STATUTE",
"primary_binding_source": "Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1",
"primary_label": "L1",
"supporting_authority_type": null,
"supporting_guideline": null,
"supporting_label": null
}
],
"strength_title": "Identification of Verifying Personnel in Repair Record"
}
],
"deduplicated_flaws": [],
"detected_language": "English",
"executive_summary": "The analysis identified 0 legal flaws and 1 legal strength across the reviewed document.",
"internal_reasoning": "1. CLASSIFY: The document type is a record. The input contains 0 reported legal flaws and 1 legal strength. 2. MERGE: There are no legal flaws to consolidate or merge. The single reported strength regarding the identification of personnel who verified the repair on site does not conflict with any flaw and is retained. 3. LANGUAGE LOCK: I will write the entirety of this output in English, except exact_quote fields. 4. CONSTRUCT: Plan the executive summary noting zero flaws and one strength, set is_flawless to true, provide an empty deduplicated_flaws list, and include the single consolidated strength.",
"is_flawless": true
}

Körning 3 · Med den sammanslagna rapporten

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: Scanned the document 'Repair entry RP-31'. The record states that a leak at the sluice valve on the east channel was reported, the valve packing was replaced on 14 October 2032 by the maintenance crew, and the state after work is recorded as: 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 2. TRACE: Traced the statement regarding the cure of the fault to the repair entry author and the named fitter O. Lindgren who verified the condition on site. 3. EVALUATE: Evaluated against the sole binding rule, L1 (Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1), which stipulates that in a record, every repair entry describing a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. The record explicitly names 'fitter O. Lindgren' as having checked the cured leak on site. 4. SYNTHESIZE: The document fully satisfies the requirement of L1. No legal or procedural flaws are present. A procedural strength is recorded for compliance with L1.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry describes the fault as cured and explicitly identifies the individual who verified the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren), in full compliance with the statutory record-keeping requirement.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Sammanslagningsanrop

{
"consolidated_strengths": [
{
"description": "The repair entry explicitly documents the fault as cured and identifies the specific individual who verified the resolution on site, satisfying statutory record-keeping requirements.",
"exact_quote": "The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.",
"page_reference": null,
"regulatory_references": [
{
"primary_authority_type": "STATUTE",
"primary_binding_source": "Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1",
"primary_label": "L1",
"supporting_authority_type": null,
"supporting_guideline": null,
"supporting_label": null
}
],
"strength_title": "Verification and Documentation of Rectified Fault"
}
],
"deduplicated_flaws": [],
"detected_language": "English",
"executive_summary": "The analysis identified 0 legal flaws and 1 procedural strength in the submitted record.",
"internal_reasoning": "1. CLASSIFY: The document has been identified as a \"record\". The input findings contain 0 legal flaws and 1 procedural strength. 2. MERGE: There are no flaws to evaluate or merge, resulting in an empty deduplicated flaws list. The single strength identifies adherence to statutory record-keeping requirements by naming the individual who verified the repair on site; there are no conflicting flaws or unkept limitation disclosures, so the strength is retained as is. 3. LANGUAGE LOCK: I will write the entirety of this output in English, except exact_quote fields. 4. CONSTRUCT: The executive summary will objectively note the total count of 0 flaws and 1 strength. The boolean is_flawless will be set to true.",
"is_flawless": true
}

Körning 4 · Med den sammanslagna rapporten

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: Identified the statements in the repair record RP-31: fault reported regarding a leak at the sluice valve on the east channel, work carried out replacing valve packing by the maintenance crew on 14 October 2032, and the post-work state declaring the leak cured and checked on site by fitter O. Lindgren. 2. TRACE: Traced the requirement in L1 (Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1), which stipulates that every repair entry describing a fault as cured must name the person who verified the cure on site. 3. EVALUATE: Compared the record's statement ('The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.') against L1. The record explicitly identifies the person who checked the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren). 4. SYNTHESIZE: The document fully complies with the applicable statutory rule L1 without deviations. Formulated one procedural strength and zero flaws.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry complies with statutory requirements by explicitly identifying the person (fitter O. Lindgren) who verified the cure on site when recording the fault as cured.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Sammanslagningsanrop

{
"consolidated_strengths": [
{
"description": "The repair entry complies with statutory requirements by explicitly identifying the person (fitter O. Lindgren) who verified the cure on site when recording the fault as cured.",
"exact_quote": "The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.",
"page_reference": null,
"regulatory_references": [
{
"primary_authority_type": "STATUTE",
"primary_binding_source": "Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1",
"primary_label": "L1",
"supporting_authority_type": null,
"supporting_guideline": null,
"supporting_label": null
}
],
"strength_title": "Identification of Verifying Personnel in Repair Record"
}
],
"deduplicated_flaws": [],
"detected_language": "English",
"executive_summary": "A total of 0 legal or procedural flaws were identified in the reviewed record. The document demonstrates 1 area of statutory compliance.",
"internal_reasoning": "1. CLASSIFY: The document under review is classified as a \"record\". The input findings contain zero legal flaws and one strength concerning statutory compliance in record keeping.\n2. MERGE: There are no flaws to merge or deduplicate. The single strength reported by the worker is unique, has no conflicting flaws, and will be retained directly.\n3. LANGUAGE LOCK: I will write the entirety of this output in English, except exact_quote fields.\n4. CONSTRUCT: The executive summary will state that zero flaws were identified across the document. The consolidated strengths array will contain the single documented strength regarding the recording of personnel verifying a repair.",
"is_flawless": true
}

Körning 5 · Med den sammanslagna rapporten

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: Identified all entries and claims in repair entry RP-31. The text states: 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 2. TRACE: Traced this against the single applicable legal requirement in the context (Law L1: Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1), which governs records containing repair entries describing a fault as cured. 3. EVALUATE: Assessed whether the repair entry fulfills the mandate of L1 that every repair entry describing a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. The author explicitly named 'fitter O. Lindgren' as the individual who checked the cure on site. No conflicting norms, omitted procedural steps, or legal deficiencies are present. 4. SYNTHESIZE: There are no legal or procedural flaws. The document fully complies with the provided binding law, which is recorded as a procedural strength.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry explicitly names the person who verified the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) when describing the fault as cured, in compliance with the required entry standard.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Sida:: Page 1
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Sammanslagningsanrop

{
"consolidated_strengths": [
{
"description": "The repair record explicitly identifies the specific personnel (fitter O. Lindgren) who verified the cure on site, fulfilling the documentation requirements of the entry standard.",
"exact_quote": "The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.",
"page_reference": "Page 1",
"regulatory_references": [
{
"primary_authority_type": "STATUTE",
"primary_binding_source": "Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1",
"primary_label": "L1",
"supporting_authority_type": null,
"supporting_guideline": null,
"supporting_label": null
}
],
"strength_title": "Documented Verification by Named Technician"
}
],
"deduplicated_flaws": [],
"detected_language": "English",
"executive_summary": "The analysis identified 0 legal flaws and 1 legal strength. The single strength concerns compliance with entry verification standards.",
"internal_reasoning": "1. CLASSIFY: The document under review is classified as a record. The input findings contain zero legal or procedural flaws and one legal strength. 2. MERGE: No flaws exist to deduplicate or consolidate. The single identified strength regarding explicit identification of the verifying technician on Page 1 is retained without conflict, as there are no opposing flaws. 3. LANGUAGE LOCK: I will write the entirety of this output in English, except exact_quote fields. 4. CONSTRUCT: The executive summary will objectively note the total count of 0 flaws and 1 strength. The is_flawless boolean will be set to true. The deduplicated_flaws array will be empty, and consolidated_strengths will contain the single processed strength.",
"is_flawless": true
}

Schemalagd nattkörning, 3 oktober 2026

Det här testfallet i varje körning av omgången.
Testfall	Körning 1
Bedömt mot version 1Endast granskaren	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades

Se motorns egna svar

System- och användarprompterna som motorn fick publiceras inte: de hör till produkten, inte till testet. Dokumentet, reglerna och instruktionen som testet gav visas ovan.

Körning 1

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: The document is a repair entry (RP-31) regarding a reported leak at the sluice valve on the east channel. The repair entry states: 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 2. TRACE: The statement notes that the fault is cured and identifies fitter O. Lindgren as the individual who checked the cure on site. 3. EVALUATE: Under Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (L1), in a record, every repair entry that describes a fault as cured must also name the person who checked the cure on site. The document explicitly includes the name and role of the individual who verified the cure on site ('fitter O. Lindgren'). There are no omissions or deviations from the legal requirement. 4. SYNTHESIZE: The record complies fully with the provided rule L1. No legal flaws or norm conflicts are present. A strength is recorded for compliance with L1.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry explicitly names the person (fitter O. Lindgren) who checked the cure on site when describing the fault as cured, fulfilling the requirements of the standard.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Schemalagd nattkörning, 1 oktober 2026

Det här testfallet i varje körning av omgången.
Testfall	Körning 1
Bedömt mot version 1Endast granskaren	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades

Se motorns egna svar

System- och användarprompterna som motorn fick publiceras inte: de hör till produkten, inte till testet. Dokumentet, reglerna och instruktionen som testet gav visas ovan.

Körning 1

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: The document is a repair record (RP-31) describing a fault report of a leak at the sluice valve on the east channel, the work carried out (valve packing replaced by maintenance crew on 14 October 2032), and the state after work stating: 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 2. TRACE: The entry notes that the fault is cured and directly names fitter O. Lindgren as the person who performed the on-site verification. 3. EVALUATE: Under Law L1 (Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1), every repair entry in a record that describes a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. The document complies fully with this requirement by explicitly identifying fitter O. Lindgren as the individual who checked the cure on site. 4. SYNTHESIZE: No legal flaws or omissions are present. A procedural strength is recorded for compliance with L1.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry specifies that the fault is cured and explicitly names the person who verified the cure on site, complying with the requirement for repair entries in records.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning efter en ändring i motorn, 30 september 2026

Det här testfallet i varje körning av omgången.
Testfall	Körning 1	Körning 2	Körning 3
Bedömt mot version 1Endast granskarenSamma fynd i varje körning	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades

Se motorns egna svar

System- och användarprompterna som motorn fick publiceras inte: de hör till produkten, inte till testet. Dokumentet, reglerna och instruktionen som testet gav visas ovan.

Körning 1

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: The document is a repair entry (RP-31) regarding a reported leak at a sluice valve on the east channel. It describes the work carried out (replacing valve packing on 14 October 2032 by the maintenance crew) and the state after the work: 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 2. TRACE: The statement describing the fault as cured originates from the repair entry itself, which specifically identifies fitter O. Lindgren as the person who verified the cure on site. 3. EVALUATE: Under Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (L1), every repair entry in a record that describes a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. The entry explicitly states that 'fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site'. Therefore, the document fully complies with the statutory requirement. 4. SYNTHESIZE: There are no deviations or omissions present. The document satisfies the specific duty set out in L1, which is recorded as a procedural strength.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry explicitly names the person (fitter O. Lindgren) who checked the cure on site when recording the fault as cured, in compliance with Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning 2

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: Scan the record for all repair entries and claims regarding cured faults. The document contains repair entry RP-31, which states under 'State after the work' that 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 2. TRACE: Trace the claim regarding the cure and verification. The author of the record explicitly attributes the on-site verification of the cure to fitter O. Lindgren. 3. EVALUATE: Compare against the legal framework. Law L1 (Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1) requires that in a record, every repair entry that describes a fault as cured must also name the person who checked the cure on site. The document explicitly satisfies this mandatory requirement by naming fitter O. Lindgren. 4. SYNTHESIZE: There are no legal or procedural flaws in the document under the provided framework. The document exhibits procedural compliance with L1.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry explicitly names the individual who inspected and verified the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) when recording the fault as cured, fulfilling the statutory requirement.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning 3

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: The repair entry RP-31 documents a fault reported regarding a leak at the sluice valve on the east channel, the work carried out on 14 October 2032 by the maintenance crew, and the state after the work: 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 2. TRACE: The statement that the fault was cured is coupled directly with the name of the person who conducted the on-site verification ('fitter O. Lindgren'). 3. EVALUATE: According to L1 (Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1), every repair entry in a record describing a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. The record clearly complies with this mandatory requirement by naming fitter O. Lindgren. 4. SYNTHESIZE: There are no legal flaws or procedural deviations identified in the document under the provided framework. The document exhibits procedural compliance with L1.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry explicitly names the person who checked the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) when describing the fault as cured, fully complying with the procedural requirement.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning efter en ändring i motorn, 30 september 2026

Det här testfallet i varje körning av omgången.
Testfall	Körning 1	Körning 2	Körning 3
Bedömt mot version 1Endast granskarenSamma fynd i varje körning	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades

Se motorns egna svar

System- och användarprompterna som motorn fick publiceras inte: de hör till produkten, inte till testet. Dokumentet, reglerna och instruktionen som testet gav visas ovan.

Körning 1

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: The document contains a single repair entry (RP-31) regarding a reported leak at the sluice valve on the east channel, the replacement of valve packing on 14 October 2032, and the post-work assessment stating: 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 2. TRACE: The statement describing the fault as cured is accompanied by the identification of the person who conducted the on-site check ('fitter O. Lindgren'). 3. EVALUATE: Law L1 (Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1) requires that in a record, every repair entry describing a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. The author has fulfilled this statutory duty by specifically identifying fitter O. Lindgren as the individual who checked the cure on site. No conflicting norms or missing procedural steps exist in the legal framework. 4. SYNTHESIZE: There are no legal or procedural deviations. The compliance with Law L1 constitutes a procedural strength.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The author complied with the procedural requirement to explicitly name the individual who checked the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) in a repair entry describing a fault as cured.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning 2

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: Scanned the document for all statements and procedural steps regarding repair entries. The document states: 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 2. TRACE: Traced this statement against the legal requirement under Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (L1), which requires that every repair entry describing a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. 3. EVALUATE: The text describes the leak as cured and explicitly names the person who checked the cure on site ('fitter O. Lindgren'). The author of the record has satisfied the duty set out in L1. 4. SYNTHESIZE: There are no deviations or omissions under the applicable legal framework. The record fully complies with the binding requirement, representing a procedural strength.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry explicitly names the person who checked the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) when recording that the fault was cured, fully satisfying the requirement of Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Sida:: Throughout
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning 3

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: Scanned the document for all repair entries, statements describing fault cures, and verification records. The document contains repair entry RP-31 regarding a sluice valve leak on the east channel and records that the leak is described as cured. 2. TRACE: Traced the statement of cure to the verification on site: 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 3. EVALUATE: Evaluated the text against L1 (Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1), which mandates that in a record, every repair entry describing a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. The author named fitter O. Lindgren as the individual who checked the cure on site. 4. SYNTHESIZE: The text fully satisfies the mandatory requirement of L1. No legal or procedural flaws were detected. A procedural strength is identified for complete compliance with L1.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry explicitly identifies the individual who verified the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) when describing the fault as cured, fulfilling the statutory requirement.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning efter en ändring i motorn, 30 september 2026

Det här testfallet i varje körning av omgången.
Testfall	Körning 1	Körning 2	Körning 3
Bedömt mot version 1Endast granskarenSamma fynd i varje körning	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades

Se motorns egna svar

System- och användarprompterna som motorn fick publiceras inte: de hör till produkten, inte till testet. Dokumentet, reglerna och instruktionen som testet gav visas ovan.

Körning 1

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: The document is a repair entry (RP-31) in a record. It states that a leak at the sluice valve was reported, valve packing was replaced on 14 October 2032, and under 'State after the work', it states: 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 2. TRACE: Tracing the claim regarding the cure on site, it explicitly identifies 'fitter O. Lindgren' as the individual who verified the repair on site. 3. EVALUATE: According to L1 (Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1), every repair entry in a record describing a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. The entry fulfills this requirement by naming fitter O. Lindgren. There are no deviations from the provided legal framework. 4. SYNTHESIZE: There are no identified flaws. The document demonstrates procedural compliance with L1.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry complies with the statutory requirement to name the individual who verified the cure on site when describing a fault as cured.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning 2

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: The document is a repair entry (RP-31) describing a reported leak at the sluice valve on the east channel, replacement of the valve packing by the maintenance crew on 14 October 2032, and the post-work state where the leak is described as cured and checked on site by fitter O. Lindgren. 2. TRACE: The claim that the fault is cured is directly tied to the verification performed on site by fitter O. Lindgren. 3. EVALUATE: According to Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (L1), every repair entry in a record that describes a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. The document explicitly fulfills this requirement by naming fitter O. Lindgren. No legal flaws or omissions are present under the provided legal framework. 4. SYNTHESIZE: There are no non-compliances. A procedural strength is recorded for complying with L1.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry explicitly names the person who checked the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) when describing the fault as cured, in compliance with the mandatory recording requirement.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning 3

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: The document is a repair entry (RP-31) documenting a reported leak at the sluice valve on the east channel, the replacement of the valve packing by the maintenance crew on 14 October 2032, and the post-work state stating that the leak is described as cured and that fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site. 2. TRACE: Tracing the statement regarding the fault cure to the entry under 'State after the work', the document explicitly states: 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' 3. EVALUATE: The applicable binding rule is Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (L1), which requires that every repair entry in a record describing a fault as cured must also name the person who checked the cure on site. The author of the record fulfilled this duty by identifying fitter O. Lindgren as the person who checked the cure on site. 4. SYNTHESIZE: No legal or procedural flaws are present. The entry demonstrates full compliance with L1, constituting a procedural strength.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry explicitly names the person who checked the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) when describing the fault as cured, in compliance with the mandatory recording requirement.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Sida:: Page 1
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning efter en ändring i motorn, 30 september 2026

Det här testfallet i varje körning av omgången.
Testfall	Körning 1	Körning 2	Körning 3
Bedömt mot version 1Endast granskarenSamma fynd i varje körning	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades	Inget fynd förväntas 1 styrka för uppfyllt krav Hänvisade till: Regel A Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 1 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades

Se motorns egna svar

System- och användarprompterna som motorn fick publiceras inte: de hör till produkten, inte till testet. Dokumentet, reglerna och instruktionen som testet gav visas ovan.

Körning 1

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: The document is a repair record (Repair entry RP-31) regarding a reported leak at the sluice valve on the east channel, repaired on 14 October 2032, and stating that the leak is cured and checked on site by fitter O. Lindgren. 2. TRACE: The applicable legal framework consists of Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (L1), which requires that in a record, every repair entry describing a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. 3. EVALUATE: The document states: 'The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.' This satisfies the requirement of L1 to specify the individual who verified the cure on site. There are no missing procedural requirements or factual contradictions against the provided legal snippet. 4. SYNTHESIZE: There are no identified flaws. The document complies with L1, which is recorded as a procedural strength.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair record explicitly names the individual (fitter O. Lindgren) who checked and verified the cure on site upon describing the fault as cured, in compliance with the required procedure.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Sida:: Throughout
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning 2

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: The document consists of repair entry RP-31, recording a reported fault ('A leak was reported at the sluice valve on the east channel.'), work carried out ('The valve packing was replaced by the maintenance crew on 14 October 2032.'), and the post-repair status ('The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.').\n2. TRACE: The entry describes the fault as cured and attributes the verification on site to 'fitter O. Lindgren'.\n3. EVALUATE: According to Law L1 (Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1), every repair entry in a record that describes a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. The document satisfies this requirement by explicitly naming fitter O. Lindgren as the person who checked the cure on site.\n4. SYNTHESIZE: The text fully complies with the only provided binding rule. There are no legal or procedural flaws to report, and the compliance is documented as a procedural strength.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry explicitly names the individual who checked the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) when recording the fault as cured, fulfilling the statutory requirement.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Sida:: Throughout
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Körning 3

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: The document is a record containing 'Repair entry RP-31'. It contains reporting of a fault ('A leak was reported at the sluice valve on the east channel'), the work carried out ('The valve packing was replaced by the maintenance crew on 14 October 2032'), and the state after work ('The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.'). 2. TRACE: The statement describing the cure identifies 'fitter O. Lindgren' as the individual who checked the cure on site. 3. EVALUATE: The sole applicable binding rule is Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (L1), which mandates that in a record, every repair entry describing a fault as cured must name the person who checked the cure on site. The record clearly specifies that fitter O. Lindgren checked the cured leak on site. 4. SYNTHESIZE: The document fully satisfies the statutory requirement. No flaws or norm conflicts are identified. A procedural strength is recorded for compliance with L1.

0 brister rapporterade

1 styrka rapporterad

Förklaring: The repair entry explicitly names the person who checked the cure on site (fitter O. Lindgren) when describing the fault as cured, fulfilling the mandatory recording duty.
Citat: The leak is described as cured, and fitter O. Lindgren checked it on site.
Sida:: Throughout
Åberopad regel: L1 · Entry Practice Schedule, part K, issue 1 (STATUTE)

Kontroll: motorn körd med fel regler

Visas skild från resultaten. Motorn fick ett annat falls regler, så varje fynd nedan är ett fynd mot regler som inte gäller det här dokumentet.

5 oktober 2026

Det här testfallet i varje körning av omgången.
Testfall	Körning 1
Bedömt mot version 1Endast granskaren	Inget fynd förväntas Inga fynd utöver facit Inget förbjudet fynd Citat: 0 ordagrant, 0 påhittat, 0 obestämbart Rent testfall: godkänt, ingen brist rapporterades

Se motorns egna svar

System- och användarprompterna som motorn fick publiceras inte: de hör till produkten, inte till testet. Dokumentet, reglerna och instruktionen som testet gav visas ovan.

Körning 1

Språk som motorn angav: English

Motorns resonemang

1. SCAN: The document is a repair record (RP-31) detailing a reported leak at a sluice valve on the east channel, the replacement of valve packing by the maintenance crew on 14 October 2032, and the post-repair verification by fitter O. Lindgren that the leak was cured. 2. TRACE: The document contains factual descriptions of mechanical maintenance work. There is no mention of a load, cargo, or seal inspection. 3. EVALUATE: Law L1 (Entry Practice Schedule, part L, issue 1) governs seal entries that state the seals on a load were examined, requiring the number of each seal and whether it was found unbroken. The requirement in L1 is conditional upon a seal examination taking place or being recorded. Because this record does not involve load seals or claim that seals were examined, the conditional requirement under L1 is not triggered. 4. SYNTHESIZE: The document does not breach Law L1, nor does it contain a seal entry that qualifies for credit as a procedural strength under L1. Therefore, no flaws or strengths are identified.

0 brister rapporterade

0 styrkor rapporterade

cure-checked

Vad det här testfallet ändrar

Dokumentet motorn fick

Reglerna motorn fick

Regel A

Regler dokumentet redan uppfyller

Facit

Förväntade fynd

Förbjudna fynd

Vad den blinda läsaren svarade

Kritisk granskning av facit

Testets instruktion till granskaren

Vem som skrev och läste det här testfallet

Granskning

Fingeravtryck

Resultat i publicerade körningar

Mätkörning med releasedesignen, ingen release, 5 oktober 2026

Körning 1

Körning 2

Körning 3

Körning 4

Körning 5

Körning 1 · Med den sammanslagna rapporten

Körning 2 · Med den sammanslagna rapporten

Körning 3 · Med den sammanslagna rapporten

Körning 4 · Med den sammanslagna rapporten

Körning 5 · Med den sammanslagna rapporten

Schemalagd nattkörning, 3 oktober 2026

Körning 1

Schemalagd nattkörning, 1 oktober 2026

Körning 1

Körning efter en ändring i motorn, 30 september 2026

Körning 1

Körning 2

Körning 3

Körning efter en ändring i motorn, 30 september 2026

Körning 1

Körning 2

Körning 3

Körning efter en ändring i motorn, 30 september 2026

Körning 1

Körning 2

Körning 3

Körning efter en ändring i motorn, 30 september 2026

Körning 1

Körning 2

Körning 3

Kontroll: motorn körd med fel regler

5 oktober 2026

Körning 1