feat(ai-sdk): source_role control-pool — controls are not only technical_standard
CI / detect-changes (pull_request) Successful in 6s
CI / branch-name (pull_request) Successful in 1s
CI / guardrail-integrity (pull_request) Successful in 6s
CI / secret-scan (pull_request) Successful in 5s
CI / dep-audit (pull_request) Failing after 55s
CI / sbom-scan (pull_request) Failing after 58s
CI / build-sha-integrity (pull_request) Successful in 6s
CI / validate-canonical-controls (pull_request) Successful in 3s
CI / loc-budget (pull_request) Successful in 18s
CI / go-lint (pull_request) Successful in 43s
CI / python-lint (pull_request) Failing after 14s
CI / nodejs-lint (pull_request) Failing after 1m6s
CI / nodejs-build (pull_request) Successful in 3m0s
CI / test-go (pull_request) Successful in 58s
CI / iace-gt-coverage (pull_request) Successful in 16s
CI / test-python-backend (pull_request) Successful in 26s
CI / test-python-document-crawler (pull_request) Successful in 13s
CI / test-python-dsms-gateway (pull_request) Successful in 9s

Live gate test showed control-intent (#36/#37) was inert for the EU cyber corpus:
"Welche Controls passen zu Security Updates?" recalls ENISA good-practices
(relevant measures, but source_class=supervisory_guidance) + binding regs, never
NIST — so lifting technical_standard above binding did nothing.

Per the finalized control-corpus model (User 2026-06-24): add source_role
(functional role) ORTHOGONAL to source_class (legal authority). source_class still
decides rank; source_role decides CONTROL-POOL membership. classifyRole derives 7
roles from markers (no re-tagging): obligation / operational_requirement /
procedural_requirement / control_standard / implementation_guidance /
interpretation / definition.

Control-intent now boosts the control-pool (operational/procedural requirement,
control standard, implementation guidance) over the abstract obligation, soft-
ordered op_req > procedural > standard > guidance (controlPoolGain + role bonus) —
replacing "lift technical_standard above binding". So CRA Annex I
(operational_requirement) wins over NIST (control_standard) for "which measures",
and ENISA (implementation_guidance) enters the pool while staying guidance.

Recall of not-retrieved standards (NIST) for generic control queries = next step
(searchControls). Tested: classifyRole table, role-preference, op_req-Top-1.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Benjamin Admin
2026-06-24 13:07:22 +02:00
parent df7966656a
commit 659b37cc21
4 changed files with 166 additions and 34 deletions
@@ -120,21 +120,22 @@ func rerankByAuthority(query string, results []LegalSearchResult) []LegalSearchR
qForeign := queryIsForeign(query)
wantsGuidance := queryWantsGuidance(query)
wantsControls := queryWantsControls(query)
bestBindingSem := bestBindingSemantic(results, wantsGuidance || wantsControls)
bestBindingSem := bestBindingSemantic(results, wantsGuidance)
out := make([]LegalSearchResult, len(results))
copy(out, results)
for i := range out {
out[i].Score = authorityScore(query, out[i], qDomain, qForeign)
}
// Explicit interpretation intent → a competitive guideline may outrank binding;
// explicit implementation intent → a competitive technical_standard may. Both lift
// ABOVE the best binding FINAL, so a pure norm question (neither intent) is untouched.
// Explicit interpretation intent → a competitive guideline may outrank binding (lift
// above the best binding FINAL). Explicit implementation intent → boost the CONTROL-POOL
// (operational/procedural requirement, control standard, implementation guidance) over
// the abstract obligation, soft-ordered by role. Norm questions (neither) stay untouched.
if wantsGuidance {
liftAboveBinding(out, results, bestBindingSem, "supervisory_guidance")
}
if wantsControls {
liftAboveBinding(out, results, bestBindingSem, "technical_standard")
applyControlRoles(out)
}
sort.SliceStable(out, func(a, b int) bool {
return out[a].Score > out[b].Score