feat(ai-sdk): controlled interpretation-intent guidance override

The authority re-rank always ranked binding law above guidance, so a guideline
could never be Top-1 even when the user explicitly asked "what does the EDPB /
ENISA say?". Add a tightly-bounded override: only when the query carries an
explicit guidance signal (EDPB / DSK / ENISA / BSI / Leitlinie / Guideline /
Orientierungshilfe / Auslegung / empfiehlt / Empfehlung / sagt / laut) AND the
guideline is semantically competitive with the best binding hit (>= best_binding
- 0.05) does supervisory_guidance get a +0.25 boost that lets it overtake the
binding norm. Obligation questions (no signal) are unchanged: binding stays #1.

Gate verified on dev:
- "Ab wann DSB-Pflicht?"                  -> Art. 37 DSGVO (binding) Top-1
- "Was empfiehlt der EDPB zum DSB?"       -> EDPB guidance Top-1
- "Was sagt die ENISA zu Security Updates?" -> ENISA guidance Top-1
- "Welche Anforderungen an Security Updates?" -> Art. 13 CRA (binding) Top-1

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>

ai-compliance-sdk/internal/ucca/authority_rerank.go

@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ const (
 	scopePenalty         = 0.25 // BDSG Teil 3 (law enforcement) on a general DP question
 	topicGain            = 0.18 // amplifier only
 	supersededPenalty    = 0.50 // superseded Alt-Quelle (pre-eu-v1): demoted, nicht versteckt
-	guidanceIntentGain   = 0.10 // epsilon a qualifying guideline is lifted ABOVE the best binding hit
+	guidanceIntentGain   = 0.25 // controlled guidance override on explicit interpretation intent
 	guidanceIntentMargin = 0.05 // ...only if the guideline is semantically competitive with binding
 )
 
@@ -110,36 +110,17 @@ func rerankByAuthority(query string, results []LegalSearchResult) []LegalSearchR
 	copy(out, results)
 	for i := range out {
 		out[i].Score = authorityScore(query, out[i], qDomain, qForeign)
+		// Interpretations-Intent (eng begrenzt): NUR wenn die Query explizit nach
+		// Guidance/Auslegung fragt UND die Leitlinie semantisch konkurrenzfaehig ist
+		// (>= bester binding-Treffer - margin), darf supervisory_guidance die bindende
+		// Norm ueberholen. Sonst bleibt binding > guidance (Normfrage unveraendert).
+		if wantsGuidance && out[i].SourceClass == "supervisory_guidance" &&
+			results[i].Score >= bestBindingSem-guidanceIntentMargin {
+			out[i].Score += guidanceIntentGain
 		}
-	if wantsGuidance {
-		applyGuidanceIntent(out, results, bestBindingSem)
 	}
 	sort.SliceStable(out, func(a, b int) bool {
 		return out[a].Score > out[b].Score
 	})
 	return out
 }
-
-// applyGuidanceIntent lifts semantically-competitive guidance just ABOVE the best
-// binding hit (ordered by semantic), so an EXPLICIT interpretation question can
-// return guidance Top-1. Obligation questions (no intent → not called) keep
-// binding on top. Guidance below the semantic margin is left untouched, so an
-// off-topic guideline can never ride the override — and the lift is computed from
-// the binding FINAL score, so authority/topic/domain bonuses cannot edge it out.
-func applyGuidanceIntent(out, raw []LegalSearchResult, bestBindingSem float64) {
-	bestBindingFinal := 0.0
-	for i := range out {
-		if out[i].SourceClass == "binding_law" && out[i].Score > bestBindingFinal {
-			bestBindingFinal = out[i].Score
-		}
-	}
-	for i := range out {
-		if out[i].SourceClass != "supervisory_guidance" || raw[i].Score < bestBindingSem-guidanceIntentMargin {
-			continue
-		}
-		lifted := bestBindingFinal + guidanceIntentGain + (raw[i].Score - bestBindingSem)
-		if lifted > out[i].Score {
-			out[i].Score = lifted
-		}
-	}
-}