E.18.1:11 - SoTA-Echoing
The sources below are current comparators for specific P2W moves, not authorities imported by reputation. Each row states what changed in the Solution and which overread remains blocked.
The synthesis that combines these moves into one P2W carry-through discipline is an FPF-scoped architectural hypothesis, not established SoTA. The sources support the problem-first, relation-separated, replayable moves named in their rows; they do not establish that P2W is a universal workflow or that one carry-through claim is sufficient for every downstream claim. The hypothesis is limited to one accepted problem-card claim, one stated decision or use that needs it, and one result or stop from the pattern that answers the question. Outside that boundary, apply the pattern whose Solution answers the exact claim, split independent claims, or stop.
| Exact source and currentness role | Move adopted in P2W | Overread rejected and practical effect |
|---|---|---|
| Roger Jiao, Towards rigorous problem formulation for engineering design research: from motivations to measurable claims via metric-measure-method, Journal of Engineering Design 37, 2026. Current engineering-design research comparator for problem-first coherence and method-first failure. | Keep the accepted problem-side claim, characteristic meaning, measurement relation, method, and validation use connected. Select the method only after the practical question and relevant characteristic or measurement relation are recoverable. This source changed the local P2W mantra, compact note, development-loop table, and method-selection stop. | Its Metric-Measure-Method vocabulary is not imported as FPF ontology: FPF keeps each characteristic, scale, measurement, and U.Method question with the pattern whose Solution answers it and carries only the returned result. Tool availability, fashionable AI, or a ready dataset cannot choose the problem or method. |
| Jenny Zhang et al., Darwin Godel Machine: Open-Ended Evolution of Self-Improving Agents, 2025; Nico Pelleriti et al., What Do Evolutionary Coding Agents Evolve?, 2026. A recent open-ended agent-evolution system paper paired with the current diagnostic limitation study. | Preserve generated variants and stepping stones in exact C.18 or C.19 structures; preserve the evaluator, edit history, comparison basis, and replay relation before interpreting a higher score. This source pair changed the development-loop relation table, cooling-module case, replay note, and proxy guard. | Archive membership or best benchmark score does not establish new algorithmic structure, method superiority, performed work outside the run, or subject improvement. Pelleriti et al. show why replay and intervention on search traces are needed to distinguish structural novelty, retuning, recombination, and evaluator overfit. |
| Yoichi Ishibashi, Taro Yano, and Masafumi Oyamada, Effective Harness Engineering for Algorithm Discovery with Coding Agents, 2026. Current harness-design study under fixed budget with explicit evaluation-hack and parallel-execution concerns. | Keep generation method, harness, evaluator, budget, safety boundary, comparison, selected result, and later work as separate questions, using the definitions or tests that answer each one. This source changed the relation-selection table and the rule that an evaluation or gate cue stops until its concrete relation and participants can be stated. | A score produced by an exploitable evaluator or unsafe execution harness cannot carry method selection, evidence, gate passage, or work-entry use. More generated candidates do not substitute for an admissible comparison basis. |
| Haoxiang Qin et al., A survey on Quality-Diversity optimization: Approaches, applications, and challenges, Swarm and Evolutionary Computation 100, 2026. Current peer-reviewed QD survey comparator. | Keep descriptor space, diversity relation, archive or front, comparator, selected-set result declaration, and actual publication distinct. This source changed the development-loop table, AutoML and QD pilot, and the stop condition for selected-set declaration and publication. | A front or archive is a structured retained set, not a scalar winner, method choice, decision, WorkPlan, or permission to start work. Descriptor or distance change reopens only dependent comparison and selection continuations. |
| Sarah Malik and Antonios Kontsos, A Digital Thread Approach for Real-Time Defect Correction in Polymer Additive Manufacturing, 2026; Sastry Veluri and Kannan Gopala Krishnan, Agentic Digital Thread for Managing the Non-Conformities in Manufacturing of Aerospace Products, 2026. Current manufacturing feedback and proposed agentic digital-thread cases. | Connect sensed defects, process state, design or process correction, quality use, and return through exact relations; preserve the dated work occurrence and reopen only the dependent design, method, planning, or decision continuation. These sources changed the return table, measurement cases, and traceability boundary. | Data continuity, report generation, confidence prediction, or a named digital thread does not itself establish evidence sufficiency, approval, decision, permission to act, or completed correction. The aerospace architecture is one proposed domain implementation, not universal P2W ontology. |
| JuliaHub, Dyad 3.2 changelog, current syntax, and current analysis documentation, 2026. Current relation-first multi-domain modeling comparator. Modelica 3.7 is retained only as historical acausal-modeling lineage, not as the SoTA basis. | Keep reusable model components and relations, analysis definitions, model compilation, solver or simulation work, and analysis results separate by applying the definitions or tests for each claim. Dyad’s current component, analysis, compilation, and agent-assisted modeling surfaces changed the diagram and model-use boundary and support the E.18.3 relation projection. | Acausal model structure or an agent-authored model does not become one execution order, performed simulation, empirical evidence, accepted method, or physical result. A model representation can expose a continuation without supplying its downstream authority; historical Modelica lineage supplies no such authority. |
As of 2026-08-07, the Jiao article, QD survey, manufacturing digital-thread papers, historical Modelica 3.7 specification, and current Dyad 3.2 documentation are publication or practice anchors. Dyad remains the current relation-first multi-domain modeling comparator; Modelica remains historical lineage only. The DGM paper is a recent system result; the 2026 EvoTrace and harness papers are current preprints and carry corresponding uncertainty. Reopen these adoptions when stronger studies change problem-first method selection, distinguish generated structural novelty differently, revise evaluator-hack controls, alter QD archive semantics, or show that digital-thread continuity warrants a stronger use than the exact direct relation currently supports.