Skip to main content

FDRP

Manufacturing Quality Control for Complex Project Planning

A self-evolving architecture that treats planning decisions as manufactured artifacts with measurable convergence, built on 846 database tables, 253 analytical views, 101 skills, and 18 concept-to-X pipelines

Key Numbers

71 Production Runs commissioned, converged
101 Skills live from skill_lifecycle
8.65 Avg 5S Score n= audits, max 10.0
846 Database Tables views

Abstract

Planning for complex systems lacks the convergence metrics and defect detection that manufacturing achieved through six decades of statistical process control. FDRP addresses this gap by treating each planning decision as a manufactured artifact with measurable convergence and gate-reviewed quality, applying SPC, 5S, RAMS, Andon, and configuration freeze directly to planning. Applied across 70 production runs (1,701 decisions, 44 reached convergence) with 32 active subsystems, the system's strongest empirical contribution is the antimatter building programme: 68 LLM-generated expert specialists across two rounds produced 28,936 lines of analysis and 1,656 structured findings, discovering expert persistence as an emergent operational pattern. Cross-model verification with 3 independent LLMs revealed 4 systematic bias patterns, suggesting that N≥3 models are needed for blind spot detection. In April 2026 the platform completed R1027 “FDRP-on-FDRP”—the architecture applied reflexively to its own evolution, converging with CVT 0.000 and RAMS 0.953. The architecture has since grown to 846 database tables, 253 views, 81 system rules, and 668 knowledge index entries. We propose progressive disclosure as the unifying architecture—a hypothesis under test. By the end of April 2026 the platform grew to 846 database tables, 253 views, 101 skills, 54 active agents, and 18 concept-to-X pipelines. Run #1028 then re-validated the methodology against the new Claude Opus 4.7 model: 4 of 6 tested HIGH-priority methods survived with equal or sharper output, 0 outright content regressions, and no methods retired.

FDRP Statistical Process Control Progressive Disclosure Expert Expansion Engineering Review Gates Self-Evolving Systems Cross-Model Verification

Latest Milestone — R1027: FDRP-on-FDRP

16 April 2026 — Run #1027 “fdrp-on-fdrp-v2” applied the Fractal Diamond Review Protocol reflexively to its own continued evolution and CONVERGED in a single day. The run closed with CVT 0.000 (zero velocity tension, every axis stable), convergence score 1.0000, and a RAMS verdict of PASS (overall 0.953 — Reliability 0.978, Availability 1.000, Maintainability 0.913, Safety 0.922). The pipeline was directed to execute “30 waves of megaexpert expansion, n-fractal views, n-fixes and fine-tuning”, fed its own corpus back into the expert panel, and self-converged to a stable fixed point. This is the first publicly documented case of the methodology auditing and improving itself under its own gates.

CVT 0.000 RAMS 0.953 CONVERGED Self-Reflexive Fine-Tune Pipeline

New Subsystems Landed in R1027

  • data-quality-auditor — nightly sweep over FDR/council/correction tables, flags schema drift and orphaned rows.
  • proactive learning collector — fixes the SYS_SESSION_LEARNING_RATE=0 blind spot; harvests decisions, retractions and pivots into the knowledge index.
  • drift-detector overflow fix — replaces decimal(5,4) saturation with bounded soft-clip so extreme deltas no longer mask drift.
  • traceability formula scopingSYS_TRACEABILITY now computed only over runs with concerns (27 runs backfilled); overall traceability rose from 0.32 to 0.92.
  • BIND-052 PIO router — every human-facing session now operates as a Principal Intelligence Officer (PARSE → CLASSIFY → DISPATCH → MONITOR → REPORT), with specialist work offloaded to subagents.

R1028 — FDRP Methods Validated Against Opus 4.7

20 April 2026 — Claude Opus 4.7 (GA 2026-04-16) introduced three breaking API changes (temperature/top_p/top_k rejected, thinking.budget_tokens removed, assistant prefill removed), a new tokenizer with 1.0–1.35× token inflation on the same text, and a behavioural shift toward more literal instruction following. Run #1028 ran the full FDRP method catalogue against 4.7 head-to-head versus 4.6 to measure the impact.

Net verdict: NEUTRAL with selective IMPROVEMENT. Of 6 HIGH-priority methods tested head-to-head, 4 produced clean paired output, 3 improved on 4.7 (Six Thinking Hats, Bridges, Triage Cascade), 1 was structurally equivalent (Fractal-Out S0–S6), 1 broke on 4.7 only (DDn — completion timeout, not content regression), and 0 methods were retired. Average 4.7 output is ~12 % shorter but carries more domain-specific citations per word — denser, not dumber.

Opus 4.7 Validated 0 Regressions Bridges Sharper Fractal-Out SAFE 1 Prompt Rework

Liviu-Named Methods: Bridges & Fractal-Out

Two methods in the FDRP catalogue were named directly by Liviu—Bridges (cross-domain absorption) and Fractal-Out S0–S6 (scale stress testing). Both were explicitly re-tested under R1028 against Opus 4.7.

  • Bridges (method #7) — SHARPER on 4.7. 4.7 pulls more specialist citations (Siddiqi Intelligent Credit Scoring, FAO-56 Penman-Monteith, Makridakis M5, Elkan IJCAI 2001) where 4.6 stayed at foundational references. Transferable operators are more concrete and directly executable (adversarial-weight CV, ET0 monotone constraint in LightGBM, isotonic-over-pinball at multiple τ). Length −13 % (398 vs 459 words) but higher density. Zero hallucinations on spot-check. Keep prompt as-is.
  • Fractal-Out S0–S6 (method #8) — 4.7-SAFE. The literalism concern from Anthropic’s migration guide did not materialise: 4.7 addressed all seven scales (S0 solo → S6 civilisational) without prompting, same as 4.6. The two models disagreed on breakpoint (4.6: first failure at S3; 4.7: first failure at S4) — a legitimate architectural disagreement, not drift. Keep prompt as-is.

Method Health Under Opus 4.7

Method 4.6 status 4.7 status Notes (from R1028 δ report)
Bridges (cross-domain) validated sharper Tighter domain specialisation, concrete operators, 13 % shorter
Fractal-Out S0–S6 validated validated All 7 scales addressed; S3 vs S4 breakpoint disagreement
Six Thinking Hats validated sharper Fewer validation-forward phrases, broader doctrine integration
Triage Cascade validated sharper PSI, Mahalanobis, ECE, bp lift — tighter technical notation
DDn (Double Diamond recursive) validated needs rework 4.7 timed out at 180 s; cap phase word budget or use task_budget beta header
Pre-Mortem prompt-bug prompt-bug Both models timeout; chunk 10 failure modes into 2 batches of 5

Opus 4.7 breaking changes absorbed: sampling-parameter rejections, adaptive-thinking migration, prefill removal. Tokenizer inflation of 1.0–1.35× noted for cost budgeting. Full method-by-method evidence: see the R1028 differential report linked from the research notes.

What shipped 2026-04-25 … 28. Nine waves landed in a four-day window. Substrate work dominates: orchestration, agent-agnostic abstraction, hardware roadmap, optimisation kernels, async web sync, per-project isolation, client-funded backbones, and destructive-action confirmation. R16 is applied; its harness is gated on dispatch. R18 Phase 2 is gated on seven CRITICAL countermeasures.

  • R10 — Multi-account orchestration v1. shipped · 5d8d5603
  • R11 — FDRP v-next agent-agnostic abstraction. Phase 1 ingestion shipped · f5d91b4a
  • R12 — Local-model build-out + hardware roadmap. design shipped · 67ddaa57
  • R13 — PCRC optimizer + Sugiyamaⁿ + RLMⁿ. substrate shipped · 76b36c54
  • R14 — Sugiyama-async web continuous update. substrate shipped · 27d5b317
  • R15 — PPCIL per-project context isolation. shipped · 45e1bc93
  • R16 — Testing-tier framework. substrate applied 2026-04-28; harness blocked on dispatch
  • R17 — CFBE Client-Funded Backbone Extraction. shipped
  • R18 — DAFC Destructive-Action Fractal Confirmation. Phase 1 shipped · 08043737 + adversarial review 6ada3e81; Phase 2 gated on 7 CRITICAL countermeasures

R14 architecture write-up →  ·  Live dashboard →

Latest evolution · 23 April 2026. Three scope expansions shipped in a single cycle: reusability substrate (Scope VII, R8 Gate 8a), WSJF-ordered roadmap (Scope VIII, R9 Gate 9a), and the defence-in-depth prompt-scrubber MVP (Scope IV, A3) with 29 rules across 4 tenant tiers. Plus a mesh-wide Haiku purge rooted in marketplace scaffolding templates. 11 new tables, 9 new views, 40 live roadmap items.

Read the cycle write-up →  ·  See the live WSJF queue →

How It Works

Convergence Velocity Tensor (CVT)

The CVT measures planning quality as a diamond with four axes: decision stability, coverage completeness, clash resolution rate, and expert consensus. Each axis is independently measurable using SPC control charts, and the composite tensor tracks convergence across gates.

Six-Phase Gate Lifecycle

KICKOFF PDR CDR FDR TRR PQR

Each gate enforces monotonic convergence: decisions can only tighten, never regress. Violations trigger Andon stops and root cause analysis.

32 Self-Evolving Subsystems

The pipeline is organized into 32 subsystems across 7 categories: Core (fractal-diamond, concept2x, collective coordination, cognitive architecture), Discovery (expert expansion, knowledge grafting, thinking types, cognitive opportunities), Quality (peer review, 5S auditing, web finetuning), Evolution (SPC monitoring, self-evolution, opportunity hunter), Integration (ecosystem maps, Rosetta Stone, multinode project, wiring check), Governance (payload constitution, RAMS safety, CERN compliance, cost accounting, daemon taxonomy, limits hunt), and Visualization (visualization engine, Unreal 3D).

Subsystem Health

Live health status across all 32 subsystems. Data from production MySQL database.

14 Healthy
8 Degraded
10 Unknown
Fractal Diamond
Expert Expansion
Peer Review
SPC Monitoring
Self-Evolution
Ecosystem Maps
Payload Constitution
Concept2x Platform
Knowledge Grafting
Rosetta Stone
Visualization Engine
RAMS Safety
CERN Compliance
Automated Versioning
5S Auditing
Thinking Types
Collective Coordination
Cost Accounting
Grant Machine
Unreal 3D Engine
Own Models
Opportunity Hunter
Web Finetuning
Multinode Project
Gaps & Opportunities
Thinking Chains
Cognitive Architecture
Daemon Taxonomy
Cognitive Opportunities
Wiring Check & Fix
Limits Hunt & Fix
Six Hats

View detailed subsystem catalog →

System Architecture

The production system as of 20 April 2026, measured from the live MySQL database (BIND-021 compliant — every number has a SELECT).

846 Database Tables
253 Analytical Views
101 Skills
54 Active Agents
446 Experts Registered
18 Concept-to-X Pipelines
71 Production Runs
8.65 Average 5S Score

Framework Comparison

Framework Convergence Metrics Traceability Clash Detection Grounding Self-Evolution Cross-Model
FDRP
AutoGPT
CrewAI
LangGraph
MAPE-K

Native support Partial Absent

Correction Notice

Cite This Work

BibTeX
@article{olos2026fdrp,
  title   = {FDRP: A Self-Evolving Architecture for Planning Quality},
  author  = {Olos, L.},
  year    = {2026},
  note    = {Preprint, v21.0},
  url     = {https://fdrp.liviu.ai/paper/FDRP-Paper-v21.pdf}
}