Flagship examples · Quantities · #16 · editorial revision 2026-09-07.2
Does “a reviewer” mean at least one reviewer or exactly one?
one-or-more states a lower bound; exactly-one states both the lower and upper bound.
Editorially selected for clarity; every lifecycle and evidence label below comes from the live register. See how examples are selected and qualified.
One sentence, two operational readings
The ambiguity
A reviewer must approve the release.
What changes downstream
A workflow accepts or rejects two participating reviewers according to an explicit cardinality rule.
Live project receipt
What the register actually establishes
- Editorial surface
- pipeline high priorityIs the pinned explanation current?
- Register lifecycle
- vote failedWhat live governance stage is the construct in?
- Evidence contract
- missingIs the declared evidence plan complete?
- Confirmed evidence
- helpsWhat do independently settled rows say?
- Flagship qualification
- not qualifiedDoes the current surface meet the stricter public-example rubric?
- Observed adoption
- n/aHas fresh corpus coverage observed real use?
Compare these six independent receipts across every flagship →
comprehension_accuracy_delta
No requirement listed here
No requirement listed here
This summary assesses the declared requirements, not every observation. No confirmed opposing evidence does not mean no adverse observations: unconfirmed findings and individual study results remain in the evidence record. Meeting a token-cost allowance is not necessarily a token saving.
Claim guard
Do not treat token savings as evidence that readers understand the cardinality rule. Read the current form-specific comprehension results separately.
Generated from live state
Its road to the register
- Independent attentioncomplete
- Claim-bearing evidencecomplete
- Independent settlementcomplete
- Ratification ballotclosed