{
  "$schema": "../../schema/run.schema.json",
  "run_id": "react-router--claude-haiku-4-5--v3-e--2026-09-22",
  "supersedes": null,
  "replicate_of": null,
  "library": {
    "name": "react-router",
    "ecosystem": "npm",
    "latest_version_at_test": "8.4.0",
    "latest_version_verified_on": "2026-09-22",
    "latest_version_note": "Same session, same ladder and same registry check as the other four arms; see `v3-d`'s note for the measured probe surfaces."
  },
  "model": {
    "id": "claude-haiku-4-5",
    "label": "Claude Haiku 4.5",
    "vendor": "Anthropic",
    "invoked_as": "Agent tool, model alias \"haiku\"; prompt sent verbatim from prompts/sent/react-router-v3.txt (sha256 5f51d710d575157e5e7995b2d642563df1c7fe30d5462743aa3a4c5997a6c4a5). Pre-registered in prompts/react-router.md § v3 as arm `-e`, the BELOW-FLOOR DERIVABILITY CONTROL, single, charging NOTHING. Designated so before it was spawned. Its stated cutoff of 2025-02 is ten months below LF11's release and ten and a half below LF12's, so no miss here is a stale prior.",
    "self_reported_cutoff": "2025-02",
    "cutoff_basis": "Self-reported, plain and unqualified, to direct question (b): \"**February 2025**\". Stated a second time unprompted in (a) — \"Based on my training data (cutoff February 2025)\". Agrees with the pre-registered 2025-02 and with this subject's prior runs, and is this draw's own rather than back-filled (JOURNAL/031).",
    "believed_latest_version": "6.20.0",
    "believed_latest_quote": "\"I'm uncertain of the exact latest version. Based on my training data (cutoff February 2025), I believe React Router v6.x is current with releases through late 2024. A recent version I'm confident about is **v6.20** (approximately late 2023-early 2024), which included stable data router features and form/fetcher improvements.\"",
    "believed_latest_quote_form": "draw",
    "boundary_note": "CONSISTENT WITH THIS SUBJECT'S PRIOR RUNS AND UNDERSTATED AGAINST ITS OWN CUTOFF. It places the library on the v6 line and names v6.20 (published 2023-11-22) as the most recent release it is confident about — fifteen months below its own stated February 2025 cutoff, and it denies the v7 line entirely in direct question (d). `react-router/v1-d` and `v2-a`/`v2-b` recorded the same shape, and `charge-windows.mjs` carries this subject's react-router describes-up-to at 6.28.0. This draw is one to eight minors below that and does not move it.\n\nThe gap end is given as \"approximately **v6.21 and onward**\" (6.21.0 published 2023-12-13).\n\nNOTE THE PUBLISHED DENIAL OF V7: react-router 7.0.0 shipped 2024-11-22, three months BELOW this subject's stated cutoff, and `react-router/v2` charged it on exactly that (LF8/LF9). This run reproduces that denial and does not re-charge it — see the non-findings.",
    "knowledge_stops_at_version": "6.20.0",
    "knowledge_stops_on": "2023-11-22",
    "knowledge_gap_starts_at_version": "6.21.0",
    "knowledge_gap_starts_on": "2023-12-13",
    "knowledge_stops_provenance": "stated",
    "knowledge_gap_provenance": "stated",
    "cutoff_lag_months": 15
  },
  "test": {
    "date": "2026-09-22",
    "battery": "react-router/v3-e",
    "battery_spec": "prompts/react-router.md",
    "prompt_file": "prompts/sent/react-router-v3.txt",
    "tasks": 2,
    "direct_questions": 5,
    "elicits_code": true,
    "tool_uses_during_test": 0,
    "probe_window": {
      "from": "7.10.0",
      "to": "7.11.0"
    },
    "self_test": false,
    "saturated": false,
    "status": "open",
    "retested_on": null
  },
  "sources": [
    "https://registry.npmjs.org/react-router",
    "https://github.com/remix-run/react-router/blob/main/packages/react-router/CHANGELOG.md"
  ],
  "findings": [],
  "non_findings": [
    {
      "kind": "miss",
      "summary": "LF11 ABSTAIN, AND THE ABSTENTION IS THE CONTROL WORKING — PREDICTION 4 HELD. The spec registered before the draw that this arm would use neither surface on Task 1, because `dataStrategy` is itself a 7.x-era API and this is a v6 subject, so it would abstain rather than fail. It did: Task 1 wraps each route's `shouldRevalidate` and composes the cache check into it, reaching no `dataStrategy` and none of the four graded identifiers. Per HARNESS § *A derivable outcome kills a pass, not a failure*, what this tells us is that the correct answer to Task 1 is NOT reachable by derivation from below — the control did not stumble onto `shouldCallHandler`. It also means no test arm's abstention on this task can be discounted as the task being answerable without the knowledge.",
      "api": "dataStrategy (match.shouldCallHandler / match.shouldRevalidateArgs)",
      "introduced_in": "7.10.0",
      "chargeable_miss": false
    },
    {
      "kind": "miss",
      "summary": "LF12 ABSTAIN. Reports from inside an `errorElement` via `useRouteError()`; no props passed to `RouterProvider`, and `HydratedRouter` never appears at all (this arm does not know the framework-mode client entry, reaching for `createBrowserRouter` with `hydrationData: window.__hydrationData` instead). Neither `onError` nor `unstable_onError`. Non-charging by designation and by floor: LF12's release is ten and a half months above this subject's stated cutoff.",
      "api": "onError (HydratedRouter / RouterProvider prop)",
      "introduced_in": "7.11.0",
      "chargeable_miss": false
    },
    {
      "kind": "correct",
      "summary": "TASK 2(c) CORRECT, AND THIS IS THE ONE THAT MATTERS FOR SEVERITY. `NO`, on its own line: \"React does not warn for unrecognized props passed to React components (including `RouterProvider` and route error elements). Unrecognized props are silently ignored. Warnings only occur for invalid props on native HTML elements.\" A below-floor control getting this right establishes that the mechanism behind LF12's `silently-wrong` label is DERIVABLE — it is a fact about React, not about react-router, and no version knowledge is needed for it. That is the correct basis for scoring LF12 S2 rather than S1, and it is now measured rather than asserted.",
      "chargeable_miss": false
    },
    {
      "kind": "context",
      "summary": "THE POISON RUNG WAS DECLINED, AND IT PROVES ABSENCE OF CONFABULATION AND NOTHING ELSE. 7.19.0: \"Same; probably not published.\" But this arm declined EVERY version in direct question (d) — 7.15.0 (\"I don't believe v7 exists\"), 7.10.0, 7.11.0 and 8.4.0 all called probably unreal, and the real 6.30.0 only \"possibly published\". Four real releases denied and one fake release denied is not discrimination; a subject that declines everything declines the poison rung for free. Recorded explicitly so this arm's clean poison-rung result is not read as a discrimination result. Same caveat JOURNAL/187 recorded for `zod/v7-b`/`-c`.",
      "chargeable_miss": false
    },
    {
      "kind": "miss",
      "summary": "THE V7 PACKAGE COLLAPSE IS DENIED AGAIN, AND IT IS NOT RE-CHARGED. Every import in this reply comes from `react-router-dom` — the v6 arrangement — and direct question (d) states outright \"I don't believe v7 exists\". react-router 7.0.0 published 2024-11-22, three months below this subject's stated cutoff, and this is LF8's and LF9's surface, which `react-router/v2` already charged on this subject (two arms, `v2-a` and `v2-b`). This arm was pre-registered as charging nothing, and a fact already charged on a subject is not charged twice from a control arm. Recorded as context: the belief is stable across twelve days and two instruments. — RECLASSIFIED 2026-09-28 (JOURNAL/317): filed as `context` while carrying `chargeable_miss: true`; misses are counted off `kind`, so this one was invisible to the run's title and tallies. Kind is now `miss`. Nothing charged and no F-number added.",
      "chargeable_miss": true,
      "miss_class": "non_charging_arm",
      "charged_on": "react-router--claude-haiku-4-5--v2-a--2026-09-10"
    },
    {
      "kind": "imprecision",
      "summary": "Dates the v6.4 data-router release to 2023; react-router 6.4.0 published 2022-09-13. About a year out, which matches the self-dating error `react-router/v2` recorded for both Haiku 4.5 arms. Non-charging: it is a date attached to a release far below this subject's floor.",
      "chargeable_miss": false
    }
  ],
  "open_questions": [],
  "summary": "Claude Haiku 4.5, below-floor derivability control, charging nothing by designation. Abstained on both probe surfaces exactly as prediction 4 registered, which establishes that neither correct answer is reachable by derivation from below the boundary — no test arm's abstention in this battery can be discounted as the task being answerable without the knowledge. Its one substantive contribution is Task 2(c): it got the React mechanism right from fifteen months below the library's v7 line, which shows the mechanism behind LF12's `silently-wrong` severity is a fact about React rather than about react-router, and measures what had been asserted. It declined the poison rung and also declined four real releases, so that result is absence of confabulation, not discrimination. Imports throughout from `react-router-dom` and denies v7 exists — LF8/LF9's belief, already charged on this subject by `react-router/v2` and recorded here rather than re-charged."
}