.. Migration note (2026m04d04): Claude copied this file during VV-to-HELL migration.
   Old path: ``vv/jub/oov2/llog/integration-findings/d1-d2-testing-matrix.rst`` (as given by LLoL)
   New path: ``hell/ll/jub/b/41/d1-d2-testing-matrix.rst`` (as chosen by Claude)
   Category: Integration finding (raw copy)

.. meta::
   :description: D1/D2 testing matrix mapping which type IDs are used by which model codes, identifying grammar-legal but semantically empty BREACH 1.7 combinations.
   :keywords: D1 D2 matrix, testing matrix, BREACH 1.7, model codes, type IDs, grammar-legal, semantically empty, BEST Names, integration finding, llog
   :author: Yah, Yas, everyone, LLoL as Laurence Loewe of Laodicea, ClaudeOp46Max, Anthropic, and Spirit of Boolean Truth
   :og:card:title: D1/D2 Testing Matrix<br>BREACH 1.7 Analysis
   :og:card:description: Which D2 type IDs does each D1 model actually use? This matrix identifies grammar-legal but semantically empty combinations found during testing.

.. SOCIAL-CARD-QUALITY-COMPARE --- OO (default effort) vs PP (max effort), 2026-03-26
   OO :description: Data collection matrix tracking which D2 type IDs are used by which D1 model codes, identifying empty and missing combinations.
   OO :keywords: matheology, integration finding, D1 D2 matrix, testing matrix, BREACH 1.7, model codes, type IDs, BEST Names, data collection, llog
   OO :og:card:title: Integration Finding:<br>D1/D2 Testing Matrix
   OO :og:card:description: Matrix tracking which D2 type IDs are used by which D1 models, identifying grammar-legal but semantically empty combinations.
   PP :description: D1/D2 testing matrix mapping which type IDs are used by which model codes, identifying grammar-legal but semantically empty BREACH 1.7 combinations.
   PP :keywords: D1 D2 matrix, testing matrix, BREACH 1.7, model codes, type IDs, grammar-legal, semantically empty, BEST Names, integration finding, llog
   PP :og:card:title: D1/D2 Testing Matrix<br>BREACH 1.7 Analysis
   PP :og:card:description: Which D2 type IDs does each D1 model actually use? This matrix identifies grammar-legal but semantically empty combinations found during testing.

.. SOCIAL-CARD-REVIEW --- generated by Claude Opus 4.6, 2026-03-26
   dv_ClaOp46_PP_2026m03d26 --- max-effort rewrite, read full page.
   :description: 150 chars | :og:card:title: 36 chars (excl <br>)
   - [ ] PP title more compelling than OO title
   - [ ] PP description more accurate than OO description
   - [ ] Description hooks without misleading
   - [ ] Keywords specific to this page's actual content
   - [ ] No language rule violations
   - [ ] Character counts verified

:orphan:

.. include:: /_templates/include-file/page-prefix.rst

*********************************************************************
Integration Finding: D1/D2 Testing Matrix (BREACH 1.7)
*********************************************************************

.. note::

   **Data collection file.** Agents performing content integration should
   append rows to the matrix below whenever they encounter a D2 type ID
   used with a D1 model code. This file is append-only (per CLAUDE.md).

   **Question being answered:** Which D2 type IDs are actually used by
   which D1 models? Are there combinations that are grammar-legal but
   semantically empty? Are there combinations that would be useful but
   nobody has written yet?

   **How to report:** For each combination encountered during integration,
   append a row with: model, type ID, status (Y = has content, E = empty
   stub, W = would be useful but missing), source file, and a brief note.


Findings
==========

.. list-table::
   :header-rows: 1
   :widths: 8 8 6 35 43

   * - D1
     - D2
     - Status
     - Source file
     - Note
   * - pet
     - ax
     - Y
     - ``pet/axioms.rst``
     - 14 axioms (ax1_A1--ax14_A14) with full content
   * - jub
     - ax
     - Y
     - ``jub/axioms.rst``
     - 11 axioms (ax15_A15--ax25_A25) with full content
   * - pet
     - con
     - W
     - (none)
     - No Pet disputatio exists yet; objections filed under Jub but several apply to Pet axioms (e.g., con11 targets ax1_A1 which is a Pet axiom)
   * - jub
     - aa
     - W
     - (none)
     - No AnyAims landing page for Jub; would be useful for tracking Jub-specific next steps


Summary (to be written after integration completes)
======================================================

*(Agents: after all content has been sorted, write a summary paragraph
here assessing: how many cells are Y, E, W? Are there D2 types used by
only one model? Is the restriction inherent or accidental?)*

*(Specifically address the Pet disputatio question: did cross-model
objections naturally emerge during sorting --- e.g., objections filed
under Jub that actually target Pet axioms, or content where authors
naturally wrote objections to Pet? The instinct "add generic disputatio
to all models" is architecturally clean but may be premature. If nobody
naturally objects to Pet axioms directly, that is evidence that con/pro
may be structurally specific to Jub's quest format. Report what you
observed, not what you think the architecture should be.)*


.. admonition:: TELES migration report (2026m04d04)

   Mechanical identifier migration applied to this file.
   All axiom/theorem text references were migrated from short form
   (e.g., A15) to compound form (e.g., ax15_A15) as part of the
   matheology compound naming operation. Both forms refer to the
   same formal object. The old form survives as the suffix to
   ensure consistency with the oldest records; the new form adds
   a temporary-status prefix. Forward-facing pages use brief form
   (ax15) only. See
   :ref:`hell-ll-other-b15-teles-renaming-prompt` for the complete
   mapping table and :ref:`legacy-5d-link-names-table-for-pet-jub-model` for the permanent
   reference.