b21 launch-2 — b18a title-page footnote back-port#

Mode: EDEN
Effort: Max
Run order: 2 of 7 in the b21 launch-sprint sub-prompt set.
Status of upstream: Brings b18a to launch quality. Scoped in b20 review llog §7-1 + §5.3 (E-B18A-1).
Drafter: Claude Opus 4.7 Max (dv_ClaOp47Max) at LLoL’s request on 2026m05d22.

1. Context#

The matheology series has a locked title-page footnote pattern at AHA/study-title-page-footnotes-template.md. The pattern was stabilised on Matheo-b19 (the SGIR paper) and Matheo-b21 (the AI co-authorship framework paper) in 2026m05d17–18.

Three forms exist:

  • B11–B18 form (STANDARD) — unconditional + Everyone byline. Used for all matheology series papers Matheo-b11 through Matheo-b18.

  • B19 form (exception 1) — conditional acknowledgement.

  • B21 form (exception 2) — AI framework paper.

This prompt targets only b18a (body + intro + appendix). The remaining b11–b17 papers are handled by sub-prompt b21-launch-5.

2. Target files#

Apply the B11–B18 STANDARD form to these three files in source/matheology/hell/mm/b/18/:

  • mmv2/b18-call-to-action_mmv2r1_2026m04d16.rst (b18a body; the canonical b18a winner per b20 §5.1).

  • mmv1/b18-call-to-action-intro_mmv1_2026m04d16.rst (b18a intro variant).

  • mmv2/b18-appendix-nobodys-job_mmv2_2026m04d16.rst (b18a Phase-2 appendix).

3. Tasks#

3.1 Read the canonical form#

Open AHA/study-title-page-footnotes-template.md and study:

  • §*”Final canonical footnote forms (locked 2026m05d17; restructured 2026m05d18)”*.

  • §*”B11–B18 form — Unconditional + Everyone (STANDARD, locked 2026m05d17)”* — this is the form to apply.

  • §*”Layout convention (PDF and HTML) — revised 2026m05d17”* — the split-footnote layout (fn 1–3 under byline, fn 4–N below Broader Significance).

  • §*”Implementation notes for paper authors”*.

  • §*”Checklist for stamping the footnote block onto a new paper”*.

The locked b18 paper-specific hope sentence is:

“He hopes to convert MAD into MAP through a ResearchCity for all.” (62 chars)

This goes at the end of footnote 5.

3.2 For each target file#

For each of the three b18a files:

  1. Identify the current title-page footnote block. It will typically be in a .. raw:: latex block + a corresponding .. only:: html block (or a single block if the file is HTML-only).

  2. Replace the LaTeX block with the canonical LaTeX rendering from the AHA file’s §*”LaTeX rendering pattern (titlepage env)”*, substituting the b18 hope sentence in fn 5.

  3. Replace the HTML/RST block with the canonical RST rendering from the AHA file’s §*”HTML / RST rendering pattern (inside .. only:: html)”*, substituting the b18 hope sentence.

  4. Verify the byline reads: *Laurence Loewe of Laodicea*¹,²,³,⁴,⁵ *AI Claude Opus 4.6-4.7 Max*⁶,⁷ *and Everyone*⁸ (per AHA §”B11–B18 form” line).

  5. Verify the License declaration is the locked form: “Licensed under the Jonah License and CC-BY 4.0 for maximal flexibility (see https://balospe.com/en/license/joli/).” If a different form exists, replace it.

  6. Verify the page-1 layout follows AHA §”Layout convention” (split: fn 1–3 under byline; Broader Significance in middle; \vfill; Declarations heading; fn 4–N at bottom; License as final fn).

3.3 Build test#

Run make dev. Test that:

  • 0 new warnings introduced by these edits.

  • The HTML build of each file renders the byline + footnotes correctly.

  • The split-footnote layout’s titlepage-credentials and titlepage-identity-footnotes containers behave per AHA.

If LaTeX warnings appear, address them or escalate to LLoL with the specific error and the file:line.

3.4 Cross-check#

After all three files are edited:

  • Read the three files in sequence and check that the footnote text is identical across them (B11–B18 STANDARD is paper-agnostic except for the fn 5 hope sentence, which is identical for all three since they’re all b18a).

  • Cross-check against the b19 SGIR paper’s footnote block to ensure formatting consistency (b19 uses B19 form, not B11–B18, so the content will differ but the layout convention should match).

4. Out of scope#

  • Any other Matheo paper (b11–b17 handled in launch-5; b19 / b21 / b20 use their own locked forms).

  • The b18-esc Beginner / Producer / Expert variants (still in hell/ll/study/b/18/; promotion to MM is LLoL’s decision).

  • Any formal content (axioms, theorems, equations, body text) — TELES-scope edits only. Footnote text + License declaration + layout structure only.

  • Generating a new hope sentence (the b18 hope is locked; use as-is).

5. Deliverables#

Produce a single new LLog file at source/matheology/hell/ll/infra/b/NN/bNN-launch-2-execution_<date>.rst containing:

  • Before/after diff of the footnote block for each of the three target files.

  • Build test result (warnings count before/after).

  • Cross-check confirmation (footnote consistency across the three).

  • Any flagged escalations (e.g. PDF layout issues, License declaration mismatches found and fixed).

  • Concluding summary: which files are now at OO-stability on footnotes, which still need work.

Also update source/matheology/hell/ll/infra/index.rst per the infra-index convention.

6. Timing & BABL-resistance#

Target: 60–90 minutes for 3 files.

The BABL trap: over-Reaching into footnote content. The AHA file is the single source of truth; do NOT rewrite footnote text, even if it seems to need polish. Bring such observations as proposed changes to the AHA file in a separate session — not inline edits to the b18a files.