Phase 2I-4: First Compilation Run (View Generation)#

Note

200K-token execution prompt. Copy-paste everything below the horizontal rule into a new Claude Code session.

Prerequisite: Phase 2I-3 (compilation skill definition) must have completed. The skill specification and extraction matrix must exist at source/matheology/compiler/ww/skill-compile-matheology.rst

Token budget: ~110K. Uses selective reads for quest.rst and debug file to stay within 200K window.

/clear /compact /effort max

You are executing Phase 2I-4 of the JUB OOv2 matheology project: the first compilation run. Using the extraction matrix and skill specification from Phase 2I-3, you will generate the first set of downstream audience pages from the PoR sources.

This session creates real files. This is the first time compiled views exist in the repository.

TOKEN BUDGET — SELECTIVE READ STRATEGY#

  • quest.rst (~48K tokens): The compilation is for AXIOMS and THEOREMS, not quest entries. Do NOT read quest.rst in full. Use grep to find source-text citations and con/pro references for each axiom. Read only the matched passages.

  • debug file (~37K tokens): Read only the last 50 lines for structural context before appending.

STEP 0 — READ ALL REQUIRED FILES (DO THIS FIRST)#

ax1_A1. AHA DESIGN DOC (5D architecture) — READ IN FULL: source/matheology/compiler/ww/5d-link-naming-matheology-aha.rst

ax2_A2. SKILL SPECIFICATION — READ IN FULL: source/matheology/compiler/ww/skill-compile-matheology.rst

ax3_A3. PoR FIELD TESTING REPORT — READ IN FULL: source/matheology/vv/jub/oov2/llog/2I-por-field-testing.rst

ax4_A4. PET AXIOMS PoR — READ IN FULL: source/matheology/pet/axioms.rst

ax5_A5. JUB AXIOMS PoR — READ IN FULL: source/matheology/jub/axioms.rst

ax6_A6. JUB THEOREMS PoR — READ IN FULL: source/matheology/jub/theorems.rst

ax7_A7. JUB QUEST — SELECTIVE READ: source/matheology/jub/quest.rst Grep for source-text citations (Torah, Bible, Gospel, Quran, Sanskrit, secular references) and for con/pro labels referencing specific axioms. Read only matched passages with context.

ax8_A8. STUB TEMPLATES — READ IN FULL: source/matheology/compiler/ww/stubs/matheology-expert.rst source/matheology/compiler/ww/stubs/matheology-producer.rst source/matheology/compiler/ww/stubs/matheology-easy.rst source/matheology/compiler/ww/stubs/matheology-math.rst source/matheology/compiler/ww/stubs/matheology-machine.rst

STEP 1 — PLAN THE COMPILATION SCOPE#

For this first compilation, use these parameters:

Mode:              REPLACE
Output folder:     source/matheology/
Models:            pet, jub
Depths:            expert, easy
Views:             (none --- default/all-views)
States:            (none --- canonical PoR)
Stubs:             no
Freeze PoR:        no

This means you generate:

  1. source/matheology/axioms/expert/index.rst — All 25 axioms at expert depth (essentially a clean aggregation of the PoR content, but with model-prefixed labels and NO .. include::).

  2. source/matheology/axioms/easy/index.rst — All 25 axioms at easy (beginner) depth. Fields extracted per the extraction matrix: rewrite intro for accessibility, top1 source text, drop all technical fields.

Step 4 creates a human-crafted landing page at source/matheology/axioms/index.rst. Per DD-b12, this landing page is PROTECTED and never overwritten by the compiler. Only the depth subdirectories (expert/, easy/) beneath it are compiled output.

STEP 2 — GENERATE EXPERT VIEW#

Create source/matheology/axioms/expert/index.rst:

  1. Title: “Axioms — Expert View (All Models)”

  2. Label: .. _all-ax:

  3. Generated-by comment with date, source files, and mode

  4. For each axiom (ax1_A1–ax25_A25), in order:

    1. Label: .. _pet-ax1: (etc.) — BUT ONLY if this page is the canonical PoR location. If the PoR remains in pet/axioms.rst, use :ref: links instead and do NOT duplicate the label.

    2. Apply the expert column of the extraction matrix

    3. Include all 45 fields that have content (per testing report). Use [stub] markers for fields rated Stub.

  5. Cross-model navigation links at top and bottom

CRITICAL: Do NOT duplicate labels. If pet-ax1 is already defined in pet/axioms.rst, this compiled page must use :ref:`pet-ax1` to link to it, NOT define .. _pet-ax1: again. Only define NEW labels here (e.g., all-ax for the collection, all-ax-easy for the easy view).

STEP 3 — GENERATE EASY VIEW#

Create source/matheology/axioms/easy/index.rst:

  1. Title: “Axioms — Beginner-Friendly Overview”

  2. Label: .. _all-ax-easy:

  3. Generated-by comment

  4. Brief introduction explaining what axioms are and why they matter, written for someone with no prior background

  5. For each axiom (ax1_A1–ax25_A25):

    1. Axiom number and display title

    2. rewrite of the intro field: accessible, conversational, no jargon, no LaTeX

    3. top1 source text: single most evocative quote

    4. Cross-reference to the expert view: :ref:`pet-ax1`

    5. NO technical fields, NO operational fields, NO network fields

  6. FeedbackFlow link at the bottom

Tone: Warm, clear, inviting. Assume the reader is intelligent but unfamiliar with formal logic, theology, or philosophy.

STEP 4 — CREATE INDEX AND TOCTREE#

Create source/matheology/axioms/index.rst (the human-crafted landing page — per DD-b12, this file is PROTECTED and never overwritten by the compiler):

  1. Title: “Axioms”

  2. Label: .. _axioms:

  3. Brief human-written introduction: what axioms are, who they are for, and which depth to choose. This is editorial, not generated.

  4. Note that depth subdirectories (easy/, expert/) are compiler output and can be regenerated from PoR sources.

  1. Toctree:

    .. toctree::
   :maxdepth: 1

   expert
   easy

  2. Link this index from source/matheology/axioms/index.rst by adding a note at the top pointing to the compiled views.

STEP 5 — CHECK BUILD#

Run make html and confirm:

  1. Zero new warnings from the compiled pages

  2. No duplicate labels

  3. All :ref: cross-references resolve

  4. Both expert and easy pages render correctly

  5. Navigation between views works

STEP 6 — APPEND TO DEBUG FILE#

APPEND a session entry to the debug file. Read only the last 50 lines for structural context, then append: source/matheology/vv/jub/oov2/llog/llog_2026m03d21_restructuring-phase1-prompts-reply-overviews-for-debugs.rst

With:

  1. Verbatim prompt (this entire prompt, in a code-block)

  2. List of all files created

  3. Label inventory (all new labels defined in compiled pages)

  4. Build check result

  5. Any issues and resolutions

SECONDARY TASK A — REAP DESIGN QUESTIONS#

While compiling, collect evidence for open design questions. Your primary task is the compilation above. This is secondary.

For each element you compile, ask yourself these five questions and append findings to the corresponding file:

  1. D1/D2 combinations: Does this element’s content suggest cross-model usage? Append to: source/matheology/compiler/ee/d1-d2-testing-matrix.rst

  2. Should Pet have con/pro? Do you see objections filed under Jub that actually target Pet axioms? Append to the same file with status W (would be useful) or N (not naturally emerging).

  3. Natural chaining: Does content combine two D2 concepts (e.g., logic-limit)? Append to: source/matheology/compiler/ee/d2-chaining-evidence.rst

  4. Cross-model echoes: Same element number in different models addresses the same topic? Append to: source/matheology/compiler/ee/alignment-class-echoes.rst

  5. “model” collision: Does “model” create ambiguity between D2 type and PoR field #40? Append to: source/matheology/compiler/ee/por-field-collision-check.rst

SECONDARY TASK B — PoR FIELD USAGE CENSUS#

For each element you compile, track which PoR fields the existing content naturally populates. Use these status codes:

  • Y — content exists and maps to this field

  • I — content exists but needs restructuring/inference

  • E — empty stub, no content

  • N/A — field does not apply to this element type

Sampling: For the first 5 elements, record ALL fields (full census). After that, focus on surprises — fields whose status differs from the initial pattern.

Most valuable observation: Does the content want a field that does NOT exist in the PoR registry? Record proposed new fields.

Append findings to: source/matheology/compiler/ee/por-field-usage-census.rst

At session end, write a 3-5 sentence summary at the bottom of each findings file where you added rows.

CRITICAL RULES#

  1. llog files are APPEND-ONLY.

  2. NEVER delete content files.

  3. NEVER abbreviate prompts in llogs.

  4. NEVER duplicate a label that exists elsewhere in the codebase.

  5. The easy view is for REAL PEOPLE. Write like a human, not a textbook.

  6. The expert view presents PoR content — do not editorialize.

  7. LANGUAGE RULES: a. NEVER use bare “Jubilee” as standalone noun. b. NEVER use “the” for unproven superlatives.

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 TELES Axiom/Theorem Compound Naming — Execution Prompt for the complete mapping table and DD b12 — Legacy Naming for PET/JUB Axioms and Theorems for the permanent reference.

TELES repair — 2026m04d04

Repaired RST syntax errors (unexpected indentation, heading level inconsistencies, or list formatting). No formal content was modified.