ZacharyZhang-NY
8d84e03077
A claim written in Chinese and English was checked only in English: the longest Latin words took every slot the rule demands, so one planted English word moved the closing Chinese pair out of the comparison and a witness that contradicted the number became a second source. The attack costs nothing — append "the" to a Chinese sentence — and it fails open, which is the wrong direction for a rule whose whole job is to keep an unvouched claim out of the prompt. Each script is now checked in its own terms: a claim with CJK pairs is demanded at its opening, middle and tail, plus its single most distinctive Latin word. A Latin-only claim keeps its three longest words. The demanded set is what claim_terms returns, all of it. Measured: the planted-word witnesses are no longer believed, a verbatim repeat still is, and a mixed claim that agrees in only one script is not a witness. The term-level boundaries are listed in CHECKLIST for both scripts, including the two the reviewer found that this rule does not catch: a demanded pair inside a longer word, and a long claim whose middle position lands on filler. Also corrects the record: the boundaries were not the same in both scripts as claimed, a historical line said "now" instead of naming a commit, and a limitation line I deleted in the last round is restored. Gates: 322 passed, ruff clean, mypy 24 errors / 9 files (baseline, net zero), pyright 0 on the two touched files, filesize clean, product audit clean.
Ely-Eye Backend
FastAPI, ingestion, memory, retrieval, runtime, verifier, evaluation, and training services for Ely-Eye.