docs: add FIPC ADRs and correct bibliographic citations - #261
Conversation
Record Kim (2006) as the implemented FIPC contract, contrast Stocking-Lord and Haebara as unimplemented alternatives, and replace the misattributed Kim & Kolen 2010 JEM record with Kang & Petersen (2012) and Kim & Kolen (2019). Co-authored-by: Seongho Bae <seonghobae@users.noreply.github.com>
|
Important Review available on request
Reviews should be triggered manually for repositories with fewer than 10 stars. Select Trigger review above or comment ⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
|
Bugbot is not enabled for your account, so this pull request was not reviewed. Enable Bugbot in the Cursor dashboard to get automatic reviews on future PRs. |
Link AGENTS.md and CLAUDE.md to docs/adr/ and docs/papers/README.md so the FIPC contract, mirt engine boundary, and withdrawn 2010 JEM record stay discoverable to agents. Co-authored-by: Seongho Bae <seonghobae@users.noreply.github.com>
|
@coderabbitai review |
|
|
@coderabbitai review |
|
# Conflicts: # ARCHITECTURE.md Co-authored-by: Seongho Bae <seonghobae@users.noreply.github.com>
Org required workflows failed before scanning this PR: Strix could not resolve repo visibility because installation 141441800 hit the GitHub API rate limit (HTTP 403), and Noema died on a GraphQL 503. No package or citation change. Co-authored-by: Seongho Bae <seonghobae@users.noreply.github.com>
Required noema-review still shows the HTTP 503 from the earlier GitHub.com outage (gh api graphql). Package checks already passed. Empty commit retriggers the org required review after status returned to All Systems Operational. Co-authored-by: Seongho Bae <seonghobae@users.noreply.github.com>
OpenCode Review Overview
Pull request overviewOpenCode reviewed the current-head bounded evidence and requested changes before merge. Findings1. P2 CONTRIBUTING.md:11 - Preserve ordered-list continuation indentation
SummaryOverview: Documentation-only PR adding ADRs and citation guidance. Changed-file evidence: CONTRIBUTING.md and the ADR/citation files are current-head changes. Verification posture: source/diff review only; no runtime receipt. Linter/static: no completed failed checks; markdown formatting issue identified in the focused hunk. TDD/regression: no runtime tests changed. Coverage: Coverage execution evidence reports not applicable for supported changed source/package files. Docstring coverage: Coverage execution evidence reports not applicable. DAG: CodeGraph current-head evidence covers the repository but found no meaningful dependency edge for these Markdown surfaces; focused flow is CONTRIBUTING.md -> Markdown renderer -> contributor Ground Rules. Mermaid: flowchart TD A["CONTRIBUTING.md"] --> B["Markdown renderer"] --> C["Ground Rules list"] --> D["Contributor understanding"]. PoC/execution: no execution receipt. DDD/domain: ADRs document FIPC and calibration decisions. CDD/context: architecture and agent/contributor documentation are updated consistently in scope. Similar issues: no unresolved non-outdated review threads or completed failed checks. Claim/concept check: citation records are present, but authoritative source verification was not executed in this isolated review. Standards search: no external search receipt. Compatibility/convention: documentation-only change; preserve Markdown list indentation. Breaking-change/backcompat: no runtime/API change. Implementation completeness: no executable implementation added. Performance: no runtime impact. Developer experience: contributor and agent guidance reviewed. User experience: documentation navigation and rendered list readability reviewed. Visual/DOM: non-web Markdown surface; no browser evidence required. Accessibility/i18n: no UI surface changed. Supply-chain/license: no dependencies or licenses changed. Packaging: R package manifests are unchanged; changed surfaces are documentation. Security/privacy: no runtime or trust-boundary change. Adversarial validation{"status":"failed","probes":[{"path":"CONTRIBUTING.md","line":11,"hypothesis":"Reducing the continuation indentation from three spaces to two will cause the first Ground Rules continuation to fall outside the ordered-list item or render inconsistently.","attack_or_counterexample":"Trusted focused diff at bounded-review-evidence.md:1626-1628 observed base line 11 as three leading spaces and current line 11 as two leading spaces while line 10 remains an ordered-list item; the malformed-list source trace is confirmed.","evidence":"Source trace at CONTRIBUTING.md:11 observed the exact indentation reduction in the current-head focused hunk; source-line-sha256=3b036e2ef58ce875691a4c64c4d973c0b889bd98f0076f900c283e24348fa553","outcome":"confirmed"}],"residual_risk":"After restoring the original three-space continuation indentation, the remaining documentation claims still require normal repository Markdown validation and maintainer verification of bibliographic sources."}
Changed-File Evidence Mapflowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Changed file (5 files)"]
S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (5 files)"]
R1 --> V1["required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Docs (7 files)"]
S2 --> I2["operator or user guidance"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Docs (7 files)"]
R2 --> V2["docs review"]
|
![opencode-agent[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1549082?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode reviewed the current-head bounded evidence and requested changes before merge.
Findings
1. P2 CONTRIBUTING.md:11 - Preserve ordered-list continuation indentation
- Problem: The Ground Rules item continuation changed from three leading spaces to two. This can make
evidence and maintainer approval.render outside item 1 or inconsistently across Markdown parsers, degrading the contributor guide. - Root cause: The focused hunk changes the continuation indentation without changing the surrounding ordered-list marker.
- Fix: Restore the three leading spaces before
evidence and maintainer approval.. - Regression test: Run the repository's
.github/workflows/code-quality.ymlMarkdown-lint job and renderCONTRIBUTING.md, verifying the Ground Rules list remains a single ordered list. - Suggested diff: posted in this finding's inline review thread.
Summary
Overview: Documentation-only PR adding ADRs and citation guidance. Changed-file evidence: CONTRIBUTING.md and the ADR/citation files are current-head changes. Verification posture: source/diff review only; no runtime receipt. Linter/static: no completed failed checks; markdown formatting issue identified in the focused hunk. TDD/regression: no runtime tests changed. Coverage: Coverage execution evidence reports not applicable for supported changed source/package files. Docstring coverage: Coverage execution evidence reports not applicable. DAG: CodeGraph current-head evidence covers the repository but found no meaningful dependency edge for these Markdown surfaces; focused flow is CONTRIBUTING.md -> Markdown renderer -> contributor Ground Rules. Mermaid: flowchart TD A["CONTRIBUTING.md"] --> B["Markdown renderer"] --> C["Ground Rules list"] --> D["Contributor understanding"]. PoC/execution: no execution receipt. DDD/domain: ADRs document FIPC and calibration decisions. CDD/context: architecture and agent/contributor documentation are updated consistently in scope. Similar issues: no unresolved non-outdated review threads or completed failed checks. Claim/concept check: citation records are present, but authoritative source verification was not executed in this isolated review. Standards search: no external search receipt. Compatibility/convention: documentation-only change; preserve Markdown list indentation. Breaking-change/backcompat: no runtime/API change. Implementation completeness: no executable implementation added. Performance: no runtime impact. Developer experience: contributor and agent guidance reviewed. User experience: documentation navigation and rendered list readability reviewed. Visual/DOM: non-web Markdown surface; no browser evidence required. Accessibility/i18n: no UI surface changed. Supply-chain/license: no dependencies or licenses changed. Packaging: R package manifests are unchanged; changed surfaces are documentation. Security/privacy: no runtime or trust-boundary change.
Adversarial validation
{"status":"failed","probes":[{"path":"CONTRIBUTING.md","line":11,"hypothesis":"Reducing the continuation indentation from three spaces to two will cause the first Ground Rules continuation to fall outside the ordered-list item or render inconsistently.","attack_or_counterexample":"Trusted focused diff at bounded-review-evidence.md:1626-1628 observed base line 11 as three leading spaces and current line 11 as two leading spaces while line 10 remains an ordered-list item; the malformed-list source trace is confirmed.","evidence":"Source trace at CONTRIBUTING.md:11 observed the exact indentation reduction in the current-head focused hunk; source-line-sha256=3b036e2ef58ce875691a4c64c4d973c0b889bd98f0076f900c283e24348fa553","outcome":"confirmed"}],"residual_risk":"After restoring the original three-space continuation indentation, the remaining documentation claims still require normal repository Markdown validation and maintainer verification of bibliographic sources."}-
Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
-
Reason: P2: CONTRIBUTING.md reduces ordered-list continuation indentation, risking malformed Ground Rules rendering.
-
Head SHA:
7b711e73aad8de5aa492a6d6866b10b8849d1c8d -
Workflow run: 32223738690
-
Workflow attempt: 1
Changed-File Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Changed file (5 files)"]
S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (5 files)"]
R1 --> V1["required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Docs (7 files)"]
S2 --> I2["operator or user guidance"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Docs (7 files)"]
R2 --> V2["docs review"]
|
|
||
| 1. Avoid behavior changes in `R/aFIPC.R` unless backed by explicit regression | ||
| evidence and maintainer approval. | ||
| evidence and maintainer approval. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
P2 Preserve ordered-list continuation indentation
- Location:
CONTRIBUTING.md:11 - Problem: The Ground Rules item continuation changed from three leading spaces to two. This can make
evidence and maintainer approval.render outside item 1 or inconsistently across Markdown parsers, degrading the contributor guide. - Root cause: The focused hunk changes the continuation indentation without changing the surrounding ordered-list marker.
- Fix: Restore the three leading spaces before
evidence and maintainer approval.. - Regression test: Run the repository's
.github/workflows/code-quality.ymlMarkdown-lint job and renderCONTRIBUTING.md, verifying the Ground Rules list remains a single ordered list.
Suggested diff
```diff
- evidence and maintainer approval.
+ evidence and maintainer approval.2 participants
Summary
docs/adr/(template, index, ADR-0001 FIPC-only linking, ADR-0002 mirt MML-EM, ADR-0003 IPD/DIF delegated to mirt).R/aFIPC.R/man/autoFIPC.Rdunchanged.Validation
R CMD check(CIchecksucceeded on7b711e7)qualitysucceeded)strix, Semgrep, trivy-fs, osv-scan,secret-and-workflow-audit,opencode-review, andnoema-reviewsucceeded on7b711e7The earlier
noema-reviewfailure wasgh api graphqlHTTP 503 during the GitHub.com outage, not a docs finding. Retrigger after All Systems Operational cleared it.Risk and Rollback
Behavioral Impact
R/aFIPC.RunchangedChecklist
README.md,ARCHITECTURE.md,CONTRIBUTING.md,AGENTS.md,CLAUDE.md,docs/)