Behind the builder / 7 October 2026
The next chapter was integration.
R4 shifted from adding components to wiring guarded execution into the actual loop, while Capital tested its reporting against controlled tournament records.
Connect the pieces
On 7 October, the emphasis changed. R4 integration work connected queued output, execution intake, the task adapter and a result guard to the existing loop and business-route paths. The installed service still reflected the earlier R3.8.2 baseline in the native preflight.
New source and a running installation are different things. The integration candidate needed actual owners, deployment bindings and an authorized route before its local behavior could become native operational evidence.
Recovery must preserve permission
The result guard checks current authority before fresh or cached results enter later consumers. A lost reply should not force the system to repeat an effect, and recovering a result should not resurrect revoked permission.
Those checks matter at validation, episode capture, learning and persistence. They connect the execution receipt to the question of whether the result may be used now. The retained work was local author evidence, not a native deployment or independent certification.
A tournament is also an evidence pipeline
Capital exercised actual legacy tournament source using controlled synthetic prices. Retained decision and economic records matched the reporting projection; an injected recording failure halted paper fill and progress.
This made the accounting path more inspectable while preserving the limits: synthetic conditions, no real model or live-market launch. The next R4 step was likewise intentionally small—a harmless, authorized end-to-end mission with recovery and revocation checks.