Conflict Resolution

═══ ADVERSARIAL CONSENSUS LOG — Anthropic (technical) ⚔ Grok (SMART) ═══

[ANTHROPIC] Asserts technical_score=98. Rationale: typing discipline, a11y fidelity, and
            zero runtime lock-in are exemplary. Recommends ELITE tier.

[GROK]      CHALLENGE. SMART rubric is not 'is the code good' — it is 'is the stated goal
            MEASURABLY met'. Goal claims '100% TypeScript coverage across ALL primitives'.
            Grounding scan found 2 primitives with client-only effects and NO documented SSR
            fallback — the 'zero runtime lock-in' clause is therefore only 97% substantiated.
            Counter-proposes smart_score=89. Flags ANTHROPIC's 98 as un-grounded optimism.

[ANTHROPIC] CONCEDES the SSR-fallback gap is real but argues it is documentation debt, not a
            code defect. Revises technical_score 98 → 96 to absorb the corroboration miss.

[GROK]      Accepts the documentation-vs-defect distinction. Raises smart_score 89 → 91 since
            the measurable target is met for 310/312 primitives (99.4% grounded).

[DAG RESOLVER] Hallucination guard: both models now agree on the evidence set. No unresolved
            divergence > 3 points. Sealing consensus.
            final VMI = round(0.6·technical + 0.4·smart) = round(0.6·96 + 0.4·91) = 94.

═══ VERDICT SEALED — VMI 94 / PROVEN-ELITE ═══