One tool-free round on the condition alone: which files, strings and tests
would show MET, and which commands would settle it. The plan is placed
between the condition and the evidence in the verifying prompt and stored
as mission_phase_evaluations.expectation beside the verdict, so an operator
can see whether the checks the judge ran are the ones it said it would run.
Self-Play Reward Hacking of Reference-Free Judges (arXiv 2607.05904): a
judge's pass rate climbed 0.72 -> 0.94 across rounds while accuracy stayed
0.20; cross-family judges and ensembles did not help; the judge committing
its own answer first cut the false-positive rate 0.719 -> 0.012. Ours
commits to a plan, not a value — re-deriving values is the failure
done-when-wording measured, and the commit prompt forbids it.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WZb5A2kfVfjpdwSochkuHz
