README.md
KESPA-EXP-004 — Full Seed-Ready Evidence Scale Run
Date: 2026-09-03 Status: Published historical scale study Project: KESPA AI / NexLabs Studios
Research question
How does KESPA's seeded evidence-acquisition and quality-gating pipeline behave when expanded from a bounded 120-card test batch to the full seed-ready population available at that stage?
Run scope
The historical run selected:
- 3,128 evidence slots
- representing 2,831 cards
The run used seeded authoritative-source acquisition rather than general search fallback.
Acquisition result
KESPA recorded:
- 2,146 evidence excerpts collected
- 982 terminal
SEED_FETCH_FAILEDslots - 0 seed-not-ready skips
- 441 network requests used
The original acquisition summary also recorded 1,469 fetch failures. That counter is preserved as reported, but it is not treated as equivalent to the 982 terminal failed slots in the queue status counts.
Safety rails remained active:
- Search fallback: OFF
- Full-page mirroring: NO
- LLM calls: 0
- Chroma writes: 0
- Brain changes: 0
- Database writes: 0
Evidence-quality audit
The audit evaluated all 2,146 collected evidence excerpts across 2,831 cards.
Source-quality outcomes:
- 835 PASS
- 848 PASS_WITH_WARNINGS
- 463 NEEDS_REVIEW
Card-level gate:
- 1,555 / 2,831 cards passed
- 54.9% card-level gate passage
Hard issues:
- 463
no_scope_term_match
Warnings:
- 840
weak_scope_term_match - 11 navigation-boilerplate-heavy
- 6 suspected encoding artifacts
Duplicate signals:
- 161 duplicate evidence hashes
- 145 duplicate final URLs
Result
This was not a clean-corpus success result.
It was a scale test that showed two things at once:
1. the seeded collector could operate across thousands of planned evidence slots; and
2. scaling exposed enough evidence-quality and scope-matching problems that the pipeline could not
responsibly proceed directly to knowledge-card generation.
The next gate explicitly required review of failed and warned evidence rows.
Why this matters
KESPA's evidence lifecycle was designed to fail closed.
A weaker system could have interpreted "2,146 excerpts collected" as permission to generate thousands of knowledge cards. KESPA did not. The evidence-quality gate held the corpus because only 1,555 of 2,831 cards met the complete evidence gate in this run.
That negative/partial result is part of the research record.
What this does not prove
This experiment does not measure end-user answer quality, production reliability, or general model capability. It also does not mean that every passing card later became trusted knowledge.
It measures the behavior of the evidence-acquisition and quality-gating subsystem under a materially larger workload.