A declared disjointness keeps same names apart (B3) - #245
Merged
Conversation
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes B3 of 0016:
owl:disjointWithreaches entity resolution. Until now the table (entity_type_disjoint) had one consumer, the ontology self-check; resolution judged cross-type same names by the hard-codedCONFUSABLE_TYPE_KEYSand, since #226, by class kinship.Rule order now: a declared disjointness wins, then kinship, then the hard-coded list.
declared_disjoint_fromcollects in one recursive query the classes declared disjoint with the mention's class or any of its ancestors, expanded to their descendants — disjointness is inherited, soPerson ⟂ OrganizationkeepsCorporationandPersonapart. Both cross-type paths (type drift and containment) treat a hit asDisjoint. Nothing declared → today's behavior, unchanged; the list stays as the no-declaration fallback.Test:
a_declared_disjointness_keeps_names_apart— the list and kinship still send undeclared pairs to Review;organization ⟂ projectsilences the list pair;corporation ⟂ agencysilences afederal_agencypair from either side (inheritance); removing the declaration brings the pair back.Decision records: 0009 status and decision 6 read the new order, with a revision note; 0016 B3 marked done; index rows updated.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code