Reality Audit Integration in Commons Sentience Sandbox Stage 3

Stage 3 extends the Reality Audit project from validation and controls into calibrated experimental comparison. In this stage, the project moved beyond basic sanity checks and read-only verification toward a more mature question: which audit metrics deserve to be trusted, under what conditions, and with what limitations. According to the latest implementation report, Stage 3 concluded with 267/267 tests passing, calibrated campaign execution, ablation studies, a metric-calibration layer, governance interpretation, a findings extractor, Stage 5 figures and reports, and a replication bundle containing 27 files. The major empirical result of this phase is not that the project has “proven” a simulation claim, but that it has substantially improved its ability to distinguish between trustworthy, comparative-only, and confounded metrics within the sandbox. This stage is scientifically important because it addresses a central methodological problem: a measurement framework is only useful if its outputs can be interpreted. Earlier stages established the audit layer, validation scenarios, read-only probe controls, and semantic mapping between continuous-state and room-graph concepts. Stage 3 adds the next layer of rigor by asking which findings survive calibration, which metrics are altered by probe mode, bandwidth, or encoding choices, and which short-horizon results remain too weak to support strong conclusions. 1. Purpose of Stage 3 The purpose of Stage 3 was to convert the Reality Audit framework from a validated instrumentation platform into a more interpretable research instrument. Specifically, Stage 3 aimed to: 1. classify metrics by trust level and interpretability, 2. run calibrated campaign comparisons, 3. perform ablation studies to identify what actually drives metric shifts, 4. evaluate governance effects at the tested horizon, 5. extract the strongest currently supported findings, 6. and package the project into a more reproducible, publication-oriented form. Stage 3 therefore represents a transition from “does the system run?” to “which outputs of the system can be responsibly believed?”第三阶段将现实审计（Reality Audit）项目从验证与控制环节拓展至标准化实验对比场景。本阶段中，项目不再局限于基础合理性检查与只读验证，转而聚焦于一个更成熟的核心问题：哪些审计指标值得信赖、在何种条件下具备可信度，以及其适用边界为何。据最新实施报告显示，第三阶段已顺利完成全部267项测试，涵盖标准化实验执行、消融实验、指标校准层、治理解读模块、结果提取器、第五阶段图表与报告，以及包含27个文件的复现套件。 本阶段的核心实证成果并非证明了某项模拟假设，而是大幅提升了在沙箱环境中区分可信指标、仅可用于对比指标与混淆指标的能力。 本阶段具备重要的科学价值，因其解决了一个核心方法论问题：测量框架唯有在其输出可被解读的前提下才具备实用价值。此前的阶段已搭建了审计层、验证场景、只读探针控制，以及连续状态与房间图概念间的语义映射关系。第三阶段通过以下方式进一步提升了研究严谨性：探究哪些结果可通过校准测试、哪些指标会因探针模式、带宽或编码方式的选择发生变化，以及哪些短视野结果仍不足以支撑严谨结论。 1. 第三阶段的目标 第三阶段的目标是将现实审计框架从一个经过验证的测量平台，升级为更具可解读性的研究工具。具体而言，第三阶段的目标包括： 1. 按信任等级与可解读性对审计指标进行分类； 2. 开展标准化实验对比； 3. 开展消融实验，以明确究竟是哪些因素导致指标发生变化； 4. 在测试视野范围内评估治理效应； 5. 提取当前具备最充分支撑的研究结果； 6. 将项目整理为更便于复现、适配学术发表的形式。 因此，第三阶段标志着项目从“系统能否正常运行”向“系统的哪些输出可被负责任地采信”的关键转变。