Owner's ruling: "as long as circulation is more expensive to build than it has
value then we have a linear ramp. a gaussian ramp is probably not appropriate
here as double the amount of corridor is simply twice as bad, so it should
score the same as two half size corridors".
Both halves check out. The linear ramp is already there -- value_circulation 50
against a build cost of 200, so every m2 of corridor is worth -150 and the
objective pushes for less of it without needing a cap. And the AMOUNT of
circulation is separately governed at building level by ratio_circulation
[0.00, 0.20], a gaussian on the circulation fraction, which is where that
question belongs. The per-leaf size gaussian was a third charge on the same
thing.
It was also the only one of the three that depended on how the corridor was cut
up. One 20 m2 corridor scored gaussian(20,0,14) = 0.360 and contributed 360;
two 10 m2 halves scored 0.775 each and contributed 775 between them. Splitting a
corridor in half multiplied its value by 2.15x -- an artefact of where the tree
happened to cut, rewarding the search for fragmenting its own spine. The
ruling's test (one 2A leaf must score as two A leaves) is exactly what a
gaussian on an amount cannot satisfy, and is now a test.
size_circulation = None; quality_size returns 1.0 for circulation and
shapecurve gives amin, amax = 0, inf.
BUG this exposed: get_space_params falls through to a habitable default when a
generic family key is missing and could not tell "missing" from "present but
null", so a corridor silently inherited a room's 16 m2 size target.
_generic_param now returns (found, value); pinned by a test. The same trap
applied to 39.22's proportion_circulation.
Fail-set effect of 39.22 and 39.23 together: 16 corridor size fails and 7
proportion fails removed, none added. harbor 33/43/42 -> 32/40/38, maple
54/73/55 -> 51/65/52, health-centre 4/9/5 -> 3/9/5, programme-house unchanged.
The layouts are identical -- these are failures the objective should never have
been reporting.
Two shape-curve tests moved fixture: both built an infeasible upper storey from
a 'C' leaf, infeasible precisely because of the bounds now removed. The fixture
is a cr1 leaf, whose infeasibility is a contradiction between two of its own
bounds (needs >= 180 m2 for its aspect bound, <= 101.5 m2 for its size bound
across the box's fixed 23.52 m span) rather than a tight fit. The invariants
they test are unchanged.
Left open on hxi: the rate gap, value_circulation 50 against value_inside 300
on identical build cost. Whether a corridor is worth a sixth of a room per m2
is a design judgement, and the linear ramp is only as steep as that number.
419 passed.
Refs homemaker-py-hxi.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01MJ84Feep79Hhm3E4zZJmnB
f07b3865ef