# C615 — Refine the candidate generative grammar

## Question

Does indexed carrier substitution require abandoning the existing transformation grammar?

## Inputs

```json
{
  "prior_operation_classes": 7,
  "newly_explicit_actions": [
    "indexed carrier realization",
    "bounded attribution"
  ]
}
```

## Sources

```json
[
  "C531; C552–C609"
]
```

## Opened utc

2026-09-28T00:31:40.497559+00:00

## Results

```json
{
  "artifact": {
    "path": "model/candidate_grammar.md",
    "sha256": "a3fb442c68878b387aa8843e6ebc2ed337c99ab047df99e08caf7e7638e4143b",
    "bytes": 1620
  },
  "architecture": [
    "source",
    "realization",
    "transformation",
    "comparison"
  ],
  "new_clarity": "expressions must retain counts and role offsets before evaluation"
}
```

## Finding

The expanded grammar remains small when it acts on labelled expressions, not bare dates. Indexed carrier realization and bounded attribution make explicit two operations hidden by date-only descriptions. Minimality remains a research question.

## Reassessment

Consolidate successful coverage and failure cases into one model assessment.

## Checks

```json
{
  "four_layers": true,
  "no_global_group_claim": true
}
```

## Closed utc

2026-09-28T00:31:40.497900+00:00

## Record provenance

Exact record hash: `b8bfd720d5aae684924bccb2aa3edbbc0d1c16cb0e5b6ff524238026d176ce9d`

Source journal: `Research_Cycles/C0532_C0631/journal.json`