{
  "id": "03",
  "slug": "learning-consequences",
  "title": "Can consequences change the next choice?",
  "short_title": "Learning consequences",
  "question": "Can a learned action-outcome model adapt its means when the state of a supplied task changes?",
  "summary": "Learned outcomes supported adaptation. A complete policy cache matched the planner, limiting the claim.",
  "status": "Functional effect · stronger interpretation not established",
  "access": "Public methods summary · full run archive not published",
  "record": "Consequence-grounding study, reviewed 16 September 2026",
  "setup": "A small categorical world supplied action paths, needs, values and a task. The reported comparison covered 1,024 worlds with eight trials per task. The agent learned how actions led to outcomes.",
  "intervention": "Compare consequence-based revaluation against frozen needs and against a complete cache of all 24 policies. The cache tests whether recursive planning is necessary to explain the result.",
  "metric": "Reported task completion · percent · supplied finite task",
  "bars": [
    [
      "Learned consequence model",
      98.05
    ],
    [
      "Frozen needs",
      33.4
    ],
    [
      "Complete policy cache",
      98.05
    ]
  ],
  "result": "The learned model achieved 98.05% reported completion against 33.40% for frozen needs. The complete 24-policy outcome cache matched it, including trajectories. This supports consequence-sensitive adaptation of means, not a unique advantage for recursive planning.",
  "limit": "Goals and values were supplied. The result does not demonstrate acquired ends, genuine desires, phenomenal experience or a live Luna integration. A preceding planning comparison also failed to establish an advantage over a myopic alternative.",
  "next": "Transfer the smallest useful mechanism into a continuing project and test a delayed later choice. Keep the matched cache or simpler controller wherever it explains the behavior.",
  "public_record_id": "NR-2026-003",
  "reviewed": "2026-09-16",
  "artifact_kind": "Public study summary, not an executable reproduction package",
  "verification": "Internal source/report review; full numerical comparison not independently re-executed for publication",
  "external_replication": "Not established"
}