Boundary Review Prompts

Page Maps

graph LR
  family["Reproducible Research"]
  program["Deep Dive DVC"]
  section["Reference"]
  page["Boundary Review Prompts"]
  capstone["Capstone evidence"]

  family --> program --> section --> page
  page -.applies in.-> capstone

flowchart LR
  orient["Orient on the page map"] --> read["Read the main claim and examples"]
  read --> inspect["Inspect the related code, proof, or capstone surface"]
  inspect --> verify["Run or review the verification path"]
  verify --> apply["Apply the idea back to the module and capstone"]

Use this page when a DVC review feels fuzzy and you need sharper keep, change, or reject questions tied to repository boundaries.

Declaration versus execution

• Does dvc.yaml describe the same contract that dvc.lock records?
• Is the implementation readable without weakening the declared pipeline boundary?
• Would a reviewer know which file should win if declaration and execution seem to disagree?

Authority prompts

• Which state layer is actually allowed to settle this question?
• Is a workspace path being mistaken for durable identity or authority?
• Would another reviewer know which surface should win when multiple files look plausible?

Promotion versus internal state

• Is the promoted bundle smaller and clearer than the whole repository?
• Has any internal artifact started masquerading as downstream contract?
• Would a downstream reviewer know what they may rely on without oral explanation?

Recovery versus convenience

• Is the recovery story really remote-backed, or is it leaning on local convenience?
• Which claim is about durability, and which is only about ordinary verification?
• What evidence would make you reject the current recovery boundary as too soft?