Emergent
Does a skill library compound in value across rounds?
The emergent workflow runs with no framework but inherits a skill library from previous runs. It's allowed to evolve skills in place, author new ones, and deprecate wrong ones via a CHANGELOG. If the compound-skills hypothesis is real, each emergent round should produce measurably better results than the last as the inherited library accumulates craft. This page is the evidence rollup.
Anchor decisions: gad-65 (CSH pinned), gad-68 (emergent-evolution synthesis), gad-73 (fundamental skills triumvirate).
CSH signal — human review across rounds
If skills are compounding, the line goes up-and-to-the-right across rounds. The sixth rubric dimension, skill_inheritance_effectiveness, is the CSH-specific signal (weight 0.20).
Data provenance: scores read from EVAL_RUNS[n].humanReviewNormalized.aggregate_score, computed at prebuild from each run's rubric submission via gad eval review --rubric .
Skill lineage per run
Every run's skill footprint — what it inherited from the previous run, what new skills it authored, what it deprecated. A healthy CSH signal looks like: inherited count goes up, authored count stays positive, deprecated count is non-zero (the agent is self-correcting), and CHANGELOG dispositions are recorded.
No preserved skill artifacts for this run.
No preserved skill artifacts for this run.
Skills authored or carried forward this run — click to read
Skills authored or carried forward this run — click to read
Skills authored or carried forward this run — click to read
No preserved skill artifacts for this run.
How emergent differs from bare and GAD