Explicit predictions with criteria, deterministic resolution, prediction error and calibration.
Predictions give a mind a way to be wrong in a measurable way. A prediction is an explicit expectation with criteria a resolver can check; its outcome feeds back into the beliefs it came from and into a calibration record that says how well confidence has tracked reality.
Predictions are created by the executive when a belief with sufficient confidence implies something checkable about the future, by operators through the interface or noemactl prediction, and by experiments as expectations. Each has a statement, a subject, a confidence, a time window, machine-checkable criteria (an event of a type whose summary contains a term, a belief crossing a confidence, a metric crossing a threshold), the belief it derives from and its origin event.
A scheduled resolver evaluates open predictions once a minute. Criteria met inside the window resolve to confirmed; a window that closes without the criteria resolves to expired (treated as refuted for calibration unless the criteria say otherwise); explicit contrary evidence resolves to refuted. Operators can resolve manually with a reason. Every resolution is a prediction_resolved event; a wrong one is also a prediction_error event with the size of the error.
A prediction error adds evidence against the belief the prediction derived from, weighted by the size of the error, and lowers confidence through the ordinary belief arithmetic. A confirmed prediction adds support. Errors also move affect (uncertainty up, confidence down) and drives (uncertainty reduction up), and give curiosity a question. The demonstration scenario in the plan, "prediction error lowers confidence and produces a curiosity goal", is exactly this chain and is covered by tests.
The calibration page bins resolved predictions by stated confidence and shows the observed frequency in each bin, the Brier score and the counts. A well-calibrated mind's 70 % predictions come true about 70 % of the time. The page exists so that an operator can judge whether a mind's confidence means anything, and so that experiments that change attention or personality can be compared on it.
A prediction is an explicit expectation with a resolution window and criteria that code can check (spec §11). Predictions are how the mind finds out it was wrong.
| Field | Meaning |
|---|---|
| statement | what is expected, in words |
| confidence | 0.05 to 0.95; certainty is refused |
| window_start / window_end | when the expectation applies |
| criteria | event_match (terms occur or stay absent in events of given types), belief (a belief reaches a confidence), or operator (a person judges) |
| belief_id | the belief the prediction was derived from, if any |
| status | open → confirmed, refuted, expired or withdrawn |
prediction_results is append-only and keeps every outcome with the stated confidence and the error, so calibration cannot be rewritten.
A scheduler runs the resolver every minute. For each open prediction it judges deterministically (predictions.Judge): event-match predictions look at the mind's events inside the window (excluding the prediction's own creation and other prediction events); belief predictions compare the current confidence; operator predictions expire a week after the window. Operators can also confirm, refute or withdraw from the UI, API or CLI.
Outcomes emit prediction_resolved or, for refutations, prediction_error with salience scaled by how confident the miss was. The result becomes evidence on the linked belief: confirmed adds support (weight 0.3), refuted adds opposition (weight 0.5), and the belief is re-evaluated with the usual arithmetic. The motivation rules raise arousal and uncertainty and lower confidence after a miss; curiosity turns the miss into a question that competes for attention and, if admitted, becomes an investigation goal.
noemactl.The dashboard shows accuracy (confirmed over decided), the Brier score, and buckets of stated confidence against actual hit rate over the last 90 days. A mind whose mean stated confidence exceeds its hit rate by more than 0.15 across at least five decided predictions is flagged as overconfident; metacognition (phase 10) uses the same signal to discount new confident claims.