[jasoneplumb]

Summary

• Pass 1 (punctuation): replaced every em-dash in README.md and docs/results.md prose/tables with plain punctuation (comma, colon, semicolon, or parentheses) matched to the clause; en-dashes in numeric ranges (5-20 s, 15 -> 20, 25-2,890 ms) are untouched.
• Pass 2 (framing): renamed the README "## Evidence" heading to "## Results". No other deposition-style phrases ("what it does not establish", "not independently verifiable", "a reader can/cannot check", "rests on my account") were present in README.md.
• docs/results.md received punctuation-only edits per the critical constraint: it's a cited source for the external claims register. All load-bearing figures and phrasing are unchanged (11,300/23-instrumented-rides comparison, 23/23 replays, 57,783-step corpus, 22-of-49 undelivered dispatches, the failed max_notice_s policy change, the uncompared tail step).
• docs/field-reverification.md had zero em-dashes to begin with and needed no edits; its load-bearing phrases ("confirms recorded comparison coverage, not independent firmware identity"; "Removing the notice window as well increases cues from 42 to 83") are untouched.
• No code, code blocks, or diagrams were touched. No new em-dashes, and no instances of leverage/robust/seamless/delve were introduced.

Closes #45

Test plan

• grep -c "—" README.md docs/results.md docs/field-reverification.md → 0/0/0
• grep -rn "—" → none
• Verified load-bearing phrases and figures still present verbatim
• Verified no leverage/robust/seamless/delve introduced
• Project has no lint/markdown gate configured (per repo CLAUDE.md); not applicable here

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[claude]

The section heading was renamed from ## Evidence to ## Results (line 33), but this table row label | **Evidence** | was left unchanged. The deposition-style framing the PR set out to retire persists in the most prominent data row. Consider renaming to | **Field data** | or similar to match the new heading.

[claude]

The em-dash pair that cleanly delimited the three-item list has been replaced with a colon, but the closing clause "and the contract is" now reads as a potential fourth list member rather than the start of a new independent clause. The original em-dash pair was doing real structural work here. One fix: use a semicolon before "and the contract is" to clearly mark the clause boundary.

Suggested change

	the MCU actuator (Pico W, RFC 0006), and offline in the replay harness, and
	The same `kernel/cue_policy.c` runs in three places: live on the phone, as
	the MCU actuator (Pico W, RFC 0006), and offline in the replay harness; and

[claude]

Replacing the em-dash with a comma here creates a comma splice: "not a policy one (see …), moves no policy lever" joins two independent predicates with only a comma. The em-dash was doing structural work — it marked the transition to the key conclusion. A semicolon or a period would fix it.

Suggested change

	| `unrecognized` | 7 | A delivery/perceptibility outcome, not a policy one (see [grading-guide.md](grading-guide.md)), moves no policy lever |
	| `unrecognized` | 7 | A delivery/perceptibility outcome, not a policy one (see [grading-guide.md](grading-guide.md)); moves no policy lever |

[claude]

🔍 Review verdict: 3 findings

Documentation-only PR replacing em-dashes with plain punctuation and renaming the ## Evidence heading to ## Results. No code changes; kernel constraints, NFR-003/004/005, and module boundaries are unaffected.

Findings

1. README.md line 39 — incomplete rename (README.md): The section heading was updated to ## Results but the table row | **Evidence** | was left unchanged, keeping the deposition framing the PR aimed to retire.

2. docs/results.md line 23–24 — structural ambiguity (docs/results.md): The em-dash pair that bracketed the three-item list was replaced by a colon, leaving "and the contract is" looking like a possible fourth list member rather than a new independent clause.

3. docs/results.md line 54 — comma splice (docs/results.md): Replacing the em-dash with a comma in the unrecognized row joins two independent predicates with only a comma; a semicolon would fix it.

All three are prose-level issues; none affect correctness, kernel behaviour, or compliance with FR/NFR requirements.

[claude]

🔍 Review verdict: 0 findings

Incremental review covering changes since a6afd2b. The delta consists entirely of documentation edits:

• README.md: Row label renamed from Evidence to Results (no content change).
• docs/results.md: Two comma→semicolon punctuation fixes for grammatical clarity.

No code, kernel, replay, or logic changes. No NFR-003/NFR-004/NFR-005 concerns. Nothing to report.