Tracking a parameter
For anyone carrying constants nobody has validated.
A parameter is a decision with a model and a measurement. Everything about recording one — the condition, informs, aspects, what the board will not do — is on Recording a decision, and none of it is repeated here. Set it up there first. This page is only what differs.
A threshold, a window, a limit — min_oi: 100, a 20-day lookback. Where you can state a model connecting the value to something measurable, and you have the measurement, it derives exactly as a decision does and reads differently:
id,lexicon,reduce,aspects
min_oi,parameter,worst,attribution|beats-control|holds-out-of-sample
| word | what happened |
|---|---|
| supported | the measurement backs the value |
| unvalidated | nothing has tested it — the ordinary case for most constants |
| refuted | it was tested and lost |
| unmeasured | cited, and no measurement ran |
Aspect names are yours. The core never reads them, so name them after what your evidence actually distinguishes.
Is it a parameter, or just a number?
One question decides it: is there a model — something that would validate this number?
Not whether you have measured it yet. The model is the half you can write down today, and writing it down is what forces you to say what would confirm the value. The measurement is the half that arrives later, and it only says how far along the parameter is: unvalidated before anything tests it, unmeasured once something cites it and no measurement has run, supported or refuted after. Gating on the measurement would send a value you fully intend to tune off to be recorded as a decision, where the vocabulary does not fit a number and the intent is lost.