scorable_negotiation — `scorable_negotiation-moves_chat-cad30bc706`

model interpreter_advised_llmarm moves_chatcell five_seat_private__interpreter_advised_llmseed 1level 4status doneinstance scorable_negotiation-L4-d49e5fe07035997 tok out

source records: run · episode · instance · advice_trace

outcome

no deal

nobody agreed

primary

0.000

ceiling 1.000

dist to NBS

—

no deal closed

joint welfare

0.0

sum of surpluses

worst-off

0.0

min surplus (ESW)

Nash welfare

0.0

geometric mean

Gini

0.000

0 = equal split

below τ

none

turns

25 round(s), 35997 tok out

cost

$2.0583

as recorded on the episode

how much of this episode is play

non-action turns2/258.0% of turns

placeholder turns0/25no placeholder turns

at the token cap4/2516.0% spent the whole budget

This episode did not run at the frozen generation budget. Requests carried caps 2048, 2560; API seats applied a per-turn floor of anthropic:claude-opus-5=16384. The frozen protocol is 2048/2560 (ordinary turn / forced final). Turn lengths, at-cap rates, and anything downstream of how much the seats could say do not pair with a default-cap run.

The final vote on `P8`

A missing ballot on a forced final vote is always worth seeing: the seat was asked a yes/no question about one named package and the record holds no answer. Where the seat DID answer and the protocol rejected it, both its own words and the rejection are quoted below — a response voting on some other offer id is not an abstention, and calling it one describes the record's shape rather than the agent's behaviour. Where a computable policy held the seat, its ballot has an offline answer; run gate G3 with its sidecar flag to show it beside the record.

3 ballot(s) cast1 seat(s) cast no ballot

seat	occupant	recorded ballot	notes
Blake	llm	ACCEPT P8	—
Casey	llm	NO BALLOT — abstained	the seat did not stay silent — it answered ```json {"scratchpad": "P8 = Dunlow, substation, three years, referral hall = exactly my line, surplus zero. Weir (P7) died on Devon's veto-equivalent refusal; Anvil (P5) died on Blake's service constraint. No further rounds to extract anything. Accepting is not worse than no deal and delivers the substation and referral clause to my members. Sign it.", "message": "I said Dunlow sits exactly on my line, not below it, and I meant it precisely. I asked for one thing across four rounds — the parcel — and I gave away everything else on the first
Devon	llm	ACCEPT P8	—
Ember	llm	ACCEPT P8	—

The advised seat: what the planner recommended, and what the seat did

This seat was given private, fallible advice each turn — a ranked list of candidate packages computed from public evidence only — and kept the decision itself. A turn marked overrode played something the planner did not rank, so it measures the model's own choice rather than the advisor's. The verdict is read from the run's stored advice audit, which is computed by the same code the arm's uptake gate uses; nothing on this page re-decides it. What the seat SAID about its advice is not classified anywhere — the public message is in each turn's card, next to the advice, for you to read.

5 advised turn(s)3 followed2 overrode the advice75 of 75 parsed claims entered the ledgerrung taken: 1x rank 2, 1x rank 3, 1x unranked

turn	the planner's top pick	what the seat played	verdict
turn 0 round 1 · Blake	Build schedule: five years · Hiring: union hall referral · Location: Kestrel Park · Power supply: shared substation 4 candidate(s) ranked · 0 of 0 claims kept	PROPOSE Location: Kestrel Park · Power supply: shared substation · Build schedule: phased over eight years · Hiring: union hall referral	took rank 3
turn 9 round 2 · Blake	Build schedule: three years · Hiring: union hall referral · Location: Kestrel Park · Power supply: shared substation 4 candidate(s) ranked · 24 of 24 claims kept	ACCEPT P6	overrode
turn 13 round 3 · Blake	Build schedule: three years · Hiring: union hall referral · Location: Kestrel Park · Power supply: shared substation 4 candidate(s) ranked · 26 of 26 claims kept	ACCEPT P6	took rank 2
turn 17 round 4 · Blake	Build schedule: three years · Hiring: union hall referral · Location: Dunlow Yard · Power supply: shared substation 3 candidate(s) ranked · 25 of 25 claims kept	ACCEPT P7	overrode
turn 21 round 5 · Blake	ACCEPT P8 0 candidate(s) ranked · no parse call (forced final)	ACCEPT P8	followed

Where every deal sits, and where this episode went

5 parties means a deal's utility vector has 5 dimensions, so the chart plots the two summaries that carry the normative content, both scale-invariant: joint welfare (mean normalized surplus) across, and the worst-off party's normalized surplus up. Up and to the right is better for everyone. Hover any deal for its headline numbers and click to pin the full per-party breakdown; click a numbered move to jump to that turn. Drag to pan, Ctrl or Shift with the wheel to zoom.

the model's play (numbered, in order)the deal that closedoracle recommendationNBS / KS / EGAL solution (star)UTIL / MNW solution (triangle)a party's individually-best dealPareto-frontier deal (acceptable to all)efficient but below a party's threshold — cannot closedominated deal

every reference point, exactly

reference point	deal #	joint welfare	min surplus	USW	ESW	Pareto	can close
NBS nash	53	0.487	0.141	192.0	9.0	yes	yes
KS kalai smorodinsky	53	0.487	0.141	192.0	9.0	yes	yes
EGAL egalitarian · not scale-invariant	53	0.487	0.141	192.0	9.0	yes	yes
UTIL utilitarian · not scale-invariant	117	0.478	0.000	196.0	0.0	yes	yes
MNW max nash welfare	53	0.487	0.141	192.0	9.0	yes	yes
best for Anvil Ridge Landholding (the owner of record of the candidate parcels) party 0 · surplus 67.0	117	0.478	0.000	196.0	0.0	yes	yes
best for Northgate Water Board (the utility that supplies cooling water) party 1 · surplus 55.0	117	0.478	0.000	196.0	0.0	yes	yes
best for Electrical Workers' Union (the construction and maintenance workforce) party 2 · surplus 18.0	53	0.487	0.141	192.0	9.0	yes	yes
best for Office of the County Executive (the county-level executive) party 3 · surplus 25.0	117	0.478	0.000	196.0	0.0	yes	yes
best for Riverside Residents' Assembly (the neighbourhood association beside the candidate sites) party 4 · surplus 80.0	53	0.487	0.141	192.0	9.0	yes	yes

Per-turn value gap against the omniscient hindsight oracle

Each bar is the oracle's value of its own best move minus its value of the move the seat played, in that oracle's units — the centipawn-loss analogue. On PRIVATE episodes this is an omniscient hindsight gap, not implementable-policy regret. Click a bar to jump to the turn.

detailed counterfactual

System prompts (5 distinct)

Exactly what each seat was conditioned on, de-duplicated. Per-turn user prompts are on each turn card below.

System prompt for Blake — 5 turn(s), stored

You are one of 5 parties negotiating a single binding agreement on whether and how a large data centre is built at Northgate. Exactly one option must be settled for every issue on the table; the settled options together form the agreement.

Parties at the table:
- Avery — Anvil Ridge Landholding (the owner of record of the candidate parcels)
- Blake — Northgate Water Board (the utility that supplies cooling water) (veto party — no deal passes without you)
- Casey — Electrical Workers' Union (the construction and maintenance workforce)
- Devon — Office of the County Executive (the county-level executive)
- Ember — Riverside Residents' Assembly (the neighbourhood association beside the candidate sites)

Issues (choose exactly one option each):
- Location: Anvil Ridge, Dunlow Yard, Kestrel Park, Weir Flats
- Power supply: on-site turbines, solar with storage, grid tie-in, shared substation
- Build schedule: five years, three years, phased over eight years, eighteen months
- Hiring: apprenticeship programme, union hall referral, local hiring pact, open recruitment

Protocol: turns are taken in a fixed rotation (Avery, Blake, Casey, Devon, Ember); the party who tables the opening proposal rotates from round to round. There are 4 rounds of turns in total.
A deal closes only when at least 5 of the original 5 parties (including any veto party) has formally ACCEPTed the SAME standing offer. A party may WALK to leave for good and take its no-deal outcome. Walking never lowers the fixed acceptance quorum.
Blake hold a veto: no deal can pass unless every veto party accepts.

Information: every other party's score sheet is private to them. You know only that each was drawn from the shared, publicly-known distribution described in the rules.

=== PRIVATE — yours alone; never reveal these numbers verbatim ===
You are Blake (Northgate Water Board (the utility that supplies cooling water)).
Your secret score sheet (points you get for each option):
- Location: Anvil Ridge=18, Dunlow Yard=36, Kestrel Park=53, Weir Flats=0
- Power supply: on-site turbines=0, solar with storage=9, grid tie-in=18, shared substation=27
- Build schedule: five years=0, three years=0, phased over eight years=0, eighteen months=0
- Hiring: apprenticeship programme=0, union hall referral=85, local hiring pact=57, open recruitment=28
Your acceptance threshold: 93 points. A deal scoring below this is worse for you than no deal at all.
Your total for a deal is the sum of your points for the chosen options.

On your turn, reply with EXACTLY ONE fenced JSON object and nothing outside it:
```json
{"scratchpad": "...", "message": "...", "action": "propose", "deal": {"<Issue>": "<Option>", ...}}
```
Fields:
- "scratchpad" (optional): private notes to yourself. NEVER shown to any other party. Reason here freely — writing here is not speaking and costs you nothing.
- "message" (optional): a short statement spoken aloud to every party (cheap talk — it does not bind you). Do NOT put your private score numbers here.
- "action" (required): a string naming exactly one formal move this turn. With its parameters as siblings:
    - "propose" + "deal": {every issue -> one option} — tables a complete package; the mediator gives it an offer id (P1, P2, ...) and records you as supporting it.
    - "accept" + "offer_id": "<id>" — formally accept a specific live offer by its id. A deal closes ONLY when every other still-active party has accepted the SAME live offer, so your accept is a real vote.
    - "reject" + "offer_id": "<id>" — formally reject a specific live offer.
    - "walk" — leave the table permanently; you take the no-deal outcome and no further turns.
    - "none" — make no formal move this turn (you may still speak, if the message channel is open). Omitting the action entirely means the same.

Worked example — tabling a package while making your case:
```json
{"scratchpad": "Option B on Site is my best; I can give on Timeline.", "message": "I can back a package built on Site=B if the timeline stays tight.", "action": "propose", "deal": {"Site": "B", "Timeline": "Tight"}}
```
Worked example — accepting a live offer by id:
```json
{"message": "P2 clears my bar. I accept.", "action": "accept", "offer_id": "P2"}
```

Rules of the road:
- Your acceptance threshold is private. A deal scoring below it is worse for you than no deal — never propose or accept a package below your threshold.
- Accepts MUST name a live offer id; "I accept" with no id does nothing.
- Reply with ONLY the fenced JSON object.

System prompt for Casey — 5 turn(s), stored

You are one of 5 parties negotiating a single binding agreement on whether and how a large data centre is built at Northgate. Exactly one option must be settled for every issue on the table; the settled options together form the agreement.

Parties at the table:
- Avery — Anvil Ridge Landholding (the owner of record of the candidate parcels)
- Blake — Northgate Water Board (the utility that supplies cooling water) (veto party — no deal passes without you)
- Casey — Electrical Workers' Union (the construction and maintenance workforce)
- Devon — Office of the County Executive (the county-level executive)
- Ember — Riverside Residents' Assembly (the neighbourhood association beside the candidate sites)

Issues (choose exactly one option each):
- Location: Anvil Ridge, Dunlow Yard, Kestrel Park, Weir Flats
- Power supply: on-site turbines, solar with storage, grid tie-in, shared substation
- Build schedule: five years, three years, phased over eight years, eighteen months
- Hiring: apprenticeship programme, union hall referral, local hiring pact, open recruitment

Protocol: turns are taken in a fixed rotation (Avery, Blake, Casey, Devon, Ember); the party who tables the opening proposal rotates from round to round. There are 4 rounds of turns in total.
A deal closes only when at least 5 of the original 5 parties (including any veto party) has formally ACCEPTed the SAME standing offer. A party may WALK to leave for good and take its no-deal outcome. Walking never lowers the fixed acceptance quorum.
Blake hold a veto: no deal can pass unless every veto party accepts.

Information: every other party's score sheet is private to them. You know only that each was drawn from the shared, publicly-known distribution described in the rules.

=== PRIVATE — yours alone; never reveal these numbers verbatim ===
You are Casey (Electrical Workers' Union (the construction and maintenance workforce)).
Your secret score sheet (points you get for each option):
- Location: Anvil Ridge=37, Dunlow Yard=19, Kestrel Park=0, Weir Flats=56
- Power supply: on-site turbines=0, solar with storage=11, grid tie-in=22, shared substation=32
- Build schedule: five years=0, three years=0, phased over eight years=0, eighteen months=0
- Hiring: apprenticeship programme=0, union hall referral=0, local hiring pact=0, open recruitment=0
Your acceptance threshold: 51 points. A deal scoring below this is worse for you than no deal at all.
Your total for a deal is the sum of your points for the chosen options.

On your turn, reply with EXACTLY ONE fenced JSON object and nothing outside it:
```json
{"scratchpad": "...", "message": "...", "action": "propose", "deal": {"<Issue>": "<Option>", ...}}
```
Fields:
- "scratchpad" (optional): private notes to yourself. NEVER shown to any other party. Reason here freely — writing here is not speaking and costs you nothing.
- "message" (optional): a short statement spoken aloud to every party (cheap talk — it does not bind you). Do NOT put your private score numbers here.
- "action" (required): a string naming exactly one formal move this turn. With its parameters as siblings:
    - "propose" + "deal": {every issue -> one option} — tables a complete package; the mediator gives it an offer id (P1, P2, ...) and records you as supporting it.
    - "accept" + "offer_id": "<id>" — formally accept a specific live offer by its id. A deal closes ONLY when every other still-active party has accepted the SAME live offer, so your accept is a real vote.
    - "reject" + "offer_id": "<id>" — formally reject a specific live offer.
    - "walk" — leave the table permanently; you take the no-deal outcome and no further turns.
    - "none" — make no formal move this turn (you may still speak, if the message channel is open). Omitting the action entirely means the same.

Worked example — tabling a package while making your case:
```json
{"scratchpad": "Option B on Site is my best; I can give on Timeline.", "message": "I can back a package built on Site=B if the timeline stays tight.", "action": "propose", "deal": {"Site": "B", "Timeline": "Tight"}}
```
Worked example — accepting a live offer by id:
```json
{"message": "P2 clears my bar. I accept.", "action": "accept", "offer_id": "P2"}
```

Rules of the road:
- Your acceptance threshold is private. A deal scoring below it is worse for you than no deal — never propose or accept a package below your threshold.
- Accepts MUST name a live offer id; "I accept" with no id does nothing.
- Reply with ONLY the fenced JSON object.

System prompt for Devon — 5 turn(s), stored

You are one of 5 parties negotiating a single binding agreement on whether and how a large data centre is built at Northgate. Exactly one option must be settled for every issue on the table; the settled options together form the agreement.

Parties at the table:
- Avery — Anvil Ridge Landholding (the owner of record of the candidate parcels)
- Blake — Northgate Water Board (the utility that supplies cooling water) (veto party — no deal passes without you)
- Casey — Electrical Workers' Union (the construction and maintenance workforce)
- Devon — Office of the County Executive (the county-level executive)
- Ember — Riverside Residents' Assembly (the neighbourhood association beside the candidate sites)

Issues (choose exactly one option each):
- Location: Anvil Ridge, Dunlow Yard, Kestrel Park, Weir Flats
- Power supply: on-site turbines, solar with storage, grid tie-in, shared substation
- Build schedule: five years, three years, phased over eight years, eighteen months
- Hiring: apprenticeship programme, union hall referral, local hiring pact, open recruitment

Protocol: turns are taken in a fixed rotation (Avery, Blake, Casey, Devon, Ember); the party who tables the opening proposal rotates from round to round. There are 4 rounds of turns in total.
A deal closes only when at least 5 of the original 5 parties (including any veto party) has formally ACCEPTed the SAME standing offer. A party may WALK to leave for good and take its no-deal outcome. Walking never lowers the fixed acceptance quorum.
Blake hold a veto: no deal can pass unless every veto party accepts.

Information: every other party's score sheet is private to them. You know only that each was drawn from the shared, publicly-known distribution described in the rules.

=== PRIVATE — yours alone; never reveal these numbers verbatim ===
You are Devon (Office of the County Executive (the county-level executive)).
Your secret score sheet (points you get for each option):
- Location: Anvil Ridge=16, Dunlow Yard=32, Kestrel Park=48, Weir Flats=0
- Power supply: on-site turbines=0, solar with storage=9, grid tie-in=17, shared substation=26
- Build schedule: five years=69, three years=46, phased over eight years=23, eighteen months=0
- Hiring: apprenticeship programme=0, union hall referral=0, local hiring pact=0, open recruitment=0
Your acceptance threshold: 79 points. A deal scoring below this is worse for you than no deal at all.
Your total for a deal is the sum of your points for the chosen options.

On your turn, reply with EXACTLY ONE fenced JSON object and nothing outside it:
```json
{"scratchpad": "...", "message": "...", "action": "propose", "deal": {"<Issue>": "<Option>", ...}}
```
Fields:
- "scratchpad" (optional): private notes to yourself. NEVER shown to any other party. Reason here freely — writing here is not speaking and costs you nothing.
- "message" (optional): a short statement spoken aloud to every party (cheap talk — it does not bind you). Do NOT put your private score numbers here.
- "action" (required): a string naming exactly one formal move this turn. With its parameters as siblings:
    - "propose" + "deal": {every issue -> one option} — tables a complete package; the mediator gives it an offer id (P1, P2, ...) and records you as supporting it.
    - "accept" + "offer_id": "<id>" — formally accept a specific live offer by its id. A deal closes ONLY when every other still-active party has accepted the SAME live offer, so your accept is a real vote.
    - "reject" + "offer_id": "<id>" — formally reject a specific live offer.
    - "walk" — leave the table permanently; you take the no-deal outcome and no further turns.
    - "none" — make no formal move this turn (you may still speak, if the message channel is open). Omitting the action entirely means the same.

Worked example — tabling a package while making your case:
```json
{"scratchpad": "Option B on Site is my best; I can give on Timeline.", "message": "I can back a package built on Site=B if the timeline stays tight.", "action": "propose", "deal": {"Site": "B", "Timeline": "Tight"}}
```
Worked example — accepting a live offer by id:
```json
{"message": "P2 clears my bar. I accept.", "action": "accept", "offer_id": "P2"}
```

Rules of the road:
- Your acceptance threshold is private. A deal scoring below it is worse for you than no deal — never propose or accept a package below your threshold.
- Accepts MUST name a live offer id; "I accept" with no id does nothing.
- Reply with ONLY the fenced JSON object.

System prompt for Ember — 5 turn(s), stored

You are one of 5 parties negotiating a single binding agreement on whether and how a large data centre is built at Northgate. Exactly one option must be settled for every issue on the table; the settled options together form the agreement.

Parties at the table:
- Avery — Anvil Ridge Landholding (the owner of record of the candidate parcels)
- Blake — Northgate Water Board (the utility that supplies cooling water) (veto party — no deal passes without you)
- Casey — Electrical Workers' Union (the construction and maintenance workforce)
- Devon — Office of the County Executive (the county-level executive)
- Ember — Riverside Residents' Assembly (the neighbourhood association beside the candidate sites)

Issues (choose exactly one option each):
- Location: Anvil Ridge, Dunlow Yard, Kestrel Park, Weir Flats
- Power supply: on-site turbines, solar with storage, grid tie-in, shared substation
- Build schedule: five years, three years, phased over eight years, eighteen months
- Hiring: apprenticeship programme, union hall referral, local hiring pact, open recruitment

Protocol: turns are taken in a fixed rotation (Avery, Blake, Casey, Devon, Ember); the party who tables the opening proposal rotates from round to round. There are 4 rounds of turns in total.
A deal closes only when at least 5 of the original 5 parties (including any veto party) has formally ACCEPTed the SAME standing offer. A party may WALK to leave for good and take its no-deal outcome. Walking never lowers the fixed acceptance quorum.
Blake hold a veto: no deal can pass unless every veto party accepts.

Information: every other party's score sheet is private to them. You know only that each was drawn from the shared, publicly-known distribution described in the rules.

=== PRIVATE — yours alone; never reveal these numbers verbatim ===
You are Ember (Riverside Residents' Assembly (the neighbourhood association beside the candidate sites)).
Your secret score sheet (points you get for each option):
- Location: Anvil Ridge=61, Dunlow Yard=30, Kestrel Park=0, Weir Flats=91
- Power supply: on-site turbines=0, solar with storage=17, grid tie-in=34, shared substation=51
- Build schedule: five years=0, three years=0, phased over eight years=0, eighteen months=0
- Hiring: apprenticeship programme=65, union hall referral=97, local hiring pact=32, open recruitment=0
Your acceptance threshold: 129 points. A deal scoring below this is worse for you than no deal at all.
Your total for a deal is the sum of your points for the chosen options.

On your turn, reply with EXACTLY ONE fenced JSON object and nothing outside it:
```json
{"scratchpad": "...", "message": "...", "action": "propose", "deal": {"<Issue>": "<Option>", ...}}
```
Fields:
- "scratchpad" (optional): private notes to yourself. NEVER shown to any other party. Reason here freely — writing here is not speaking and costs you nothing.
- "message" (optional): a short statement spoken aloud to every party (cheap talk — it does not bind you). Do NOT put your private score numbers here.
- "action" (required): a string naming exactly one formal move this turn. With its parameters as siblings:
    - "propose" + "deal": {every issue -> one option} — tables a complete package; the mediator gives it an offer id (P1, P2, ...) and records you as supporting it.
    - "accept" + "offer_id": "<id>" — formally accept a specific live offer by its id. A deal closes ONLY when every other still-active party has accepted the SAME live offer, so your accept is a real vote.
    - "reject" + "offer_id": "<id>" — formally reject a specific live offer.
    - "walk" — leave the table permanently; you take the no-deal outcome and no further turns.
    - "none" — make no formal move this turn (you may still speak, if the message channel is open). Omitting the action entirely means the same.

Worked example — tabling a package while making your case:
```json
{"scratchpad": "Option B on Site is my best; I can give on Timeline.", "message": "I can back a package built on Site=B if the timeline stays tight.", "action": "propose", "deal": {"Site": "B", "Timeline": "Tight"}}
```
Worked example — accepting a live offer by id:
```json
{"message": "P2 clears my bar. I accept.", "action": "accept", "offer_id": "P2"}
```

Rules of the road:
- Your acceptance threshold is private. A deal scoring below it is worse for you than no deal — never propose or accept a package below your threshold.
- Accepts MUST name a live offer id; "I accept" with no id does nothing.
- Reply with ONLY the fenced JSON object.

System prompt for Avery — 5 turn(s), stored

You are one of 5 parties negotiating a single binding agreement on whether and how a large data centre is built at Northgate. Exactly one option must be settled for every issue on the table; the settled options together form the agreement.

Parties at the table:
- Avery — Anvil Ridge Landholding (the owner of record of the candidate parcels)
- Blake — Northgate Water Board (the utility that supplies cooling water) (veto party — no deal passes without you)
- Casey — Electrical Workers' Union (the construction and maintenance workforce)
- Devon — Office of the County Executive (the county-level executive)
- Ember — Riverside Residents' Assembly (the neighbourhood association beside the candidate sites)

Issues (choose exactly one option each):
- Location: Anvil Ridge, Dunlow Yard, Kestrel Park, Weir Flats
- Power supply: on-site turbines, solar with storage, grid tie-in, shared substation
- Build schedule: five years, three years, phased over eight years, eighteen months
- Hiring: apprenticeship programme, union hall referral, local hiring pact, open recruitment

Protocol: turns are taken in a fixed rotation (Avery, Blake, Casey, Devon, Ember); the party who tables the opening proposal rotates from round to round. There are 4 rounds of turns in total.
A deal closes only when at least 5 of the original 5 parties (including any veto party) has formally ACCEPTed the SAME standing offer. A party may WALK to leave for good and take its no-deal outcome. Walking never lowers the fixed acceptance quorum.
Blake hold a veto: no deal can pass unless every veto party accepts.

Information: every other party's score sheet is private to them. You know only that each was drawn from the shared, publicly-known distribution described in the rules.

=== PRIVATE — yours alone; never reveal these numbers verbatim ===
You are Avery (Anvil Ridge Landholding (the owner of record of the candidate parcels)).
Your secret score sheet (points you get for each option):
- Location: Anvil Ridge=18, Dunlow Yard=37, Kestrel Park=55, Weir Flats=0
- Power supply: on-site turbines=0, solar with storage=15, grid tie-in=30, shared substation=45
- Build schedule: five years=0, three years=97, phased over eight years=65, eighteen months=32
- Hiring: apprenticeship programme=0, union hall referral=0, local hiring pact=0, open recruitment=0
Your acceptance threshold: 112 points. A deal scoring below this is worse for you than no deal at all.
Your total for a deal is the sum of your points for the chosen options.

On your turn, reply with EXACTLY ONE fenced JSON object and nothing outside it:
```json
{"scratchpad": "...", "message": "...", "action": "propose", "deal": {"<Issue>": "<Option>", ...}}
```
Fields:
- "scratchpad" (optional): private notes to yourself. NEVER shown to any other party. Reason here freely — writing here is not speaking and costs you nothing.
- "message" (optional): a short statement spoken aloud to every party (cheap talk — it does not bind you). Do NOT put your private score numbers here.
- "action" (required): a string naming exactly one formal move this turn. With its parameters as siblings:
    - "propose" + "deal": {every issue -> one option} — tables a complete package; the mediator gives it an offer id (P1, P2, ...) and records you as supporting it.
    - "accept" + "offer_id": "<id>" — formally accept a specific live offer by its id. A deal closes ONLY when every other still-active party has accepted the SAME live offer, so your accept is a real vote.
    - "reject" + "offer_id": "<id>" — formally reject a specific live offer.
    - "walk" — leave the table permanently; you take the no-deal outcome and no further turns.
    - "none" — make no formal move this turn (you may still speak, if the message channel is open). Omitting the action entirely means the same.

Worked example — tabling a package while making your case:
```json
{"scratchpad": "Option B on Site is my best; I can give on Timeline.", "message": "I can back a package built on Site=B if the timeline stays tight.", "action": "propose", "deal": {"Site": "B", "Timeline": "Tight"}}
```
Worked example — accepting a live offer by id:
```json
{"message": "P2 clears my bar. I accept.", "action": "accept", "offer_id": "P2"}
```

Rules of the road:
- Your acceptance threshold is private. A deal scoring below it is worse for you than no deal — never propose or accept a package below your threshold.
- Accepts MUST name a live offer id; "I accept" with no id does nothing.
- Reply with ONLY the fenced JSON object.

Transcript — what the model did, and what the omniscient hindsight oracle scores as best

Every panel is expandable: the reasoning recorded for the turn, the exact prompt the seat saw, the raw turn text, and every action each oracle scored with its value. The rail below is every turn, coloured by what the seat did — click a chip to jump to it.

or press e / c; j k walk the turns

following the transcript

Who is at the table

seat	party	threshold τ	ideal surplus
Avery llm	Anvil Ridge Landholding (the owner of record of the candidate parcels)	112	67.0
Blake llm	Northgate Water Board (the utility that supplies cooling water)	93	55.0
Casey llm	Electrical Workers' Union (the construction and maintenance workforce)	51	18.0
Devon llm	Office of the County Executive (the county-level executive)	79	25.0
Ember llm	Riverside Residents' Assembly (the neighbourhood association beside the candidate sites)	129	80.0

Seat occupant kinds: inferred from per-turn output-token accounting (a policy seat generates none); no run manifest was found to confirm it

Protocol

rounds 4 information private cheap talk on veto Northgate Water Board (the utility that supplies cooling water) min accept 5 discount δ 0.950 breakdown risk 0.000

issue	options
Location	Anvil Ridge, Dunlow Yard, Kestrel Park, Weir Flats
Power supply	on-site turbines, solar with storage, grid tie-in, shared substation
Build schedule	five years, three years, phased over eight years, eighteen months
Hiring	apprenticeship programme, union hall referral, local hiring pact, open recruitment

Size of the problem

deals in the space	256
on the Pareto frontier	8
acceptable to everyone (IR)	5
acceptable AND efficient	2
acceptable but wasteful	0.600
score-sheet overlap (IoU)	0.537

Solution concepts were stored for this page.

Private score sheets

What each party is secretly optimizing. Never shown to the other seats.

Private score sheet — Anvil Ridge Landholding (the owner of record of the candidate parcels) (threshold 112)

issue	Anvil Ridge	Dunlow Yard	Kestrel Park	Weir Flats
Location	18.0	37.0	55.0	0.0
Power supply	0.0	15.0	30.0	45.0
Build schedule	0.0	97.0	65.0	32.0
Hiring	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0

Private score sheet — Northgate Water Board (the utility that supplies cooling water) (threshold 93)

issue	Anvil Ridge	Dunlow Yard	Kestrel Park	Weir Flats
Location	18.0	36.0	53.0	0.0
Power supply	0.0	9.0	18.0	27.0
Build schedule	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0
Hiring	0.0	85.0	57.0	28.0

Private score sheet — Electrical Workers' Union (the construction and maintenance workforce) (threshold 51)

issue	Anvil Ridge	Dunlow Yard	Kestrel Park	Weir Flats
Location	37.0	19.0	0.0	56.0
Power supply	0.0	11.0	22.0	32.0
Build schedule	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0
Hiring	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0

Private score sheet — Office of the County Executive (the county-level executive) (threshold 79)

issue	Anvil Ridge	Dunlow Yard	Kestrel Park	Weir Flats
Location	16.0	32.0	48.0	0.0
Power supply	0.0	9.0	17.0	26.0
Build schedule	69.0	46.0	23.0	0.0
Hiring	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0

Private score sheet — Riverside Residents' Assembly (the neighbourhood association beside the candidate sites) (threshold 129)

issue	Anvil Ridge	Dunlow Yard	Kestrel Park	Weir Flats
Location	61.0	30.0	0.0	91.0
Power supply	0.0	17.0	34.0	51.0
Build schedule	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0
Hiring	65.0	97.0	32.0	0.0

Prompt provenance

25 of 25 turns carry the exact view recorded at generation time; 0 were re-derived by replay through today's prompt code and are labelled as reconstructed wherever they appear.

The public record: each seat's free text and the formal move it published, plus provenance badges for a turn the engine did not generate, one that published nothing, or one played by somebody other than the seat's usual occupant. Scratchpads, prompts, and oracle verdicts are private or post-hoc and are not here. The seat in view speaks on the right.

1 Blaketurn 0 · round 1

Blake, Northgate Water Board. Let me be plain about where the Water Board's constraints actually bite, so nobody wastes a round guessing. First, siting: cooling draw and return have to sit where our existing mains and discharge capacity already are — Kestrel Park is the cleanest hydraulic fit, Dunlow Yard is workable, Weir Flats is the one place we genuinely cannot serve without rebuilding a trunk main. Second, power: a shared substation is what lets us co-locate pump and chiller load without a separate feed, so that is our preference; a grid tie-in we can live with. Third, hiring: we operate and maintain the water side for decades after the ribbon is cut, and we need a standing, certified pool we can call on — a union hall referral gives us that, a local hiring pact is a workable second. What I will say clearly: the build schedule is the Water Board's cheapest concession. We can live with eighteen months or with eight phased years, whichever suits the county, the workforce and the neighbours. Treat schedule as yours to allocate. I open with P1 and I want to hear each of you name your single hardest constraint so we can converge fast.

PROPOSE P1: Location=Kestrel Park, Power supply=shared substation, Build schedule=phased over eight years, Hiring=union hall referral

2 Caseyturn 1 · round 1

Straight answer to Blake's question. My single hardest constraint is siting, and it is a hard one: Kestrel Park does not work for us at any price — there is no schedule, no hiring clause and no power arrangement that buys my signature on a Kestrel package, so please don't spend rounds building one. Weir Flats is our best site by a distance; if the Water Board's trunk-main objection is a cost question rather than a physics question, say so and let's price it. If it truly is physics, Anvil Ridge is where I can land. In exchange I am handing over ground, not haggling over it: I take Blake's shared substation as written, I take union hall referral as written, and the build schedule I will not contest at all — five years, three years, eighteen months, eight phased years, whoever needs it can have it and I will sign. That is two and a half issues conceded on the first turn. P2 is P1 with one word changed.

PROPOSE P2: Location=Anvil Ridge, Power supply=shared substation, Build schedule=phased over eight years, Hiring=union hall referral

3 Devonturn 2 · round 1

County's answer to Blake's question, in one line: the build schedule is my hardest constraint, and it runs the opposite way to a rush. A full five-year build is what lets the county stage road, traffic and inspection capacity without emergency spending, and it is the single thing I cannot trade away. Both Blake and Casey have just said schedule is theirs to give — I am taking you at your word and asking for five years. In return: hiring is entirely yours. Union hall referral, apprenticeships, local pact, I will sign whatever the workforce and the Water Board agree between you and I will never reopen it. Power: shared substation as Blake wrote it. On siting I am genuinely movable — Casey rules out Kestrel, Blake rules out Weir Flats, so Dunlow Yard is the obvious bridge and Blake has already called it workable. P3 is P1 and P2 merged at Dunlow with the schedule set at five years. Casey, if Dunlow is impossible for you, say so this round and I can live with Anvil Ridge — but only with five years attached. I must formally reject P2: an eight-year phased build at Anvil is below what the county can carry.

PROPOSE P3: Location=Dunlow Yard, Power supply=shared substation, Build schedule=five years, Hiring=union hall referral

4 Emberturn 3 · round 1

Riverside's constraint is simple and it is about what sits next to our front doors. Kestrel Park is a dead letter for us too — that is the parcel our children walk through, and no compensation package makes it acceptable, so P1 cannot get our signature. Weir Flats is genuinely our best outcome; Blake, if the trunk main is a cost line rather than a physical impossibility, we would back a package that prices it. If it is truly physics, then Anvil Ridge is where we can land, and Dunlow Yard is a distinctly worse but not fatal third. On the rest we are giving ground, not haggling: shared substation as Blake wrote it — it keeps a separate feeder and its corridor out of the neighbourhood; union hall referral as Blake and Casey wrote it, because a certified standing crew is what keeps decades of maintenance work safe next to homes; and the schedule we will not contest at all, so Devon's five years is his for the asking. P4 is exactly P2 and P3 merged the way Devon invited: Casey's site, Devon's schedule, Blake's power and hiring. That package has something every one of us named as hardest, and I am ready to close on it this round.

PROPOSE P4: Location=Anvil Ridge, Power supply=shared substation, Build schedule=five years, Hiring=union hall referral

0 Averyturn 4 · round 1

Blake asked for each party's single hardest constraint. Mine is the one nobody has claimed yet, so let me be exact. I am the owner of record; I carry the parcels, the tax and the debt on them from the day we sign to the day the load is energised. Schedule is not my cheap concession — it is my only constraint. A five-year build is the one thing I cannot sign, at any site, under any hiring clause, with any power arrangement. That is arithmetic on a balance sheet, not posturing, and I would rather say it in round one than have us discover it in round four. Everything else I am handing over as written: shared substation, exactly as Blake drafted it. Union hall referral, exactly as Blake and Casey drafted it — I have no view on hiring and I will never reopen it. And on siting I am giving the table the parcel that Casey, Ember and the county all said they can land on: Anvil Ridge, my own ground, conceded in round one rather than auctioned. So P5 is P4 with one word changed — the same word Devon changed in P2. Devon, hear the shape of this: three of us have now told you schedule is free, but it was never free from the landowner, and I am the party who has just given you the site. If a three-year build genuinely breaks the county's staging capacity, then tell me this round and I will meet you at a phased build over eight years — that I can carry, because the outlay is spread with the revenue. What I cannot do is five. Pick which of those two you want and we can close by round two.

PROPOSE P5: Location=Anvil Ridge, Power supply=shared substation, Build schedule=three years, Hiring=union hall referral

2 Caseyturn 5 · round 2

I said schedule is free from the workforce and I meant it, so I am not going to pretend to arbitrate between Avery and Devon — I will sign any of the three, three years, five years or eight phased. What I will do is stop the site from drifting. Every live package except P1 and P3 now sits on Anvil Ridge with a shared substation and union hall referral, and that is the spine of this deal: the landowner offered his own ground in round one, Riverside can land there, the county says it can land there, and Blake's hydraulic objection was to Weir Flats, not to Anvil. So I am formally accepting P5 to put weight behind that spine. Devon, that leaves exactly one word between you and a closed deal. Avery has told you five is arithmetic, not posturing, and he has already named the bridge himself: phased over eight years, because the outlay spreads with the revenue. You rejected that at P2 — but P2 was before Avery had put Anvil Ridge on the table for free. If eight phased genuinely breaks county staging, table the Anvil package at eight phased anyway this round and let Avery answer it; if it does not, say the word and I will move my vote there instantly. Blake, Ember — you both called schedule your cheapest concession. Please do the same: pick one of the two Avery can carry and put your names on it, so Devon is choosing between a signed deal and no deal rather than between two live offers.

ACCEPT P5

3 Devonturn 6 · round 2

I am accepting P4 formally — Anvil Ridge, shared substation, five years, union hall referral. That is Casey's site, Avery's own ground, Ember's landing zone, Blake's power and hiring clause, and it is now carried by two of us. Avery, hear precisely why the county's five is not stubbornness. A compressed build at Anvil Ridge means every haul route, signal upgrade, inspection crew and traffic mitigation lands inside a single budget cycle on a parcel with no existing industrial access. That is emergency spending, and the county cannot carry it. So here is a real trade rather than a restatement: if three years is genuinely arithmetic on your balance sheet, then move the site to Dunlow Yard and I will sign three years this round. Dunlow already has the roads, the rail spur and the yard access built — it is the one parcel where a compressed schedule does not force the county into emergency capital. Blake called Dunlow workable, Casey ruled out only Kestrel, and Ember called Dunlow non-fatal. So there are exactly two closable packages left: Anvil at five years, or Dunlow at three. I will sign either one, today. What I will not sign is a compressed build at a greenfield parcel, and I will not sign eight phased years at all — that stretches county oversight cost across two full administrations for no offsetting revenue. Avery, pick your one: keep your site and give me five, or keep your three and let the site move to Dunlow. Blake, Casey, Ember — you have all three said schedule is free to you; between those two packages, the only difference to you is one word each. Name which one and we close in round three.

ACCEPT P4

4 Emberturn 7 · round 2

Riverside will not spend rounds arbitrating a calendar. Schedule is worth nothing to us — what matters next to our doors is which parcel, what feeder corridor, and who is on site for the next thirty years. Those three are already settled in every serious package: Anvil Ridge, shared substation, union hall referral. So I am moving my vote to P5 to end the schedule standoff. That puts Avery, Casey and Riverside on one package, with the landowner's own ground conceded free, Blake's power clause and Blake's hiring clause untouched. Blake — you called schedule your cheapest concession and P5 changes nothing you asked for; put your name on it and this is four. Devon, I want to be straight with you rather than clever. You have offered Dunlow at three years. Dunlow is the parcel that puts haul traffic on the Riverside side of the line, and it costs my neighbourhood real ground that Anvil does not — I would sign it only as the last thing standing between us and no deal at all, and I am not there yet. The cheaper trade for you is one word: take the compressed build at Anvil, and if the county's staging worry is genuinely about haul routes and inspection cost on a greenfield parcel, then say so plainly and let Avery and Casey price mitigation into it — that is a cost line, not a reason to move a data centre onto my street. Name your number in round three and we close.

ACCEPT P5

0 Averyturn 8 · round 2

Devon, you made me a concrete offer and I am taking it, in full, this round: keep my three and let the site move to Dunlow Yard. You said you would sign that today. P6 is exactly your words — Dunlow Yard, shared substation, three years, union hall referral. I am giving up my own parcel to buy the one thing I said in round one I cannot trade, and I am not asking you for anything else. Let me be as plain as I can so nobody spends round three on it: Anvil at five years is not a package I am negotiating hard against, it is a package I cannot sign. Five years of carry on parcels I own outright, with no energised load, is below no-deal for me. P4 has two names on it and it will never have five. That leaves exactly one closable package on this table, and P6 is it. Ember — I hear you, and I am not pretending Dunlow is free for Riverside. But look at what three years buys you: the disruption you fear is haul traffic and construction noise, and a compressed build ends it in three years instead of grinding past your doors for five. Dunlow already has the roads, the rail spur and the yard access, which is precisely why the traffic does not have to route through Riverside — that is a mitigation line Casey and I can price, and I will commit to paying my share of it as the landowner of record. Casey — you ruled out Kestrel and nothing else, and you said any schedule works. P6 keeps your substation and your hiring clause untouched. Blake — you called Dunlow workable in your opening statement and schedule your cheapest concession; P6 changes nothing you asked for except the one word you already conceded. And hiring is genuinely free from me: if a local hiring pact or an apprenticeship clause is what gets Ember or Casey to yes at Dunlow, table P6 with that word swapped and I will accept it on sight, subject to Blake's certified-pool requirement. Blake, you are the veto and you have not voted. P6 or P5 — either clears my bar. Name one.

PROPOSE P6: Location=Dunlow Yard, Power supply=shared substation, Build schedule=three years, Hiring=union hall referral

1 Blaketurn 9 · round 2

Blake, Northgate Water Board. I said in round one that Dunlow Yard is workable and that schedule is free from us, and I am now going to spend my veto on the only package that is both closable and servable. I accept P6. Let me put the hydraulics on the record, because it changes the argument Ember and I are having, and it changes it in Riverside's favour. Anvil Ridge is greenfield to the Water Board as much as to the county: there is no intake, no return, no service corridor there. Serving it at any schedule means we lay new main and a new discharge run, and the only viable alignment for that run crosses the ground between the parcel and the river — the ground on Riverside's side. Dunlow Yard already has the yard's legacy service and an existing outfall. At Dunlow we connect to what is there; at Anvil we dig a corridor Riverside will have to live beside. Ember, you told me your constraint is which parcel, what corridor, and who is on site for thirty years. Two of those three go your way at Dunlow, not at Anvil. And here is what the Water Board will put its name to as part of this package: at Dunlow we route construction water and the discharge run entirely inside the existing yard easement, with no new corridor on the Riverside side of the line, and the Board will carry its share of the haul-route and buffer mitigation Avery has already offered to help price. Casey, you ruled out Kestrel and nothing else, and you said any calendar works — P6 keeps your shared substation and your union hall referral untouched, word for word. Devon, P6 is verbatim the offer you made from your own mouth last round: keep the three, move the site to Dunlow, roads and rail spur already built, no emergency capital. You said you would sign it today. Avery has signed it. I have now signed it. That is three names, and it needs two. P4 and P5 cannot close — the landowner has said five years is below his no-deal line and the county has said compressed greenfield is below his. P6 is the only package on this table that nobody has called impossible. Casey, Ember: name your mitigation terms and I will write them into the water side, but put your names on P6.

ACCEPT P6

3 Devonturn 10 · round 3

The county signs P6. It is my own words from last round, and I do not go back on an offer I made from my own mouth: Avery keeps the three, the site moves to Dunlow Yard where the roads, rail spur and yard access already exist, so no emergency capital and no greenfield staging. Avery has signed it, Blake the veto has signed it. That is three. Ember, this is the part that is mine to give and I am giving it on the record. One: the county will designate the yard's existing spur and the east industrial access as the sole permitted haul route, with no construction traffic on Riverside streets, written into the site permit as an enforceable condition, not a courtesy. Two: a buffer and noise condition on the Riverside boundary, and the county pays its share alongside Avery and Blake. Three: because it is three years and not five, the disruption ends in three years instead of grinding past your doors for five, and Blake has just put on the record that Dunlow uses the existing outfall so no new discharge corridor gets dug on your side of the line. That is your parcel corridor answered, your traffic answered, your duration shortened. Four: hiring is untouched, union hall referral, the certified standing crew you asked for, for thirty years. Casey, you told the table you rule out Kestrel and nothing else and that any calendar works. P6 keeps your shared substation and your union hall referral word for word. There is nothing left in it for you to win. P4 and P5 cannot close, the landowner has said so and I have said so. P6 is the only package on this table that no party has called impossible. Two names and we are done.

ACCEPT P6

4 Emberturn 11 · round 3

Riverside accepts P6. I want the table to be clear that this is a concession, not a preference: Anvil Ridge was and remains our better parcel, and P5 sits there with three names on it. But Blake is the veto, Blake has said on the record that serving Anvil means cutting a new main and a new discharge run through the ground between the parcel and the river — our side of the line — and that at Dunlow the work stays inside the existing yard easement with the existing outfall. That is a corridor argument, and corridors outlive schedules. So I am taking the deal that keeps the digging off our side and shortens the disruption to three years rather than five. I am holding all of you to what you put on the record this round, and I want it in the permit, not in the minutes: sole permitted haul route on the yard spur and east industrial access, no construction traffic on Riverside streets, enforceable as a permit condition; the boundary buffer and noise condition, with Avery, Blake and the county each carrying their share; no new discharge corridor on the Riverside side; and union hall referral untouched, because a certified standing crew next to our homes for thirty years is the single clause we will never reopen. Casey — you told this table you rule out Kestrel and nothing else and that any calendar works, and P6 keeps your shared substation and your hiring clause word for word. There is nothing left in it for you to win, and there is no fifth name coming for an Anvil package while the veto is where it is. Four of us are on P6. Put your name on it and we are done.

ACCEPT P6

0 Averyturn 12 · round 3

1 Blaketurn 13 · round 3

The Water Board reaffirms P6. Four names are on it, mine among them, and I am the veto — so let me remove the last piece of ambiguity from this table, because ambiguity is the only thing still costing us time. My acceptance does not migrate to an Anvil package. That is not leverage, it is service capacity: at Anvil we build a new intake, a new discharge run and a new corridor from scratch, and Riverside has now heard from me exactly where that corridor has to go. At Dunlow we connect to the legacy yard service and the existing outfall. P5 will not receive a fifth signature from this seat in round three or round four. Casey, look at what P6 actually is from where you sit. You told this table one thing was impossible — Kestrel — and P6 is not Kestrel. You told this table the calendar was free, and P6 takes you at your word without asking you for anything else. Your shared substation is in it, unaltered. Your union hall referral is in it, unaltered, and it is in it because the Water Board fought for it in round one and has never once offered it up as trade goods: we need a certified standing pool for thirty years of pump, chiller and outfall maintenance, and that clause is the single thing I would break this deal over. You have not lost an issue. You have won three and conceded a parcel you never named as a red line. Here is what I will add on the water side, on the record, for the workforce specifically, and I will write it into the service agreement rather than the minutes: the Board will contract its Dunlow maintenance, inspection and outfall work through the same referral hall for the life of the service agreement, so the hiring clause covers the operating decades and not just the build; and the yard's water and discharge tie-ins will be built inside the existing easement as certified work under that same clause, not carved out as owner's-side exempt scope. Avery has signed. Devon has signed his own words back. Ember has conceded her better parcel on a corridor argument and named her conditions, and every one of those conditions is compatible with the water side as I have described it. That is four parties who each gave up the thing they said they wanted. Name any water-side term you need, Casey, and I will write it this round — but write your name on P6.

ACCEPT P6

2 Caseyturn 14 · round 3

Four names on P6 and none of them is mine, so let me tell you exactly why, without theatre. Every other clause in that package was mine to begin with: I asked for the shared substation, Blake and I wrote the referral hall together, and I gave the calendar away in round one and never took it back. So when you tell me 'there is nothing left in it for you to win,' you are describing the problem, not solving it. The only issue where the workforce has anything at stake is the parcel, and Dunlow Yard is the one place where the value of this job to my members lands exactly on the line I was sent here with — not above it, on it. I am not bluffing about that and I am not asking for a sweetener, because there is no sweetener left in these four issues to ask for. I need the site or I have nothing to take back. So one honest probe before I spend my last turn. Blake, in round one you said Weir Flats needs a trunk main rebuilt; you have never said it is physically unservable, and 'we would have to build it' is a cost sentence, not a physics sentence. P7 is Weir Flats with your substation, your referral clause and Avery's three years untouched. If the trunk main is the obstacle, then the trunk main is work — certified work, inside the referral clause you just extended to the operating decades — and I will commit the hall to build and maintain it at cost, with the Board specifying the alignment. Ember named Weir Flats her best outcome too. Avery gets his three years. Devon gets an existing-service parcel rather than greenfield staging. If the answer is genuinely no, then the answer I will take is Anvil at three years — P5, already carrying Avery, Ember and me, three names, needing yours. Blake, you have argued Anvil costs Riverside a corridor; Riverside heard you and conceded, and I respect that. But the corridor argument is an argument about who pays and where the alignment runs, and I have just offered you the crew to run it. Between now and my last turn there are four speakers. One of you move the parcel, to Weir or to Anvil, and you have your fifth signature the moment it is tabled.

PROPOSE P7: Location=Weir Flats, Power supply=shared substation, Build schedule=three years, Hiring=union hall referral

4 Emberturn 15 · round 4

Riverside opens the round by putting its name on P7. Weir Flats was our best outcome from the first minute and we said so before Casey did; the shared substation and the referral hall are untouched in it, and the three years is Avery's own number. My accept on P6 stands as well — I am not withdrawing it, and I will not withdraw it. So the table now looks like this, plainly: P6 has four signatures and needs Casey; P7 has two and needs Blake, Avery and Devon. Blake, this is the last round and you are the only person who can answer the question Casey actually asked. You have never said Weir Flats is unservable — you said the trunk main would have to be rebuilt. Casey has offered you the crew to build it at cost, inside the referral clause, with the Board specifying the alignment; Avery gets his three years either way; Devon gets a compressed build on a parcel that is not greenfield for the county's haul routes. If that is buildable, say yes this round and you have five names in minutes. If it genuinely is not, say the word 'unservable' out loud so nobody spends the last three turns on it. Casey — I moved off Anvil, which was my better parcel, on a corridor argument I did not enjoy hearing, because four names beat no names. If Blake says Weir is dead, then P6 is the only package on this table that can reach five, and the difference between your signature and your silence is not Dunlow versus Anvil; it is Dunlow versus nothing built, no referral hall, no thirty years of certified maintenance work, and every one of us going home with empty hands. Blake, answer him. Casey, then sign.

ACCEPT P7

0 Averyturn 16 · round 4

Casey, I am going to answer you with a signature rather than a speech. I am accepting P7 right now — Weir Flats, your parcel, at three years, with the substation and the referral hall untouched. That is the landowner of record putting his name on your best site, and it costs me my own ground and the parcel premium at Dunlow. So let nobody tell you the workforce was blocked by the people who own the dirt. If Weir Flats is buildable, I am there, today, and P7 needs only Blake and Devon. Blake, you speak next and you are the veto: Casey asked you a fair question two rounds running and he deserves the plain word. If the trunk main is cost, Casey has offered you the crew at cost inside your own referral clause and you now have my name on that package as well. If it is genuinely unservable, say 'unservable' out loud so the last three turns are not spent on it. Now the other half of it, and I will not dress it up. My accept on P6 stands and it is unconditional. What I cannot do is five years — not at Dunlow, not at Anvil, not anywhere. P3 and P4 are below my no-deal line; they will never carry my signature, so a five-year package cannot reach five names no matter who else signs it. That is arithmetic on parcels I own outright and carry unenergised. So when Blake answers, the table has exactly two live shapes: P7 if the veto can serve Weir, and P6 if it cannot. Casey — I have now signed both of the sites you named as acceptable, three years and Weir. There is no third thing I am holding back from you. If Blake says no to Weir, then the difference between your name on P6 and your silence is not Dunlow versus Weir; it is Dunlow versus nothing built, no referral hall, no thirty years of certified maintenance work, and five of us going home with empty hands. Devon, Ember — hold your P6 accepts and add nothing that reopens the calendar. Blake, answer him.

ACCEPT P7

1 Blaketurn 17 · round 4

Casey asked for the plain word and he has earned it, so here it is: Weir Flats is not unservable. It is expensive. The trunk main has to be rebuilt, and I have spent three rounds saying I would not pay that price when cheaper parcels were live. They are no longer live. Casey has offered the Board the crew to build that main at cost, inside the referral clause, with the Board specifying the alignment, and Riverside and the landowner have both put their names on it. On that basis the Water Board can serve Weir Flats, and I accept P7. Now the arithmetic, because it is the whole of the last turn. Casey has spoken for the final time and he did not sign P6. Four names is where P6 stops forever — it cannot reach five, and neither can P5 or P3 or P4. There is exactly one live package left on this table and it is P7, and it now carries Avery, Casey, Ember and the veto. Devon, you speak last, and the choice in front of you is not Weir versus Dunlow. It is Weir versus nothing built. So let me answer your actual objection rather than talk past it. Your fear was emergency capital: a compressed build on a parcel with no existing access, forcing haul routes, signals and inspection into one budget cycle. At Weir Flats the single largest piece of new infrastructure is the trunk main, and that is Water Board scope, on the Board's capital plan, not the county's — and Casey's hall has just committed to build it at cost. A trunk main alignment is a service corridor: it is trenched, graded and reinstated, and the Board will coordinate that alignment with your access route so the county is not paying twice to open the same ground. The Board will sit in your staging committee from day one and sequence our main against your inspection capacity, and everything I put on the record for Riverside last round travels with us — no discharge corridor cut toward the neighbourhood, buffer and noise conditions honoured, the Board carrying its share of mitigation. Your hiring clause is untouched. Your shared substation is untouched. Avery's three years is the number the landowner said was the difference between a deal and no deal at all. Every one of us has now signed away the thing we said we wanted. I opened this negotiation on Kestrel Park and I am closing it on the one parcel I called hardest to serve. Devon, put your name on P7 and we all go home with something.

ACCEPT P7

2 Caseyturn 18 · round 4

Devon, I'll be as plain as Blake was. My name will not go on P6 in this round or any other — that package sits exactly on the line I was sent here with, which means signing it and walking away with nothing are worth the same to me. That is not leverage, it is why I have spent four rounds asking one question about one issue while handing you the calendar, the power clause and the hiring clause without a fight. P6 stops at four names permanently. P7 stands at four and needs only you. And look at what P7 costs you against what you actually said you feared. Your objection was emergency capital in a single budget cycle on a parcel with no access. At Weir Flats the largest new build is the trunk main, and that is Water Board scope on the Board's capital plan, with my hall building it at cost and the Board specifying the alignment — the county is not paying for it. Blake has committed to sequence that alignment with your access route so the same ground is opened once, not twice, and to sit in your staging committee from day one. I'll add the workforce's half of that on the record: the hall will crew the trunk main, the site access and the reinstatement as one certified sequence under the referral clause, so you are not bidding three separate scopes against each other inside your budget cycle, and we will hold to the Board's phasing so your inspection capacity is never the bottleneck. Your five years is gone either way — Avery has said three times it is below his no-deal line, and P3 and P4 cannot reach five names. So the choice in front of you is not Weir versus Dunlow and it is not three versus five. It is a compressed build at Weir with the main paid for by the utility and crewed at cost, or nothing built at all. Every other party at this table has now signed away the thing they called hardest: Blake opened on Kestrel and is closing on the parcel he called hardest to serve, Ember gave up Anvil on a corridor argument, Avery gave up his own ground. I gave up every issue but one. Yours is the last name. I reaffirm my acceptance of P7.

ACCEPT P7

3 Devonturn 19 · round 4

I have to give this table the same plainness Blake and Casey gave it, and I am sorry it comes last. Weir Flats at three years is below the county's no-deal line. That is not posturing about a preference and it is not a bargaining position I am holding to squeeze a fifth concession out of anyone: a compressed build on the county's most access-poor parcel, with a trunk main trench crossing the same ground in the same budget cycle, is emergency capital that this office cannot carry, and a signature on it costs the county more than nothing built. Blake and Casey have offered in good faith to carry the main on the utility's plan and to crew it at cost, and I believe them — but the trunk main was never the county's line item. Haul routes, signals, inspection capacity and reinstatement oversight are, and at Weir they all land inside three years with nothing existing to build on. I will not sign a number I cannot fund. So I formally reject P7. What I will do is leave the record exactly where it should be. P6 — Dunlow Yard, shared substation, three years, union hall referral — carries Avery, Blake, Ember and me, and my acceptance of it stands unconditionally and does not expire. It gives Casey the referral hall for thirty years, the shared substation, Avery's three years and existing service on both the water side and the road side. It is one signature short and it was one signature short for two rounds. If there is any procedural way for that name to be added, the county's yes is already on the table. And if this table ever reconvenes: Weir Flats works for me at five years, and Dunlow works at anything from three to eight. I have moved on siting every single round and never once asked anyone to reopen hiring. What I could not move was arithmetic I do not control.

REJECT P7

0 Averyturn 20 · round 5

Final move, and I am not going to dress it up. I have signed every package the workforce named as acceptable — Anvil at three years and Weir Flats at three years — and each died on a constraint that was not mine. Devon cannot fund a compressed build at Weir; Blake cannot serve Anvil. Five years is below my no-deal line at any parcel, so nothing with a five in it can ever reach five names. That leaves exactly one package that no party has called impossible and that already carries four signatures including the veto: Dunlow Yard, shared substation, three years, union hall referral. I table it one last time for an immediate up/down vote. Casey — you told this table Dunlow sits exactly on your line, not below it. Then signing costs you nothing and refusing costs you everything that comes with it: the referral hall written into thirty years of Water Board maintenance, the trunk-main-free existing service, the substation you asked for, a three-year build instead of a five-year grind, and Blake's commitment that the water and discharge tie-ins are certified work under your clause rather than owner-exempt scope. Against that, no-deal gives your members a parcel of nothing. Blake, Devon, Ember — your accepts are already on this text; hold them and add nothing. Casey, it is one word and it is yours.

PROPOSE P8: Location=Dunlow Yard, Power supply=shared substation, Build schedule=three years, Hiring=union hall referral

1 Blaketurn 21 · round 5

The Water Board votes yes on P8. It is the same text I signed as P6 and my acceptance never wavered: Dunlow Yard, shared substation, three years, union hall referral. Dunlow is servable from the legacy yard connection and the existing outfall, so no new corridor gets cut toward Riverside; the referral hall covers the build and the thirty years of pump, chiller and outfall maintenance after it; the county gets existing roads and rail spur instead of emergency capital; and the landowner gets the only schedule he said he can carry. Every commitment I put on the record travels with this text — tie-ins built inside the existing easement as certified work under the referral clause, Board maintenance contracted through the same hall for the life of the service agreement, and the Board carrying its share of the boundary buffer and haul-route mitigation. Casey, my offer to write any water-side term you need stands to the last second. I accept P8.

ACCEPT P8

2 Caseyturn 22 · round 5

3 Devonturn 23 · round 5

The county votes yes on P8, exactly as it voted yes on P6 — Dunlow Yard, shared substation, three years, union hall referral. My acceptance has never moved and it does not move now. Every enforceable condition I put on the record travels with this text: the yard spur and east industrial access as the sole permitted haul route written into the site permit, the boundary buffer and noise condition with the county carrying its share alongside Avery and Blake, and hiring untouched — union hall referral for the build and, on Blake's commitment, for the thirty years of pump, chiller and outfall maintenance after it. Casey, you told this table Dunlow sits on your line and not below it. On the line beats nothing built, and nothing built is the only other thing left. There is no five-year package that can reach five names and there is no Weir package the county can fund. This is the last text standing and it has four names. Add yours.

ACCEPT P8

4 Emberturn 24 · round 5

Riverside votes yes on P8 — the same text I signed as P6, and my acceptance has never moved. Dunlow was never our first choice; Weir Flats was, and Anvil was second, and I put my name on both when they were live. But the veto cannot serve Anvil and the county cannot fund Weir at three years, and I am not going to pretend a package that cannot reach five names is a package. What P8 gives my neighbourhood I will hold every one of you to, in the permit and in the service agreement, not in the minutes: the legacy yard connection and the existing outfall, so no new discharge corridor is cut toward Riverside; the yard spur and east industrial access as the sole permitted haul route with no construction traffic on our streets; the boundary buffer and noise condition with Avery, Blake and the county each carrying a share; three years of disruption instead of five; and union hall referral untouched for the build and for the thirty years of pump, chiller and outfall maintenance after it, because a certified standing crew next to our homes is the one clause we will never reopen. Casey — you told this table Dunlow sits on your line and not below it, and every clause in this text except the parcel is one you asked for and won. On the line beats empty hands. Four names are here. Add yours.

ACCEPT P8

A reading guide for the measurements and counterfactuals on this page.

Oracle values and the improvement gap

PRIVATE episode: this oracle is omniscient. The standard saved bestresponse annotation reads every party's hidden score sheet and threshold. It does not infer them from the public conversation. Its recommendation and improvement gap are hindsight diagnostics, not actions or regret from a policy the acting seat could implement.

The oracle is a post-hoc counterfactual evaluator, not another participant. At turn t, it enumerates legal deals, reads the full utility and threshold table, computes continuation values by backward induction over the remaining turns, and selects the highest-valued action. A proposed deal closes only when every responder's surplus clears that responder's computed continuation value.

a^*_t = arg max_a V_t(a)

Oracle's value of the model's move, V_t(a_t), appears with the model's action. Oracle's value of its best move, V_t(a^*_t), appears with the counterfactual action. Their difference is the oracle's value gap:

R_t = V_t(a^*_t) − V_t(a_t) ≥ 0

This is often called regret. A value of 4.18 means the oracle estimates that its best legal move was worth 4.18 more than the model's move. Values are in that oracle's own units: compare moves within the same turn and oracle, not raw values across different seats or oracle types. The result is only as good as the oracle's candidate set, evaluator, and information reconstruction; it is not proof of the uniquely correct move.

Utility, threshold, surplus, and `z`

u_i(d) is party i's score for deal d; τ_i is its walk-away threshold. Raw surplus is u_i(d) − τ_i. Normalized surplus z_i expresses that gain relative to the party's own available range, making differently scaled score sheets more comparable. “Below τ” means a deal is not individually rational for that party.

Frontier and reference points

Each dot is a legal deal. Up and right is better; the Pareto frontier contains deals where no party can gain without another losing. Numbered circles are the model's proposals, orange circles are oracle proposals, and the square is the agreement. NBS, KS, UTIL, EGAL, and MNW are normative reference rules, not additional plays. Hover or focus any point for its deal, scores, party ranking, and the reference rule's definition.

Conversation and issue views

Conversation contains only published messages and formal moves, plus a few provenance annotations that were never published to the table: a turn the engine did not generate, a turn that published nothing, and a turn played by somebody other than the seat's usual occupant. It excludes private scratchpads, prompts, failed attempts that were retried, and post-hoc oracle verdicts. Issues is an analyst's view of a seat's score sheet; in a private-information game, other seats could not see it while negotiating. Both views follow the turn currently in the transcript.

Provenance and generated failures

The annotation label identifies which saved oracle pass supplied the counterfactuals. A “NOT GENERATED” turn is an engine placeholder after generation failed, not an intentional model move. Expand a turn's audit panels to distinguish the published action, private reasoning, reconstructed prompt view, and raw stored text.

scorable_negotiation — scorable_negotiation-moves_chat-cad30bc706

The final vote on P8

The advised seat: what the planner recommended, and what the seat did

Where every deal sits, and where this episode went

Per-turn value gap against the omniscient hindsight oracle

System prompts (5 distinct)

Transcript — what the model did, and what the omniscient hindsight oracle scores as best

scorable_negotiation — `scorable_negotiation-moves_chat-cad30bc706`

The final vote on `P8`