# Process-To-Plan Route Boundary

## Current scope — 12 September 2026

The higher-autonomy lane now follows the forward direction: a supplied mechanism and meaningful marking generate permitted executions; typed supply witnesses connect realised work to plan structures and checked representative schedules. [Experiment 04](marking-plan-method.html) retains bounded whole-family generation. [Experiment 05](feedback-plan-method.html) adds repeated work, explicit current/stale evidence and observed-state response policies within a finite occurrence horizon. The policy guarantee and the retrospective schedule of one successful branch have different domains.

These toy completed-event checkpoints do not claim the broader dynamic-project-states foray is implemented. The private hill/travel programme and continuous-operation questions remain outside this slice. Public scholarly methods may be cited; private archive identifiers and personal context remain private.

The July boundary below is retained as the historical scope of the inherited baseline. Its selected-schedule projection does not describe the full capability or certificate claims of the later experiments.

## Historical boundary — 4 July 2026

Status: public boundary note for the watchable Gimmer Crag mountain-refuge lab
Created: 2026-07-04

This published mirror makes one route inspectable:

`process/Petri fragment -> valid execution -> schedule/SMC/WBS projection -> caveat`

It is not the whole process-to-plan programme.

## Foray Relationship

| Layer | Foray | Role in this lab |
|---|---|---|
| Primary | `FORAY-WBS-PATHS` | Owns the Gimmer Petri/process -> schedule -> SMC/WBS route. |
| Parent context | `FORAY-PROCESSES-TO-PLANS` | Explains why the route matters: rich process material can become thinner executable plan artefacts. |
| Adjacent/deferred | `FORAY-DYNAMIC-PROJECT-STATES` | Remains outside the current public Gimmer slice until its first state grammar is tested elsewhere. |

## What This Published Lab Can Claim

- A selected schedule candidate can witness one valid execution of the embedded process/Petri
  fragment.
- The SMC expression and WBS view are projections of that witness.
- The projection preserves task identity, ordering, parallel blocks, resource settings, and makespan.
- The projection deliberately forgets unchosen alternatives, guard rationale, resource provenance,
  and risks not modelled in the toy net.
- A plan view is too thin to reconstruct the original process without extra assumptions.

## What It Should Not Claim

- It is not a formal proof that every project plan is functorial.
- It is not a general route-planning engine.
- It is not the first public receiver for dynamic project states.
- It does not expose record-level DEVONthink provenance.

## Broader Scenario Boundary

The broader `processes to plans` foray has a private hill/travel scenario under review. That scenario
is useful because real route planning contains intention, constraints, resources, preferences,
weather, body state, and contingency decisions that should not be forced into a Petri net too early.

This public mirror only names the concept-level boundary. Detailed source notes, record titles, links,
and provenance stay in the private Portfolio Wave working folder until deliberately reviewed for
public use.