Repository navigation
Adjudicate the incumbent's four post-calibration aggregate scalers #790
Description
Parent: #665 (WS-D/E boundary). Extracted from the 2026-08-14 adjudication request on #623 so the ruling has a home that survives #623 closing at the first certified cut; registered in #736.
The question
The incumbent runs four aggregate adjustments after calibration, on weighted sums:
- Rail-subsidy scaling to the ORR total
- Bus-subsidy scaling to the DfT total
- Fuel-litre-proxy scaling to HMRC road-fuel clearances
- Bus-fare rescale to the DfT total, which also reshapes the income gradient to NTS trips-per-quintile — a distributional operation, not only an aggregate one
Because they read calibrated weights, they cannot live in the WS-E source stages — the ports (#682 consumption/services, #685 bus fares) deliberately exclude them — and the calibration seam landed without them (#743, per the 2026-08-20 scope ruling). Nothing in the migrated pipeline reproduces their effect today.
The options
- (a) Port them as a declared post-calibration step in the seam, under adjudicated doctrine (each scaler a declared operation with its target total pinned as a chronicle fact, mass semantics recorded). Keeps the incumbent's published levels; adds a second adjustment layer after the solve.
- (b) Replace them with calibration targets — rail/bus subsidy totals and road-fuel volumes as chronicle facts the solver binds directly, letting reweighting do what the scalers did by multiplication. No post-solve mutation; distributional NTS gradient would need its own representation (quintile-level facts) or a signed limitation.
- (c) Sign their absence — accept the level gap on these four surfaces with tracked exclusions until (a) or (b) lands.
Evidence that bears on the ruling (2026-08-26, #757 branch)
The obr.fuel_duties investigation on the first live seam runs measured the frame carrying ~37% of implied road-fuel litres (LCFS two-week-diary zero-inflation: fuel-recording share 0.44 petrol / 0.19 diesel against ~78% car ownership), leaving obr.fuel_duties at −62.5% relative error. The incumbent's fuel-litre scaler to HMRC clearances compensated for exactly this under-capture. The scaler ruling and the pending fuel-duties disposition (household-incidence retarget vs total-receipts fact, flagged on #757) are the same question from two sides: whether the gap closes by scaling values, by binding volume targets, or by re-scoping the fact to what a household frame can carry.
Related: rail levels measured ~3.07× donor at #686 (after accounting for the incumbent's per-head division defect, policyengine-uk-data#469), so the rail scaler's effect is entangled with a known incumbent defect on the same surface.
Acceptance
- A ruling choosing (a), (b), or (c) per scaler — they need not share one answer; the NTS gradient reshape is adjudicated separately from the three pure aggregate scalings.
- The chosen mechanism lands with declared provenance (facts pinned, mass/distributional semantics recorded) or signed exclusions with tracking.
- The
obr.fuel_dutiesdisposition on Swap the microcosm-built UK spine into the national build and retire the incumbent feed #757 is resolved consistently with the fuel-scaler ruling.
🤖 Filed with Claude Code
Activity
Record the E9 licensed acceptance: twins, attribution, round-trip, pa…
Record the E9 licensed acceptance: twins, attribution, round-trip, pa…
Record the E9 licensed acceptance: twins, attribution, round-trip, pa…
juaristi22 commentedon Sep 3, 2026
Related incumbent filing: PolicyEngine/policyengine-uk-data#479 records that the four scalers run after the base-year materialisation, fitted at period 2025 on a 2024-stamped file, and that the saved file is therefore not uprate-invertible on those columns (PolicyEngine/policyengine-uk-data#480 documents this at the call site rather than reordering). Bearing on the ruling: microcosm has no base-year materialisation (the frame stays at 2024 and the seam computes at the calibration year), so under (a) the factors would be fitted at the period the artifact is consumed at and declared as operations; under (b) the question is moot; the invertibility argument is an argument for (b).
juaristi22 commentedon Sep 9, 2026
Ruling 2026-09-09: option (b) for all four scalers — bind the publisher facts and let the solver calibrate; no post-solve multiplication. The NTS income gradient becomes a declared margin against the NTS0705a facts rather than a post-solve reshape. The
obr.fuel_dutiesdisposition follows the same path (household-incidence fact plus HMRC volume control) instead of a value scaler.Implementation moves to #890, which carries the measured anatomy (London −57% / outside London +37% under the England-only binding; the has-fuel bridge deleting about a fifth of donor fuel mass; BUS0415 unconsumed at about ×1.11 outside London). The source facts the path needs — HMRC clearances, OBR receipts by vehicle type, DESNZ pump prices, Transport Scotland / Welsh Government / DfI bus finance, NEED, Ofgem cap rates and standing charges, ORR rail support — are requested in PolicyEngine/chronicle#254.
Closing this adjudication issue; #890 is the tracking home from here.
Bind the DfT London bus rows at region level and derive England outsi…
Bind the DfT London bus rows at region level and derive England outsi…
Make the energy_rake gate a fact check with one declared residual tol…
Make the energy_rake gate a fact check with one declared residual tol…