fix(rectification): treat a yes discriminator as covering that domain's collect

A choice-card yes/weak_yes already told us the domain happened, so skip the same-domain "which year" collect without writing the ledger.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>

CHANGELOG.md

@@ -1,5 +1,9 @@
 # 印度占星 Skill 更新日志
 
+## 2026-09-05 — 区分卡答发生了之后不再问同一领域哪年
+
+生时校正里，如果刚在选择卡上确认某类经历发生过，不会紧接着再问「还记得哪年…」同一领域的采集题。点选仍不记入证据账本。那年没有或记不清时，仍可以问别的年份。Skill 版本仍是 10.0.14。
+
 ## 2026-09-05 — 报告页可下载全量数据附录
 
 主报告仍是五章叙事。ready 之后可以另下一份 Markdown 全量数据附录（三年年度、KP 月度、功能吉凶、校时敏感度等）。附录失败只显示暂不可用，不会把主报告打回失败，也不退款。Skill 版本未变。

docs/BUG_HISTORY.md

@@ -8470,3 +8470,19 @@
 - 复发自：无
 - 修复版本：`52a4570c`
 
+## BUG-549 | 区分卡答「发生了」后仍问同一领域哪年采集
+
+- 状态：resolved
+- 首次发现：2026-09-05
+- 最近更新：2026-09-05
+- 影响面：`buildMethodFollowupPlan`、`datedCollectDomainBlocked`、`rectificationFollowupCatalog`
+- 用户现象：刚在事业区分卡上点选「发生了」，下一问又是「工作上呢，还记得哪年入职、换工作…」。
+- 触发条件：账本没有该领域带年份证据；区分卡答案只进推断层；本轮已无剩余区分卡，计划层按账本判断领域未覆盖。
+- 根因：点选答案不写证据账本（BUG-389–393 分层，本单不推翻）。计划层 `careerCovered` / `datedCollectDomainBlocked` 只看账本。BUG-547 之后区分卡问完才进采集链，刚答过的领域会被再问一次。
+- 修复：`yes` / `weak_yes` 的领域视为采集已覆盖（用 `eventProbes` 按 `semantic_key` / `probe_id` 回查 domain，回查不到则忽略）。不写账本，不改 `meetsAcceptanceEventQuality`，不改确认门。`no` / `unsure` 不算覆盖。
+- 验证：`frontend/tests/rectification-collect-direction-20260904.test.ts`：账本无事业证据、事业探针答 yes 后下一问不是事业采集；答 no 仍问。BUG-546/547 既有用例仍过。
+- 防复发：不得把点选答案写入证据账本来「修」重复采集。不得用 `semantic_key` 前缀硬拆领域。不得加「除了刚才那次以外」这类补丁文案。
+- 相关记录：BUG-389、BUG-546、BUG-547
+- 复发自：无
+- 修复版本：待发布
+

docs/tasks/PROGRESS-rectification-probe-answer-covers-domain-20260905.md

@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+# PROGRESS · 区分卡答「发生了」视为该领域采集已覆盖（2026-09-05）
+
+工作树：`.worktrees/rectification-probe-answer-covers-domain-20260905`
+分支：`codex/rectification-probe-answer-covers-domain-20260905`
+基线：`origin/staging` @ `2dc61946`（任务书）。未改 `.gitea/workflows/**`、未动迁移、未升级依赖、未 bump Skill（仍 10.0.14）、未改 `page.tsx`。
+
+| 任务 | 状态 | BUG |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+| 点选 A/B 覆盖该领域采集，不写账本、不动门 | 完成 | BUG-549 |
+
+## 编号
+
+开工时最大号 BUG-548。本单 **BUG-549**。未占用预留的 BUG-542。
+
+## 产品取舍
+
+任务书决策 2 允许否决「答 C/D 后仍可马上问同领域采集」。本单**保留原文**：C/D 不算覆盖。区分卡谈的是那一个年份窗口；采集问的是别的年份。隔一轮只是把同一问推迟，会把调度混进覆盖判定，也不减少信息差。未加「除了刚才那次以外」文案。
+
+`decideFromDossier` 里只用来算 `methodCoverageAll` / `datedMethodCollectOpen` 的轻量 `buildMethodFollowupPlan` 仍只看账本，训练门与确认门输入不变。出题计划通过 `rectificationFollowupCatalog.answeredProbes` 透传。`adopt-narration.ts` 不调用 `buildMethodFollowupPlan`，无需改。
+
+## 实现要点
+
+- `domainsAnsweredYes`：用 `eventProbes`（外加同类型的 clarification / collection 探针）按 `semantic_key` / `probe_id` 回查 `domain`；回查不到忽略，不从前缀拆领域。
+- `relationshipCovered` / `careerCovered` / `familyCovered` 与 `datedCollectDomainBlocked` 叠加 `answeredYes`。
+- `classified_from: "evidence"` 不算覆盖。
+
+## 测试
+
+| 命令 | 结果 |
+| --- | --- |
+| collect-direction + choice-card | 52/52 |
+| `npx tsx --test tests/rectification-*.test.ts tests/agent-voice-copy-contract.test.ts` | 898 项；pass 898；fail 0；cancelled 0；skipped 0 |
+| `npx tsc --noEmit` | 0 错 |
+| 改动文件 eslint `--quiet` | 0 error |
+| `page.tsx` | 未改 |
+
+未做浏览器真人走查。清单：`docs/testing/rectification-probe-answer-covers-domain-20260905.md`。旧会话在部署前仍会按旧逻辑再问一遍。

docs/tasks/README.md

@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@
 | — | `PROGRESS-rectification-adopt-card-anchor-20260905.md` | 采用卡钉在历史采集题下，最新旁白没有卡；单分钟交付旁白机器腔 | 已验收通过（浏览器走查欠） | `codex/rectification-quality-probe-dedupe-20260904`（BUG-544～545） |
 | — | `PROGRESS-rectification-family-collect-continue-20260905.md` | 家人答「没有」后直接给结果，未继续收能区分分钟的经历 | 已由 cd704a92 修正并验收通过 | `codex/rectification-quality-probe-dedupe-20260904`（BUG-546） |
 | `TASK-rectification-family-collect-continue-fix-20260905.md` | `PROGRESS-rectification-family-collect-continue-20260905.md` | `998406ce` 修复单：家人之后的 dated 补采集无条件抢在现成区分卡之前（choice-card A/B 卡用例回归），另两条顺序断言缺三栏说明 | 已验收通过（浏览器走查欠） | `cd704a92`（BUG-547） |
-| `TASK-rectification-probe-answer-covers-domain-20260905.md` | — | 区分卡答 A/B 后紧接着又问同领域"哪年…"采集题：点选答案只进推断层不写账本，计划层领域覆盖只看账本；改为 yes/weak_yes 视为该领域采集已覆盖（不写账本、不动门） | 待执行 | `codex/rectification-probe-answer-covers-domain-20260905`（BUG-549 起） |
+| `TASK-rectification-probe-answer-covers-domain-20260905.md` | `PROGRESS-rectification-probe-answer-covers-domain-20260905.md` | 区分卡答 A/B 后紧接着又问同领域"哪年…"采集题：点选答案只进推断层不写账本，计划层领域覆盖只看账本；改为 yes/weak_yes 视为该领域采集已覆盖（不写账本、不动门） | 待验收 | `codex/rectification-probe-answer-covers-domain-20260905`（BUG-549） |
 | `TASK-api-not-configured-mislabel-20260904.md` | — | 16 处路由把数据库瞬断（部署切换窗口）兜底翻译成 503「服务尚未配置」；改为仅配置错误用该文案，其余 `service_unavailable`，收敛为共享 helper | 待执行 | `codex/api-not-configured-mislabel-20260904`（BUG-542 起） |
 | `TASK-rectification-ux-20260902.md` | `PROGRESS-rectification-ux-20260903.md` | 会话面空白假死与交互摩擦 | 已验收 | `d159f08e`（09-03 在新基线重做后合入，BUG-505～509） |
 

docs/testing/rectification-probe-answer-covers-domain-20260905.md

@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+# Staging 人肉复核 · 区分卡答发生了之后不再问同一领域哪年（2026-09-05）
+
+给产品负责人。不要把真实案例里的年份、事件或候选分钟写进任何记录。
+
+对应 BUG-549。测之前先做第 0 条。本单部署前，旧会话仍可能在区分卡答「发生了」后马上问同一领域「哪年…」。
+
+## 0. 确认测的是新版本
+
+浏览器打开 `https://staging.jyotisha.chat/api/health`，看 `deployment.gitCommit` 前 8 位是否等于本单合入 staging 后的提交。不一致 = 先别测。
+
+## 1. 事业区分卡答「发生了」后不要再问哪年入职（P0）
+
+1. 新建生时校正。
+2. 先补齐能把对话推到区分卡的带年份经历（不要口述补一条事业入职）。
+3. 出现事业区分卡：「某年某月前后，有没有入职、换工作或职责加重？」点 A 或 B（发生了 / 比较像发生了）。
+4. 把其余区分卡答完，直到下一问变成口述采集。
+
+- ✅ 预期：下一句**不是**「工作上呢，还记得哪年入职、换工作，或职责一下子变重吗？」可以是别的还没问过的领域（钱、搬家、身体、家人、学业）或职业口述。
+- ❌ 失败：紧接着又问「工作上呢，还记得哪年入职…」。
+
+## 2. 事业区分卡答「没有」后仍可问哪年（P0）
+
+同一路径，事业区分卡点 C（那年没发生）或 D（记不清）：
+
+- ✅ 预期：后面仍可以出现事业采集「工作上呢，还记得哪年入职…」。那年没有，别的年份仍可能有。
+- ❌ 失败：因为点了 C/D，事业采集整条线被关掉。
+
+## 3. 不要出现补丁口吻（P1）
+
+- ✅ 预期：采集题仍是原来的「工作上呢，还记得哪年…」，没有「除了刚才那次以外」这类句子。
+- ❌ 失败：为了回避重复而改写了采集原文。

frontend/src/lib/rectification-agentic/v9/answer-choice.ts

@@ -1048,9 +1048,15 @@ async function persistExhaustionCollect(input: {
   hostNarration: string;
   focus?: ConversationFocus | null;
 }> {
+  const catalog = rectificationFollowupCatalog(
+    input.dossier.latestResult ?? null,
+    input.dossier.evidence,
+  );
   const followup = exhaustionSpokenCollectFollowup({
     evidence: input.dossier.evidence,
     declinedTopics: input.dossier.conversationSummary.declinedSkippedTopics,
+    answeredProbes: catalog.answeredProbes,
+    eventProbes: catalog.eventProbes,
   });
   const range = nonConvergingRangeNarration({
     ...input.decision,

frontend/src/lib/rectification-agentic/v9/decision-from-dossier.ts

@@ -282,6 +282,7 @@ export function rectificationFollowupCatalog(
     contrastPacket: contrastPacketFromLatestResult(latest ?? null, evidence),
     topCandidateTimes,
     askedProbeKeys: askedKeys,
+    answeredProbes: inference?.answered_probes ?? [],
     eventProbes: refinement.discriminating_event_probes,
     eventClarificationProbes: refinement.event_clarification_probes,
     evidenceCollectionProbes: refinement.evidence_collection_probes,

frontend/src/lib/rectification-agentic/v9/method-followup.ts

@@ -33,6 +33,8 @@
  * Known-event quality probes (exam went badly for a year already
  * in the ledger) are not reverse-inference cards. Dasha existence
  * probes skip a year already in the ledger, not the whole domain.
+ * A yes/weak_yes discriminator answer covers that domain's spoken
+ * collect without writing the ledger. no/unsure does not.
  * Contrast-packet ranking must use the same year rule: a dated
  * unstructured probe stays eligible when the domain already has a
  * different year. Information gain is recomputed on the current
@@ -223,6 +225,47 @@ function hasConfirmedDomain(evidence: readonly MethodFollowupEvidence[], domain:
   return evidence.some((item) => item.status === "confirmed" && item.domain === domain);
 }
 
+export type AnsweredProbeCoverageRow = Readonly<{
+  semantic_key: string;
+  probe_id?: string;
+  answer_class: string;
+  classified_from?: string;
+}>;
+
+function domainForAnsweredProbe(
+  answer: AnsweredProbeCoverageRow,
+  eventProbes: readonly DiscriminatingEventProbe[],
+): string | null {
+  const keys = new Set(
+    [answer.semantic_key, answer.probe_id].filter((key): key is string => Boolean(key?.trim())),
+  );
+  if (keys.size === 0) return null;
+  for (const probe of eventProbes) {
+    const semantic = probe.semantic_key?.trim() ?? "";
+    if (!semantic || !keys.has(semantic)) continue;
+    const domain = probe.domain?.trim();
+    if (domain) return domain;
+  }
+  return null;
+}
+
+/** Domains where a discriminator was answered yes/weak_yes. Lookup is by probe identity, not key prefix. */
+export function domainsAnsweredYes(
+  answeredProbes: readonly AnsweredProbeCoverageRow[] | undefined,
+  eventProbes: readonly DiscriminatingEventProbe[] | undefined,
+): Set<string> {
+  const domains = new Set<string>();
+  if (!answeredProbes?.length) return domains;
+  const catalog = eventProbes ?? [];
+  for (const answer of answeredProbes) {
+    if (answer.answer_class !== "yes" && answer.answer_class !== "weak_yes") continue;
+    if (answer.classified_from && answer.classified_from !== "choice") continue;
+    const domain = domainForAnsweredProbe(answer, catalog);
+    if (domain) domains.add(domain);
+  }
+  return domains;
+}
+
 function evidenceYear(item: MethodFollowupEvidence): number | null {
   const raw = item.occurredFrom || item.occurredTo;
   if (!raw || raw.length < 4 || !/^\d{4}/.test(raw)) return null;
@@ -1070,19 +1113,26 @@ function datedCollectDomainBlocked(
   domain: (typeof DATED_COLLECT_ORDER)[number],
   evidence: readonly MethodFollowupEvidence[],
   declined: ReadonlySet<string>,
+  answeredYes: ReadonlySet<string> = new Set(),
 ): boolean {
   if (domain === "health_pressure") {
-    return declinedHealth(declined) || hasConfirmedHealth(evidence);
+    return declinedHealth(declined)
+      || hasConfirmedHealth(evidence)
+      || answeredYes.has("health_pressure")
+      || answeredYes.has("health");
   }
-  return declined.has(domain) || hasConfirmedDomain(evidence, domain);
+  return declined.has(domain)
+    || hasConfirmedDomain(evidence, domain)
+    || answeredYes.has(domain);
 }
 
 export function nextDatedCollectFollowup(
   evidence: readonly MethodFollowupEvidence[],
   declined: ReadonlySet<string>,
+  answeredYes: ReadonlySet<string> = new Set(),
 ): MethodFollowup | null {
   for (const domain of DATED_COLLECT_ORDER) {
-    if (datedCollectDomainBlocked(domain, evidence, declined)) continue;
+    if (datedCollectDomainBlocked(domain, evidence, declined, answeredYes)) continue;
     const next = datedCollectFollowup(domain, evidence);
     if (next) return next;
   }
@@ -1125,9 +1175,12 @@ function otherCollectFollowup(evidence: readonly MethodFollowupEvidence[]): Meth
 export function exhaustionSpokenCollectFollowup(input: {
   evidence: readonly MethodFollowupEvidence[];
   declinedTopics?: readonly Readonly<Record<string, unknown>>[];
+  answeredProbes?: readonly AnsweredProbeCoverageRow[];
+  eventProbes?: readonly DiscriminatingEventProbe[];
 }): MethodFollowup | null {
   const declined = declinedDomains(input.declinedTopics ?? []);
-  const dated = nextDatedCollectFollowup(input.evidence, declined);
+  const answeredYes = domainsAnsweredYes(input.answeredProbes, input.eventProbes);
+  const dated = nextDatedCollectFollowup(input.evidence, declined, answeredYes);
   if (dated) return dated;
   if (
     !declined.has("occupation")
@@ -1506,6 +1559,7 @@ export function buildMethodFollowupPlan(input: {
   eventClarificationProbes?: readonly DiscriminatingEventProbe[];
   evidenceCollectionProbes?: readonly DiscriminatingEventProbe[];
   askedProbeKeys?: readonly string[];
+  answeredProbes?: readonly AnsweredProbeCoverageRow[];
   closedCollectFocuses?: readonly Readonly<Record<string, unknown>>[];
   birthDate?: string | null;
   accepted?: boolean;
@@ -1559,10 +1613,18 @@ export function buildMethodFollowupPlan(input: {
   const ask = (why: string, varga: string, extra = "") =>
     agentHint(why, varga, extra, input.evidence);
   const declined = declinedDomains(input.declinedTopics ?? []);
+  const answeredYes = domainsAnsweredYes(input.answeredProbes, [
+    ...(input.eventProbes ?? []),
+    ...(input.eventClarificationProbes ?? []),
+    ...(input.evidenceCollectionProbes ?? []),
+  ]);
   const dashaCovered = input.evidence.some(isConfirmedDated);
-  const relationshipCovered = hasConfirmedDomain(input.evidence, "relationship");
-  const careerCovered = hasConfirmedDomain(input.evidence, "career");
-  const familyCovered = hasConfirmedDomain(input.evidence, "family");
+  const relationshipCovered = hasConfirmedDomain(input.evidence, "relationship")
+    || answeredYes.has("relationship");
+  const careerCovered = hasConfirmedDomain(input.evidence, "career")
+    || answeredYes.has("career");
+  const familyCovered = hasConfirmedDomain(input.evidence, "family")
+    || answeredYes.has("family");
   const financeCovered = hasConfirmedDomain(input.evidence, "finance");
   const healthCovered = hasConfirmedHealth(input.evidence);
   const occupationCovered = hasConfirmedDomain(input.evidence, "occupation")
@@ -2120,7 +2182,7 @@ export function buildMethodFollowupPlan(input: {
     && precisionCard?.choice_frame
   ) {
     next = precisionCard;
-  } else if ((datedCollect = nextDatedCollectFollowup(input.evidence, declined))) {
+  } else if ((datedCollect = nextDatedCollectFollowup(input.evidence, declined, answeredYes))) {
     next = makeFollowup(datedCollect);
   } else if (!occupationCovered) {
     if (meetsAcceptanceEventQuality(input.evidence)) {

frontend/tests/rectification-collect-direction-20260904.test.ts

@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ import {
   spokenFollowupForUser,
   type MethodFollowupEvidence,
 } from "../src/lib/rectification-agentic/v9/method-followup.ts";
+import type { DiscriminatingEventProbe } from "../src/lib/rectification-agentic/v9/refinement-packet.ts";
 import { persistNextInterviewAfterChoice } from "../src/lib/rectification-agentic/v9/answer-choice.ts";
 import { projectTurnDecision } from "../src/lib/rectification-agentic/v9/turn-decision.ts";
 import { parseV9CaseDossier } from "../src/lib/rectification-agentic/v9/tool-service.ts";
@@ -472,3 +473,99 @@ test("turn decision and GET interview expose collection_progress 2/3/1 or null",
   );
   assert.match(tools, /采集题必须写出服务端给你的领域/);
 });
+
+const CAREER_EXISTENCE_PROBE: DiscriminatingEventProbe = {
+  year: 2011,
+  year_label: "2011 年前后",
+  domain: "career",
+  event_family: "入职、换工作或职责加重",
+  source: "dasha_activation",
+  tracks: ["vimshottari", "narayana"],
+  tracks_agree: true,
+  unique_minute_claim: false,
+  user_meaning: "年份锁定 2011 年前后。事件家族：入职、换工作或职责加重。",
+  role: "distinguish",
+  information_gain: 0.4,
+  candidate_ids: ["05:00", "05:20"],
+  expected_outcomes: [
+    { answer_class: "yes", supports: ["05:00"], conflicts: ["05:20"] },
+    { answer_class: "no", supports: ["05:20"], conflicts: ["05:00"] },
+  ],
+  semantic_key: "career.2011",
+  candidate_split_hash: "career.2011:05:00|05:20",
+  choice_kind: "existence",
+};
+
+const RELATIONSHIP_AND_FAMILY = [
+  dated("relationship", "2014", { eventKind: "relationship_start" }),
+  dated("family", "2016", { eventKind: "family_event" }),
+] as const;
+
+function careerAnswerPlan(answerClass: string, extra: Partial<Parameters<typeof buildMethodFollowupPlan>[0]> = {}) {
+  return buildMethodFollowupPlan({
+    evidence: RELATIONSHIP_AND_FAMILY,
+    eventProbes: [CAREER_EXISTENCE_PROBE],
+    askedProbeKeys: ["career.2011", "probe:career.2011"],
+    answeredProbes: [{
+      semantic_key: "career.2011",
+      probe_id: "probe:career.2011",
+      answer_class: answerClass,
+      classified_from: "choice",
+    }],
+    holdoutValidation: "not_started",
+    ...extra,
+  });
+}
+
+test("career discriminator yes covers career collect without ledger career evidence", () => {
+  const unanswered = buildMethodFollowupPlan({
+    evidence: RELATIONSHIP_AND_FAMILY,
+    eventProbes: [CAREER_EXISTENCE_PROBE],
+    askedProbeKeys: ["career.2011", "probe:career.2011"],
+    holdoutValidation: "not_started",
+  });
+  assert.equal(unanswered.next_followup?.domain, "career");
+  assert.equal(unanswered.next_followup?.intent, "collect_method_evidence");
+  assert.equal(spokenFollowupForUser(unanswered.next_followup), USER_COLLECT_QUESTION.career);
+
+  const yes = careerAnswerPlan("yes");
+  assert.notEqual(yes.next_followup?.domain, "career");
+  assert.equal(yes.next_followup?.domain, "education");
+  assert.equal(yes.next_followup?.intent, "collect_method_evidence");
+  assert.equal(spokenFollowupForUser(yes.next_followup), USER_COLLECT_QUESTION.education);
+  assert.equal(
+    yes.methods.find((item) => item.method_id === "d10_career")?.status,
+    "covered",
+  );
+
+  const weakYes = careerAnswerPlan("weak_yes");
+  assert.notEqual(weakYes.next_followup?.domain, "career");
+  assert.equal(weakYes.next_followup?.domain, "education");
+
+  const no = careerAnswerPlan("no");
+  assert.equal(no.next_followup?.domain, "career");
+  assert.equal(spokenFollowupForUser(no.next_followup), USER_COLLECT_QUESTION.career);
+
+  const unsure = careerAnswerPlan("unsure");
+  assert.equal(unsure.next_followup?.domain, "career");
+  assert.equal(spokenFollowupForUser(unsure.next_followup), USER_COLLECT_QUESTION.career);
+});
+
+test("career discriminator yes does not invent coverage from a semantic_key prefix", () => {
+  const plan = careerAnswerPlan("yes", { eventProbes: [] });
+  assert.equal(plan.next_followup?.domain, "career");
+  assert.equal(spokenFollowupForUser(plan.next_followup), USER_COLLECT_QUESTION.career);
+});
+
+test("ledger-classified career probe answers do not cover career collect", () => {
+  const plan = careerAnswerPlan("yes", {
+    answeredProbes: [{
+      semantic_key: "career.2011",
+      probe_id: "probe:career.2011",
+      answer_class: "yes",
+      classified_from: "evidence",
+    }],
+  });
+  assert.equal(plan.next_followup?.domain, "career");
+  assert.equal(spokenFollowupForUser(plan.next_followup), USER_COLLECT_QUESTION.career);
+});