# Correction: nine pattern counters were arithmetically impossible

- **Artifact ID:** CHQ-CORR-2026-025
- **Status:** IN FORCE
- **Public record:** https://record.cybersecurityhq.com/corrections/chq-corr-2026-025
- **Machine-record SHA-256:** `c18c9fd16ef58ad5c5283022e9eefcf7d109226dcf6af5b34b0b268a7ebc1f8b`

## Complete structured record

```json
{
  "id": "CHQ-CORR-2026-025",
  "class": "CORRECTION",
  "subtype": "control",
  "status": "IN FORCE",
  "authority": "DM ratified 2026-11-12",
  "effective": "2026-11-12",
  "published": "2026-11-12",
  "title": "Correction: nine pattern counters were arithmetically impossible",
  "what_was_wrong": "In an internal pattern summary, nine rows carried a 30-day reinforcement count larger than the 90-day count. The fields were maintained by hand and nothing recomputed them; several values were cumulative totals entered in the 30-day column. The summary also held one duplicate row and one misplaced cell.",
  "what_is_true": "These counters feed no condition count, rating or Outlook. The trigger engine computes its own windows from the evidence rows.",
  "what_changed": "Every counter was recomputed from typed fields under a stated rule: 30 and 90 calendar days ending on the run date, counting reinforcing and counted entries by catalog date, or by signal date where no catalog date exists. Sub-class counters were cleared because sub-class attribution is not held in a field. The duplicate row was marked and the misplaced text moved. Prior values are preserved in every earlier artifact.",
  "what_did_not_change": "Every condition count, rating and Outlook.",
  "control_analysis": "A gate check was added the same day so that an impossible counter cannot recur silently. The first application of this correction failed to clear some cells it logged as cleared; a negative test added with the new check caught that on its first run, and the cells were then cleared.",
  "found_by": "An external adversarial review."
}
```