Adaptive systems need rhythm
Continuous monitoring does not mean continuous structural change. A review cadence gives the ecology stable checkpoints for triage, pruning, promotion, and theory revision.
Recommended cadence
| Cadence | Review focus | Typical decisions |
|---|---|---|
| Daily | incidents, canaries, drift alarms, cost spikes | rollback, pause, investigate |
| Weekly | candidate pool, active population, router errors | promote to shadow, retire, archive |
| Monthly | benchmark freshness, niche coverage, operator performance | update suites, adjust thresholds |
| Quarterly | theory, governance, roadmap, human-capability outcomes | change policy, fund experiments |
Weekly population review
FUNCTION weekly_population_review(ecology, dashboards, policy)
candidates <- GET_CANDIDATES_READY_FOR_DECISION()
retirements <- FIND_NEGATIVE_RETENTION_MODULES(ecology)
drift <- SUMMARIZE_DRIFT(dashboards)
incidents <- SUMMARIZE_INCIDENTS(dashboards)
DECIDE(candidates, retirements, drift, incidents, policy)
WRITE_REVIEW_RECORD(created_at_utc: NOW_UTC())
END FUNCTIONMeeting artifacts
Each review should produce a short durable record: decisions, rejected alternatives, evidence links, owners, deadlines, and UTC timestamps. Do not rely on chat history as the only memory.
When to break cadence
Break cadence only for incidents, policy changes, major security findings, urgent capacity threats, or severe drift. Otherwise, the no-op state should be allowed to persist until the next review.
Human oversight load
Review cadence should fit human attention. If the system creates more review work than the team can perform, reduce candidate generation or increase automation only after the safety boundary is clear.
Source reports used for this guide
These reports are preserved verbatim in the site archive. The guide above is an editorial synthesis and may narrow, qualify, or reorganize claims from the source material.