feat(risk-monitor): measure the rule that fires, and give fundamentals their own channel

The Warning study measured a fitted percentile crossing that nothing consumes.
What reaches Telegram is a quadrant change: fixed 50/40 dividers, hysteresis,
two-session confirmation, 3-day cooldown. Those thresholds are constants, not
fits, so there is no training set to protect and all 11 detected corrections are
evaluable instead of the 4 that fell in a holdout.

Replaying it: 1/10 corrections, 0.9 false alarms/year. Random alarms at the same
firing rate match or beat that in 65% of draws. The panel now carries ablations
(does the quadrant machinery earn its place?), external baselines (does the score
earn its complexity?), and that null, because a bare "2 of 4" was unreadable in
either direction. Nothing in the alert path was retuned on the strength of it.

Fundamentals become a third channel rather than a term in either score. v3 cut
them arguing 12+8 of 100 points "could not change any published conclusion" --
true only when every technical sensor reads zero; weighted they moved the bar for
the 40 divider from 40 to 25. But no fusion weight is measurable either: with ~10
events and no fundamental history, any weight is a policy preference presented as
a measurement. So the read is a categorical state (supportive/neutral/adverse/
unknown) with an evidence grade, derived by fixed rules from stored facts, read
by confluence. The LLM extracts and explains; it does not score.

Absence stays absence throughout. `unknown` is unreachable by averaging, a stale
or empty observation may display but never confirm, extraction failures map to
`unknown` rather than `mixed`, and the study rows are coverage-matched and marked
not-measurable until enough corrections are covered -- otherwise a fortnight of
observations renders as 0/10 and reads as a failed test.

Observations become a real time series (migration 033); they lived in a single
overwritten settings slot, so no history existed to replay. Pre-rename snapshots
are adapted rather than discarded. METHODOLOGY stays v4 -- no score changed --
so no reseed; STUDY_SCHEMA moves to 3 and discards the cached report.

Post-deploy: re-run Event Study from Admin -> Jobs. The panel reads "not run yet"
until then.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

scripts/run_regime_monitor_calibration.py

@@ -18,6 +18,15 @@ The script refuses to emit a band recommendation unless every hard gate passes.
 That is deliberate: it must be structurally impossible to read a calibration
 result out of a run whose pipeline did not validate.
 
+**Fundamental channel note.** The sourced capex / earnings read is a separate
+categorical channel and is never a term in State or Warning, so every variant and
+gate below is unaffected by it. This harness passes no observation, which means
+the ``fundamental_context`` on each replayed row reads ``unknown`` -- correct, and
+the same thing production reports for a session nobody observed. Calibrating
+anything *about* that channel needs an observation series passed through
+``_compute_index(..., observations=...)``, and enough history to be worth
+calibrating against.
+
 Research branch only. Example:
 
   .\\.venv\\Scripts\\python.exe scripts\\run_regime_monitor_calibration.py ^