meta:
  id: sec-analysis
  title: "SEC Document Analysis"
  subtitle: "Filing Intelligence with Episteme"
  version: "1.0.0"

actors: {}

slides:
  # ============================================
  # TITLE
  # ============================================
  - type: title
    id: title

  # ============================================
  # HOOK
  # ============================================
  - type: hook
    id: hook
    line: "Your filings contradict each other."
    subline: "And every agent reading them gets a different answer."

  # ============================================
  # THE DRIFT - Revenue
  # ============================================
  - type: code
    id: drift-revenue
    title: "10-K: Annual revenue"
    code: |
      // Agent extracts from 10-K filing
      // CIK: 0001234567, Filed: 2024-02-28

      {
        "subject": "ACME/revenue/annual",
        "source": "10-K/2023",
        "value": "$847M"
      }

  - type: code
    id: drift-revenue-2
    title: "10-Q: Quarterly revenue tells a different story"
    code: |
      // Agent extracts from Q4 10-Q filing
      // Same company, same fiscal year

      {
        "subject": "ACME/revenue/Q4",
        "source": "10-Q/2023-Q4",
        "value": "$218M"
      }

      // Q1 + Q2 + Q3 + Q4 = $872M annualized
      // 10-K says $847M
      // Delta: $25M. Which is right?

  # ============================================
  # THE DRIFT - Amendments
  # ============================================
  - type: code
    id: drift-amendment
    title: "Original 10-K: No impairment"
    code: |
      // Filed: 2024-02-28
      // Form: 10-K

      {
        "subject": "ACME/goodwill/impairment",
        "source": "10-K/2023",
        "value": "$0"
      }

      // Clean bill of health.

  - type: code
    id: drift-amendment-2
    title: "10-K/A: $340M impairment appears"
    code: |
      // Filed: 2024-06-15 (amended filing)
      // Form: 10-K/A

      {
        "subject": "ACME/goodwill/impairment",
        "source": "10-K-A/2023",
        "value": "$340M"
      }

      // The amendment supersedes the original.
      // But which sections? All of them? Just Note 7?
      // The rest of the 10-K -- still valid?

  # ============================================
  # THE SPIRAL
  # ============================================
  - type: code
    id: spiral
    title: "Same data, extracted 3 times, 3 answers"
    code: |
      // Q3 Revenue appears in:
      "10-Q/2023-Q3"    ->  $213M    // quarterly filing
      "10-K/2023"       ->  $209M    // annual summary table
      "DEF 14A/2024"    ->  $211M    // proxy exec comp section

      // Two analysts read the same proxy statement
      // Analyst A: CEO comp = $14.2M (includes options)
      // Analyst B: CEO comp = $8.7M  (base + bonus only)

      // Both are "correct" -- different definitions

  - type: hook
    id: spiral-question
    line: "Which extraction is correct?"
    subline: "Depends on the filing, the section, and what you're measuring."

  # ============================================
  # THE CATASTROPHE
  # ============================================
  - type: code
    id: catastrophe
    title: "The Catastrophe"
    code: |
      // Agent builds a DCF model
      // Revenue: pulled from 10-K/A        -> $847M (amended)
      // Cost of revenue: pulled from 10-K   -> $612M (original)
      //
      // But the amendment changed cost allocations too.
      // Actual cost of revenue post-amendment: $658M
      //
      // Gross margin: 27.7% (agent's model)
      // Actual:       22.3%
      //
      // DCF valuation: off by $180M
      //
      // The model mixed amended and pre-amendment data
      // because there was no way to track the amendment chain.

  - type: code
    id: catastrophe-why
    title: "The Root Cause"
    code: |
      // Filings were stored as flat key-value pairs
      // No amendment chain linking 10-K to 10-K/A
      // No section-level tracking
      // No way to know which data points were superseded
      //
      // The agent had no concept of "this number was restated"
      // It just grabbed the first match for each field
      //
      // Garbage in, $180M garbage out.

  # ============================================
  # THE FIX - Episteme
  # ============================================
  - type: hook
    id: fix-intro
    line: "What if filings carried their own lineage?"
    subline: "Every extraction linked to its source, section, and amendment chain."

  - type: code
    id: fix-store
    title: "Store extractions with filing metadata"
    code: |
      episteme.assert({
        subject: "ACME/revenue/annual/2023",
        predicate: "value",
        value: "$847M",

        source: {
          cik: "0001234567",
          form: "10-K",
          filed: "2024-02-28",
          section: "Part II, Item 8",
          accession: "0001234567-24-000042"
        },

        lifecycle: "current",
        confidence: 0.95
      });

  - type: code
    id: fix-amendment
    title: "Amendments supersede cleanly"
    code: |
      // When the 10-K/A arrives:
      episteme.assert({
        subject: "ACME/goodwill/impairment/2023",
        predicate: "value",
        value: "$340M",

        source: {
          form: "10-K/A",
          filed: "2024-06-15",
          amends: "0001234567-24-000042",   // links to original
          sections_amended: ["Note 7", "Part II Item 8"]
        },

        lifecycle: "current",
        supersedes: "ax7f3k9..."   // the $0 assertion
      });

      // The original $0 assertion is now lifecycle: "superseded"
      // Sections NOT in sections_amended remain valid

  - type: code
    id: fix-query
    title: "Query with lifecycle: only current data"
    code: |
      // Agent building a DCF model queries:
      const revenue = await episteme.query({
        subject: "ACME/revenue/annual/2023",
        lifecycle: "current"
      });
      // Returns $847M from 10-K/A (amended value)

      const cost = await episteme.query({
        subject: "ACME/cost-of-revenue/annual/2023",
        lifecycle: "current"
      });
      // Returns $658M from 10-K/A (amended value)

      // Both values from the same amendment.
      // No mixing. No $180M error.

  # ============================================
  # TIME TRAVEL
  # ============================================
  - type: code
    id: time-travel
    title: "What did we believe before the restatement?"
    code: |
      // Audit question: what was our position on March 1?
      // (before the 10-K/A was filed on June 15)

      episteme.query({
        subject: "ACME/goodwill/impairment/2023",
        as_of: "2024-03-01T00:00:00Z"
      });

      // Returns: $0 (the original 10-K assertion)
      // At that point, that WAS the truth.

      episteme.diff({
        subject: "ACME/goodwill/impairment/2023",
        from: "2024-03-01",
        to: "2024-07-01"
      });

      // Shows: 10-K/A filed June 15, impairment changed $0 -> $340M
      // Full audit trail. No guessing.

  # ============================================
  # MULTI-ANALYST
  # ============================================
  - type: code
    id: multi-analyst
    title: "Competing extractions coexist"
    code: |
      // Analyst A extracts CEO comp from proxy (DEF 14A)
      episteme.assert({
        subject: "ACME/exec-comp/CEO/2023",
        value: "$14.2M",
        source: { form: "DEF 14A", section: "Summary Compensation" },
        confidence: 0.9,
        author: "analyst-A"
      });

      // Analyst B extracts from the same proxy
      episteme.assert({
        subject: "ACME/exec-comp/CEO/2023",
        value: "$8.7M",
        source: { form: "DEF 14A", section: "Summary Compensation" },
        confidence: 0.85,
        author: "analyst-B"
      });

      // Both assertions coexist. No overwrite.

  - type: code
    id: multi-analyst-resolve
    title: "Lens resolves at query time"
    code: |
      // Default lens: highest confidence wins
      episteme.query({
        subject: "ACME/exec-comp/CEO/2023",
        lens: "authority"
      });
      // Returns: $14.2M (analyst-A, confidence 0.9)

      // But you can ask: show me all claims
      episteme.query({
        subject: "ACME/exec-comp/CEO/2023",
        lens: "all"
      });
      // Returns both: $14.2M and $8.7M
      // With full provenance on each

      // The disagreement IS the signal.
      // Someone needs to reconcile definitions.

  # ============================================
  # VISION
  # ============================================
  - type: vision
    id: vision
    title: "Episteme"
    points:
      - "Amendment chains, not flat overwrites."
      - "Section-level provenance for every extraction."
      - "Competing analyst reads coexist until resolved."
      - "Time travel for audit and restatement analysis."
    tagline: "Git for Truth"
