# EM-STR-02 provider comparison

Claude and Grok agree that WM-KNW-011 remains the Objective/Key Result/Target master, quantitative targets need exact Metric Definition revision pins, WM-XCT-025 has no standalone identity, and WM-ACT-034 is the Value Assessment activity. Both reject delivery, planned effects and KR attainment as proof of realised Outcome or Benefit.

Grok explicitly rejects the original combined Outcome and Benefit aggregate. Claude's identity/mastership table independently assigns separate identities and masters, so the same rejection is inferred rather than stated verbatim. Grok selects WM-MAT-008 as a candidate observation host under an unfrozen usage rule; Claude requires a named but still unassigned outcome-observation host. Revision 3 preserves both alternatives and asserts no settled catalogue relation.

The reconciled artifact is a non-allocating boundary register with two separate, non-binding potential-root sketches. Attribution Claim is a Benefit-owned revisable assertion. Adjudicated shares cannot exceed one, need not total one, and residual unattributed value is explicit. Benefit and Disbenefit are separate records using the same polarity-bearing candidate shape, not separate models. No ID or publication readiness is claimed.