projection is the paper's traderization construction

Enforcement of a quantitative price region is by the projection trader, which holds λ_n(proj_{K_n}(P_n) − P_n) on the day's fragment. The row construction is retained as the simpler special case, as the comparison, and as the source of the presentation-dependence observation; nothing about it is deleted or weakened, and for a single halfspace the two are the same trader. DistanceComplete and the d_∞ dual route leave the critical path, because the paper's ℓ^∞ conclusion follows from the Euclidean one at the same tolerance.

Three consequences settled with it.

The canonical intensity is calibrated, not merely bounded below. The construction uses ρ_n = ε_n + A_n and λ_n = ρ_n/δ_n² exactly, so the paper-facing budget carries no free parameter and its day charge is (ρ_n/δ_n)·d₂(W|_{Φ_n}, K_n). The identity λ_nδ_n = ρ_n/δ_n holds only at that value; the general free-λ theorem is kept as a supporting result.

The cube-extension correction is accepted. The market maker's day contract is applied at a point of the region, which is not a world; that extension is justified by affineness of a strategy's value together with the cube being the convex hull of the {0,1} assignments on the traded support. The point actually fed to the contract is the fragment target extended off the fragment by the displayed prices — a device for one inequality, not a credence. The credal conclusion concerns the fragment projection only.

The per-date-admission correction is accepted. Zero risk capital follows from admission by every region up to the horizon, not from world-inclusivity plus global nesting; global nesting is a sufficient condition for it. The weakening to admission at the final date is false, and there is a witness.

Statements of record: Workspace.Normativity.Contrib.Projection{Force,Market,Compiler, Budget,Calibrated,Enforcer} and Workspace.Normativity.Contrib.EnforcedComputation. Round: projects/normativity/rounds/2026-08-18-projection-enforcement.