Field crosswalk — ELK (Eliciting Latent Knowledge)
ELK asks for reporters that reveal latent model knowledge rather than behavior-only simulators. When readout bandwidth tracks correction uptake, latent readout succeeds — but readout is an epistemic subchannel; latent readout can succeed while correction uptake fails.
What decision changes?
Treat ELK success as evidence about readout, not as certification that human correction still changes future behavior.
ELK targets a real failure mode of naive oversight: the monitor sees only behavior, not what the model knows. The book’s crosswalk places ELK as a latent-readout subchannel inside a broader correction and bundle transport problem — not as a replacement for correction-channel integrity.
Lean proves the forward link when readout bandwidth tracks correction uptake and the separation when readout succeeds without uptake. Native reporter/training theorem matching remains deferred; the spine records what is honestly machine-checked today: projection, separation, and imported handles citing the published agenda.
What ELK keeps that this crosswalk does not replace: a sharply posed benchmark problem with concrete proposals and counterexamples. Relocating it as a subchannel does not solve the readout problem.