Mechanism

Nuclear Context Reset as Execution Recovery

Why I learned to delete entire sessions without flinching -- and how the 8.5x recovery multiplier proved that destroying corrupted context is the fastest path forward.

68
Commits on January 28 -- 3rd highest single day across the entire 116-day dataset
596,903
Lines of production code shipped across 10 systems in 4 months
2,561
Raw commits across the full portfolio with zero sustained velocity dips from resets

The Problem

I have sat in sessions where every correction made things worse. Not a little worse -- unpredictably worse. I would fix the AI's understanding of one component and watch it break its understanding of three others. The accumulated history of instructions, corrections, clarifications, and patches had become so tangled that the context itself was the obstacle. This is not drift. Drift is incremental misalignment you can diagnose and correct with a recap. This is poisoning -- corruption so deep and layered that untangling it costs more than starting over.

The instinct is to keep going. I have invested three hours in this session. I cannot just throw that away. That instinct is the sunk cost effect working against me. The three hours are spent regardless of what I do next. The only question that matters is whether the next hour will produce value or waste. With poisoned context, the next hour will be wasted. Every additional instruction interacts with the corruption and produces output that is wrong in ways I cannot predict or efficiently correct.

Traditional execution culture reinforces this trap. Restart is framed as failure -- an admission that you made the wrong call. So operators push forward through sessions that are actively working against them, burning hours to protect an ego investment in the original approach. I did this too, until I realized the math was obvious: when Foundation holds my actual work product and the only thing I am destroying is corrupted conversation history, restart is not failure. It is the highest-value action available.

What Stop. Run It Back Actually Is

Stop. Run It Back is the nuclear reset option within CEM's three-level escalation chain. It deploys only after lighter interventions fail -- Stop, Pause, Reset could not restore clarity, and Stop and Recap revealed that the AI's understanding is fundamentally corrupted, not merely drifted. At that point, the only rational action is complete destruction of the session context and a clean-slate restart from Foundation.

What it provides:

  • Complete context destruction -- the poisoned conversation history, accumulated corrections, and layered misunderstandings are deleted entirely, not archived. Deletion forces commitment to the fresh start.
  • A deliberate fresh start effect -- opening a new session creates a real temporal landmark. The operator enters without accumulated frustration, cognitive fixation, or attachment to the failed approach.

What it does not provide:

  • Permission to skip the escalation chain -- Stop. Run It Back is the nuclear option, not the first option. If a lighter fix would work, use it. Nuclear resets are more expensive than recaps even with Foundation backing.
  • A fix for upstream problems -- if Vision or Target is unclear, a fresh session will hit the same wall with a different approach. Repeated nuclear resets without resolution is a signal that the problem is strategic, not tactical.

The Escalation Chain and the January 27 Nuclear Reset

The escalation chain exists because not every problem needs a nuclear solution. Three levels, deployed in order:

Stop, Pause, Reset is the light fix. I reset my own perspective. If clarity returns, I resume in the same session. Most problems resolve here.

Stop and Recap is the medium fix. I ask the AI to play back its understanding. If the shared reality is recoverable -- if I can see where it drifted and correct it -- I resume with recalibrated context.

Stop. Run It Back is the nuclear reset. The recap revealed that the AI's model is fundamentally broken. Corrections will not fix it. The context is the problem. I close the session, delete the thread, and start fresh.

On January 27, 2026, an AI tool deleted the PRJ-02 landing page instead of modifying it. I escalated through the full chain. Stop, Pause, Reset failed to restore clarity. Stop and Recap revealed fundamental context corruption -- the AI's understanding was beyond repair. I deployed Stop. Run It Back: closed the thread, opened a new session with clean context, and imposed a modify-only constraint to prevent recurrence.

The git record tells the rest of the story. January 27 produced 8 commits -- a frustration day of crashed output. January 28 produced 68 commits -- the 3rd highest single day in the entire 116-day dataset. That 8.5x recovery multiplier was not reconstruction. The burst touched both PRJ-01 and PRJ-04, a cross-project recovery consistent with Foundation catching everything transferable. I started further ahead than where the poisoned session had stalled. The clean context did not just restore velocity -- it unlocked velocity the corruption had been suppressing.

What the Data Shows

The strongest evidence comes from the January 27 nuclear reset event, triangulated across git commit counts, conversation logs, and frustration taxonomy classification.

Date Commits Context
January 27, 2026 8 Frustration day -- crash output, full escalation chain
January 28, 2026 68 Recovery day -- 3rd highest in 116-day dataset

The 8.5x recovery multiplier validates three claims. First, the sunk cost override worked -- I lost a day's work and chose restart over repair, and Foundation's structural guarantee made that choice rational. Second, the fresh start effect was immediate -- the next-day output was not merely restored but massively amplified. Third, Foundation caught what mattered -- the multiplier is only possible if transferable assets survived the nuclear reset. If actual work product had been lost, the recovery day would show reconstruction, not acceleration.

At the portfolio level, velocity maintenance across four months reinforces the pattern. The portfolio shipped 596,903 lines across 10 systems with 2,561 raw commits. If nuclear resets required rebuilding from cold start, each deployment would produce a visible velocity dip. The absence of sustained dips suggests Foundation-enabled restarts that minimized reconstruction cost. The approach pivots visible across the portfolio -- features rebuilt differently between sessions with the prior approach absent -- are consistent with Stop. Run It Back destroying corrupted context while Foundation preserved the actual work.

How to Apply It

1. Recognize Poisoned Context Early The signal is unmistakable: corrections produce new errors, the AI's understanding cannot be recalibrated, and you are spending more time fixing than building. If you have already tried Stop, Pause, Reset and Stop and Recap without recovery, the context is poisoned. Do not keep patching. The correction-to-creation ratio has inverted, and every additional minute produces more confusion than progress.

2. Delete -- Do Not Archive Close the session and delete the thread. Archiving preserves the option to return, which maintains cognitive attachment to the failed approach. Deletion forces commitment to the fresh start. Foundation already holds your transferable assets -- the code in your files, the patterns you have established, the decisions you have documented. The only thing you are destroying is the accumulated corruption.

3. Walk Away If Needed Physical separation from the execution environment breaks residual cognitive fixation. This is not required every time, but it is available. Minutes to hours. The walk creates temporal and physical distance between the failed session and the fresh one, amplifying the fresh start effect. When you return, the failed approach no longer occupies working memory.

4. Return Fresh and Trust Foundation Come back to the problem as if encountering it for the first time. Foundation provides starting resources. Scaffold provides instant structure. But the accumulated context of the failed approach does not carry over. Start from Foundation, not from the wreckage. If the same wall appears after restarting, the problem is upstream -- lock your Target or revisit your Vision before attempting again.

References

  1. Arkes, H.R. & Blumer, C. (1985). "The Psychology of Sunk Cost." Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 35(1), 124–140.
  2. Dai, H., Milkman, K.L., & Riis, J. (2014). "The Fresh Start Effect: Temporal Landmarks Motivate Aspirational Behavior." Management Science, 60(10), 2563–2582.
  3. Keating, M.G. (2026). "Vision." Stealth Labz CEM Papers. Read paper
  4. Keating, M.G. (2026). "Foundation." Stealth Labz CEM Papers. Read paper
  5. Keating, M.G. (2026). "Scaffold." Stealth Labz CEM Papers. Read paper
  6. Keating, M.G. (2026). "Target." Stealth Labz CEM Papers. Read paper
  7. Keating, M.G. (2026). "Stop, Pause, Reset." Stealth Labz CEM Papers. Read paper
  8. Keating, M.G. (2026). "Stop and Recap." Stealth Labz CEM Papers. Read paper