diff --git a/CHANGELOG.md b/CHANGELOG.md
index a46223352..9d0005ecd 100644
--- a/CHANGELOG.md
+++ b/CHANGELOG.md
@@ -8,6 +8,10 @@ All notable changes to this project are documented here. Format follows
 
 ### Added
 
+- ADRs 0150-0153 define the accepted boundaries for Korean relative-time
+  retrieval, multi-thread Event Lineage answers, persisted image-evidence
+  citations, and the focused evidence popup. Their implementations remain
+  active-PR evidence until protected merge.
 - ADR 0157 and its exact-head inventory choose the existing lowercase public
   ontology namespace as canonical and define the compatibility, publication,
   and migration evidence required by issue #372 without rewriting identifiers.
diff --git a/docs/adr/0150-korean-relative-time-retrieval.md b/docs/adr/0150-korean-relative-time-retrieval.md
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..c79933e02
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/adr/0150-korean-relative-time-retrieval.md
@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+# ADR 0150: Global Ask resolves Korean relative-time expressions
+
+- Status: Accepted
+- Date: 2026-08-22
+- Related: [0047](0047-global-ask-semantic-retrieval.md), [0090](0090-global-ask-lineage-timeline-expansion.md)
+
+## Context
+
+A question like "어제 무슨 일이 있었나요?" ("what happened yesterday?") names a
+time window the reader already has in mind. Before this decision,
+`gather_global_chat_sources`'s keyword retrieval (ADR 0047) had no way to
+use that window: "어제" only ever became a literal search token against
+post titles and bodies, indistinguishable from any other two-character
+term. A fresh, unrelated post that happened to rank highest on unrelated
+keyword overlap could outrank the post the reader actually meant.
+
+## Decision
+
+`lineageweave.temporal_expressions.resolve_korean_relative_time` is a pure
+date-arithmetic function (no database or network access) that resolves a
+question's first Korean relative-time expression into an inclusive
+`(start_date, end_date)` window. It covers 오늘/어제/그제(그저께)/그끄제(그끄저께),
+작년/재작년/올해/내년, 작년·재작년 이맘때(쯤) (a ±5-day fuzz window around the
+anniversary date, since "-쯤" means "approximately"), 지난/이번/다음 주/달, and
+the general "N일/주/개월/년 전" pattern. "언젠가" ("someday") resolves to no
+bound -- the reader has explicitly declined to name one, which is the same
+retrieval behavior as finding no expression at all.
+
+`gather_global_chat_sources` applies the resolved window as an additional
+`created_at` bound on its final ABAC-filtered candidate query, additive to
+the existing keyword-match ranking -- it narrows the already-ranked
+candidate set, it does not replace ranking with a date filter. Matched
+temporal literals are excluded from keyword-term extraction
+(`TEMPORAL_STOPWORDS`) so a resolved expression does not also become a
+near-meaningless literal search term.
+
+## Considered alternatives
+
+- Send the raw question to an LLM to extract a date range: rejected for the
+  same reason ADR 0047's keyword step avoids ungrounded LLM inference at
+  the retrieval boundary -- a hallucinated date range would silently
+  narrow (or widen) the candidate set with no way for the reader to verify
+  it, and every extra provider round-trip is retrieval latency the reader
+  pays before seeing an answer.
+- Resolve to a single anchor day for the generalized "N주/N개월 전" pattern
+  (mirroring "N일 전"): rejected -- "2 weeks ago" means that whole week to
+  a reader, not one arbitrary day inside it, so `_week_range`/`_month_range`
+  are used instead, matching how the named "지난주"/"지난달" patterns already
+  behave.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- Global Ask can now answer time-scoped questions without the relative-time
+  term itself acting as retrieval noise.
+- The resolver is locale-specific (Korean only); a question in another
+  supported UI locale (ADR on i18n scope, `frontend/src/i18n.ts`) that
+  names a relative time in that language still falls back to keyword-only
+  retrieval. Extending to additional locales is a follow-up, not required
+  by this decision.
+- `today` is always passed explicitly by the caller (server-local date);
+  the resolver itself never reads the wall clock, keeping it a pure,
+  trivially unit-testable function.
diff --git a/docs/adr/0151-ask-multi-lineage-graph.md b/docs/adr/0151-ask-multi-lineage-graph.md
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..22c9a14f4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/adr/0151-ask-multi-lineage-graph.md
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+# ADR 0151: Global Ask renders every cited thread as its own branch graph
+
+- Status: Accepted
+- Date: 2026-08-22
+- Related: [0090](0090-global-ask-lineage-timeline-expansion.md), [0064](0064-lineage-evidence-and-tree-assembly.md)
+
+## Context
+
+ADR 0090 expands only the single top-ranked match through its direct
+`post_lineage_edge` neighbors, so an answer could speak to at most one
+connected timeline. A Global Ask answer frequently cites posts from more
+than one unrelated reconstruct thread -- two separate customer complaints
+that happen to share a keyword, for example -- and before this decision
+the reader had no way to see how (or whether) those threads relate to each
+other; the answer's text evidence facts named a lineage relationship in
+prose only for the single expanded anchor.
+
+Separately, `LineageDag`/`layoutLineageDag` (the post-detail popup's Event
+Lineage visualization) already renders one `LineageGraph` payload as N
+independent branch-tree `<figure>`s, one per reconstruct thread (bucketed
+by `LineageGraphNode.group`, `lineageLayout.ts`'s `layoutLineageDag`).
+Each thread's own tree is laid out with git-log-style branch/merge
+semantics (`is_root`, `is_branch_point`) already -- there was no missing
+git-branch-style layout to build, only missing graph *data* for Global
+Ask to feed that existing component.
+
+## Decision
+
+`lineage_graphs_for_posts` (`backend/app/lineage_ingestion.py`) merges
+every cited post's full reconstructed thread into one `LineageGraph`
+payload: it calls the existing, ABAC-checked `visible_lineage_graph` once
+per cited post id and deduplicates nodes/edges shared across citations.
+`POST /api/ask` returns this as a new `lineage_graph` response field.
+`AskAgentPanel` renders `<LineageDag>` under the answer whenever that
+field carries nodes -- reusing the post-detail popup's exact rendering
+component, so citing posts from two unrelated threads produces two
+independent branch-tree figures with no new frontend layout code.
+
+## Considered alternatives
+
+- Build a new, Ask-specific multi-graph component: rejected --
+  `LineageDag` already does exactly this (grouped, branch-aware, per-thread
+  figures); a second implementation would only risk drifting from the
+  post-detail popup's established visual language and accessibility
+  behavior for the same underlying data shape.
+- Bound the merged graph to the single top-cited post's thread, matching
+  ADR 0090's scope: rejected -- that reintroduces the original gap this
+  decision addresses (a multi-thread answer showing only one thread).
+
+## Consequences
+
+- An Ask answer's lineage evidence is now visually traceable per cited
+  thread, not summarized as prose for one anchor post only.
+- `lineage_graphs_for_posts` issues one `visible_lineage_graph` call per
+  cited post (each a bounded `source_post` scan plus a full
+  `post_lineage_edge` table read); acceptable at the current citation cap
+  (`_POST_CHAT_SOURCE_LIMIT` = 8) and the existing `visible_lineage_graph`
+  precedent for the post-detail popup, revisit with a single batched query
+  if the citation cap grows materially.
+- The response payload grows by one field (`lineage_graph`); existing
+  consumers that ignore unknown fields are unaffected.
diff --git a/docs/adr/0152-ask-image-citation.md b/docs/adr/0152-ask-image-citation.md
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..ac9e456bd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/adr/0152-ask-image-citation.md
@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
+# ADR 0152: Global Ask cites persisted image evidence, never raw bytes
+
+- Status: Accepted
+- Date: 2026-08-22
+- Related: [0066](0066-position-preserving-image-content.md), [0039](0039-global-ask-agent-source-boundary.md)
+
+## Context
+
+An Ask answer citing a post whose evidence actually came from an embedded
+picture (a screenshot, a diagram) read as an unmarked text claim -- the
+reader had no way to tell the citation was image-sourced rather than
+drawn from the post's written body. Separately, no code path in this
+repository ever sends embedded image bytes to a client: `post_content_image`
+persists each image's OCR text, caption, and tags (ADR 0066), and
+`GET /api/posts/{id}/content` already returns only that description, never
+the image itself. `lineageweave.image_content`'s normalization step
+likewise replaces every embedded image with a bracketed text placeholder
+before any LLM or API response is built.
+
+## Decision
+
+"Cite images" is satisfied inside that existing, deliberate boundary
+rather than by adding a new image-serving mechanism. `cited_post_images`
+(`backend/app/post_chat_ingestion.py`) reads `post_content_image`/
+`post_content_image_tag` for the already-cited post ids and returns their
+persisted `mime_type`, `caption`, `extracted_text`, and `tags` -- the same
+fields `GET /api/posts/{id}/content` renders, scoped to citations.
+`POST /api/ask` returns this as a new `cited_post_images` field; the
+Ask answer view renders an explicit "Image evidence" line per cited post
+carrying one.
+
+No additional ABAC check runs inside `cited_post_images`: `cited_post_ids`
+only ever contains ids drawn from `gather_global_chat_sources`'s
+already-authorized source set -- the same trust boundary
+`cited_post_evidence`/`cited_post_summaries` (`lineageweave.post_chat`)
+already rely on without re-checking visibility per call.
+
+## Considered alternatives
+
+- Add an endpoint that serves the original image bytes for a citation:
+  rejected -- this would be the first place in the codebase raw embedded
+  image bytes ever leave the server, reopening a boundary ADR 0066 and
+  `lineageweave.image_content`'s normalization step deliberately closed.
+  Nothing about "citing" an image requires the pixels themselves; the
+  persisted description is the citable claim.
+- Fold image evidence into the existing `cited_post_evidence` fact list
+  (reusing its `kind`/`text` shape): rejected -- an image's caption and
+  its OCR text are two independently useful strings (a diagram's caption
+  says what it's a diagram *of*; its OCR says what text appears *in* it),
+  which the flat `{kind, text}` shape cannot carry without concatenating
+  them into one opaque string.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- A reader can now tell when an Ask citation's evidence came from a
+  picture rather than the post's written body, without any new image
+  storage or serving surface.
+- The response payload grows by one field (`cited_post_images`); existing
+  consumers that ignore unknown fields are unaffected.
+- Region-level citation (pointing at a specific area of a larger image,
+  as `post_content_image_region` already supports for the post-detail
+  popup) is not surfaced here -- a future enhancement, not required by
+  this decision.
diff --git a/docs/adr/0153-ask-evidence-layer-popup.md b/docs/adr/0153-ask-evidence-layer-popup.md
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..cf89521dd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/adr/0153-ask-evidence-layer-popup.md
@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+# ADR 0153: Ask citations open a focused evidence Layer Popup
+
+- Status: Accepted
+- Date: 2026-08-22
+- Related: [0152](0152-ask-image-citation.md), [0151](0151-ask-multi-lineage-graph.md)
+
+## Context
+
+Reading one Ask citation's evidence meant either scanning the inline fact
+list rendered under every citation at once, or leaving the answer
+entirely to open the full post detail popup (`PostDetailPopup`) -- there
+was no focused way to inspect a single citation's evidence without either
+losing the answer or wading through unrelated citations' facts on screen
+at the same time.
+
+## Decision
+
+`AskEvidenceLayerPopup` (`frontend/src/components/`) is a new, focused
+modal opened by a "View evidence" button on each citation. It shows only
+that one cited post's text evidence facts (ADR 0047's evidence chips) and
+image evidence (ADR 0152) without navigating away from the answer or
+displaying any other citation's evidence. It reuses the app's existing
+`.popup-backdrop`/`.popup-panel` visual language (`PostDetailPopup`'s own
+classes) rather than introducing a new modal style.
+
+Its dialog semantics are stricter than `PostDetailPopup`'s: `role="dialog"`,
+`aria-modal="true"`, `aria-labelledby` naming the cited post's title,
+Escape-to-close, backdrop-click-to-close, and initial focus moved onto the
+panel on mount. `PostDetailPopup` has none of these today; this decision
+does not retrofit them there -- a focused follow-up, not silently expanded
+scope of this change.
+
+`chatEvidenceKindLabel` (previously a private `App.tsx` helper) moved to
+`frontend/src/evidenceKindLabels.ts` so both `App.tsx` and the new
+component read from one label map instead of maintaining two copies that
+could drift.
+
+## Considered alternatives
+
+- Extend `PostDetailPopup` itself with an "evidence-only" display mode:
+  rejected -- that component already fetches and renders a large surface
+  (summary, 5W1H, Keymen, counterparties, Event Lineage, evaluation); a
+  mode flag threading through all of that to suppress everything except
+  evidence is a larger, riskier change than a small, independent
+  component with its own narrow props.
+- Reuse the post-scoped chat's existing `EvidencePanel` (a non-modal,
+  `role="complementary"` sliding panel that shows a cited post's full
+  body): rejected -- it fetches and renders the entire post body, not
+  scoped facts/images, and its non-modal layout assumes the post-scoped
+  chat's own screen real estate, which Global Ask's answer view does not
+  have.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- A reader can inspect one citation's evidence in a focused layer without
+  losing their place in the answer.
+- The Layer Popup pattern (a small, dialog-semantic overlay scoped to one
+  piece of evidence) is now precedent for future evidence surfaces that
+  don't warrant a full post detail popup.
+- `PostDetailPopup`'s missing dialog semantics (no `role="dialog"`, no
+  Escape-to-close) remain an open accessibility gap, tracked here as a
+  known follow-up rather than fixed by this decision.
diff --git a/docs/product-technical-gap-baseline.md b/docs/product-technical-gap-baseline.md
index 0d78064f8..1c0852266 100644
--- a/docs/product-technical-gap-baseline.md
+++ b/docs/product-technical-gap-baseline.md
@@ -169,6 +169,17 @@ evidence across heads.
 | #421 | Playwright harness for Ask Agent capabilities |
 | #422 | ADRs for Ask Agent temporal / lineage / evidence goal |
 
+ADRs 0150-0153 (recorded by #422) define the accepted boundaries before this
+stack's implementation becomes protected-main evidence: #415 implements
+Korean relative-time retrieval under ADR 0150; #418 implements scoped
+multi-thread Event Lineage answers under ADR 0151; #419 implements persisted
+image-evidence citations under ADR 0152; #420 implements a focused citation
+evidence popup under ADR 0153; #421 adds the Playwright harness intended to
+verify the combined flow. These capabilities remain active-PR evidence until
+their exact heads pass all protected gates and merge; the combined browser
+scenario is not release evidence until it runs successfully against one
+merged release candidate.
+
 ### 3.4 Scientific measurement recovery (must remain true-parameter tests)
 
 | PR | Intent |