CB-WP-0039: a seat that does not regulate — and it changes H1's verdict
CB-EV-0030 concluded H1's DARVO arm rate was still 0. That was true of the
panel, and the panel was greedy-family throughout. GreedyPolicy ranks
`Ground if gated => 100`, so it grounds the instant the stress gate bites,
Stress plateaus at 3, and the arm at 5 is unreachable by construction. "H1
does nothing" was really "H1 does nothing to a seat that already manages
its Stress" — and H1 was written for the seat that does not.
`reactive` is greedy with exactly one preference changed: GROUND demoted
below ATTACK. Under it, H1's criteria 1 and 2 are MET — DARVO arms 400
times per cell, ATTACK is chosen 3 times per seat per game. Criterion 3
fails harder: reactive wins nothing at any seat count.
The larger finding is about the baseline. Greedy and reactive play
IDENTICALLY under baseline, and peak Stress across 3,200 baseline games
was 1 — against a starting value of 2. The gate at 4, the DARVO arm at 5
and the Freedom token are all unreachable, and a policy built to be
reckless with Stress is indistinguishable from one built to husband it.
That is a deeper account of F17 than F17 has. Not raised as a finding yet:
it wants the plural panel first.
A constant was investigated rather than reported: darvo was exactly 400 in
every cell while atk scaled with seats. Six-player final Stress is
[5,5,4,4,4,4] every seed — H1-B holds the attacker at 4, below the arm,
and pushes its targets to 5. The self-soothe suppresses DARVO in the
aggressor and concentrates it in the attacked. The direction follows from
H1-B's arithmetic; the number 2 is partly an artifact of reactive's
first-legal targeting, and is labelled as such.
Still unreviewed: tier L review outstanding on CB-WP-0038, and nothing
here reaches ground-game until it runs.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 01:08:40 +02:00
|
|
|
|
# CB-EV-0031 — a seat that does not regulate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CB-WP-0039. Tier M (adds a policy to the panel every future measurement is
|
|
|
|
|
|
reported against; chaos d8 = 2 → no override). **Declaration 11 of chaos
|
|
|
|
|
|
window 3.** Closed 2026-08-08.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CB-REV-0001: the adversarial review, and it was not approvable
Thirteen challenges, five FATAL, all five conceded. Nothing had reached
ground-game, which is the only reason this is a correction and not a
retraction.
The worst: `Reactive` was not "greedy with one preference changed". It
differed in five, including SpendFreedom — ranked 95 unconditionally
against greedy's `95 if gated else 0` — so the seat burned its Freedom
token in round one of every game. A second change to the exact mechanism
under study, and every number in CB-EV-0031 was measuring it. The pass
claimed ADR-0018's one-varying-parameter discipline in its own workplan
while violating it. GreedyPolicy::rank is now public and the policy
delegates, overriding one match arm, so the control is structurally true.
Withdrawn entirely: "H1-B suppresses DARVO in the attacker". Disabling
H1-B under the corrected policy changes the arm count by exactly zero.
The pass hedged the wrong variable — it disclaimed "the number 2" and
defended "the direction", and the direction is what failed. The
supporting inference was invalid anyway: final Stress cannot show who
armed, because DarvoEnded resets the stage and REVERSE gives its owner -2.
Corrected: criterion 1 was failed on the greedy column while the pass's
own printed table showed 31-1000 arms in the other columns — the
selective-column move, in the file that names it. "Peak Stress was 1" was
a maximum over StressSet payloads, not held state (true: 2); the baseline
game count was 1,600 not 3,200; and "a reckless policy plays identically
to a careful one" is refuted by this repo's own rank-95 policy.
Inert controls replaced, each verified red against the reviewer's own
mutation: the baseline hash test compared two identically-constructed
states (serde(skip) on variant left 57/57 green); the `unchanged:` test
checked 3 of 7 entries and passed with SOLVE made illegal; H1-A's ordering
and H1-B's OU-cancel path had no test at all.
edition-check now covers catalog.yaml and rules_delta.yaml, whose digests
CB-WP-0038 claimed and never recorded — the review found it and reported
it unverified rather than absent, which was the right call.
Still open: H1-B on the DARVO extra-Attack path is untested, regulation.rs
still skips setup failures silently, and round-5 arms are counted though
they can never act.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 02:02:35 +02:00
|
|
|
|
> **CORRECTED 2026-08-08 after adversarial review, and most of the
|
|
|
|
|
|
> original file was wrong.** The review is in
|
|
|
|
|
|
> [`CB-REV-0001`](../reviews/CB-REV-0001-h1.md). The policy this pass
|
|
|
|
|
|
> called *"greedy with one preference changed"* differed in **five**
|
|
|
|
|
|
> places — including `SpendFreedom`, which it ranked 95 unconditionally
|
|
|
|
|
|
> where greedy ranks it 0 unless the gate bites, so the seat burned its
|
|
|
|
|
|
> Freedom token in round one of every game. **Every number below was
|
|
|
|
|
|
> measuring that bug.** They have been re-derived against a policy that
|
|
|
|
|
|
> delegates to `GreedyPolicy::rank` and overrides exactly one arm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
> Sections 1 and 2 are rewritten. **Section 3 is withdrawn entirely.**
|
CB-WP-0039: a seat that does not regulate — and it changes H1's verdict
CB-EV-0030 concluded H1's DARVO arm rate was still 0. That was true of the
panel, and the panel was greedy-family throughout. GreedyPolicy ranks
`Ground if gated => 100`, so it grounds the instant the stress gate bites,
Stress plateaus at 3, and the arm at 5 is unreachable by construction. "H1
does nothing" was really "H1 does nothing to a seat that already manages
its Stress" — and H1 was written for the seat that does not.
`reactive` is greedy with exactly one preference changed: GROUND demoted
below ATTACK. Under it, H1's criteria 1 and 2 are MET — DARVO arms 400
times per cell, ATTACK is chosen 3 times per seat per game. Criterion 3
fails harder: reactive wins nothing at any seat count.
The larger finding is about the baseline. Greedy and reactive play
IDENTICALLY under baseline, and peak Stress across 3,200 baseline games
was 1 — against a starting value of 2. The gate at 4, the DARVO arm at 5
and the Freedom token are all unreachable, and a policy built to be
reckless with Stress is indistinguishable from one built to husband it.
That is a deeper account of F17 than F17 has. Not raised as a finding yet:
it wants the plural panel first.
A constant was investigated rather than reported: darvo was exactly 400 in
every cell while atk scaled with seats. Six-player final Stress is
[5,5,4,4,4,4] every seed — H1-B holds the attacker at 4, below the arm,
and pushes its targets to 5. The self-soothe suppresses DARVO in the
aggressor and concentrates it in the attacked. The direction follows from
H1-B's arithmetic; the number 2 is partly an artifact of reactive's
first-legal targeting, and is labelled as such.
Still unreviewed: tier L review outstanding on CB-WP-0038, and nothing
here reaches ground-game until it runs.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 01:08:40 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**Delivered:** the `reactive` policy, and the measurement CB-EV-0030 §4
|
|
|
|
|
|
named as the one it had not run.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## 1. It changes CB-EV-0030's verdict
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CB-EV-0030 concluded H1's DARVO arm rate was still 0. **That was true of
|
|
|
|
|
|
the panel, and the panel was greedy-family throughout.**
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
`GreedyPolicy` ranks `Action::Ground if gated => 100`: the instant the
|
|
|
|
|
|
stress gate bites it grounds. Stress plateaus at 3, and the arm at 5 is
|
|
|
|
|
|
unreachable **by construction**. So "H1 does nothing" was really "H1 does
|
|
|
|
|
|
nothing *to a seat that already manages its Stress*" — and H1 was written
|
|
|
|
|
|
for the seat that does not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CB-REV-0001: the adversarial review, and it was not approvable
Thirteen challenges, five FATAL, all five conceded. Nothing had reached
ground-game, which is the only reason this is a correction and not a
retraction.
The worst: `Reactive` was not "greedy with one preference changed". It
differed in five, including SpendFreedom — ranked 95 unconditionally
against greedy's `95 if gated else 0` — so the seat burned its Freedom
token in round one of every game. A second change to the exact mechanism
under study, and every number in CB-EV-0031 was measuring it. The pass
claimed ADR-0018's one-varying-parameter discipline in its own workplan
while violating it. GreedyPolicy::rank is now public and the policy
delegates, overriding one match arm, so the control is structurally true.
Withdrawn entirely: "H1-B suppresses DARVO in the attacker". Disabling
H1-B under the corrected policy changes the arm count by exactly zero.
The pass hedged the wrong variable — it disclaimed "the number 2" and
defended "the direction", and the direction is what failed. The
supporting inference was invalid anyway: final Stress cannot show who
armed, because DarvoEnded resets the stage and REVERSE gives its owner -2.
Corrected: criterion 1 was failed on the greedy column while the pass's
own printed table showed 31-1000 arms in the other columns — the
selective-column move, in the file that names it. "Peak Stress was 1" was
a maximum over StressSet payloads, not held state (true: 2); the baseline
game count was 1,600 not 3,200; and "a reckless policy plays identically
to a careful one" is refuted by this repo's own rank-95 policy.
Inert controls replaced, each verified red against the reviewer's own
mutation: the baseline hash test compared two identically-constructed
states (serde(skip) on variant left 57/57 green); the `unchanged:` test
checked 3 of 7 entries and passed with SOLVE made illegal; H1-A's ordering
and H1-B's OU-cancel path had no test at all.
edition-check now covers catalog.yaml and rules_delta.yaml, whose digests
CB-WP-0038 claimed and never recorded — the review found it and reported
it unverified rather than absent, which was the right call.
Still open: H1-B on the DARVO extra-Attack path is untested, regulation.rs
still skips setup failures silently, and round-5 arms are counted though
they can never act.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 02:02:35 +02:00
|
|
|
|
`reactive` now **delegates to `GreedyPolicy::rank` and overrides one arm**
|
|
|
|
|
|
(`Ground if gated`), so "one preference differs" is structurally true
|
|
|
|
|
|
rather than a claim. SHARED GROUND, 200 games per cell, all 200 ran, and
|
|
|
|
|
|
**`peak` is now Stress held, not Stress assigned** (§2):
|
CB-WP-0039: a seat that does not regulate — and it changes H1's verdict
CB-EV-0030 concluded H1's DARVO arm rate was still 0. That was true of the
panel, and the panel was greedy-family throughout. GreedyPolicy ranks
`Ground if gated => 100`, so it grounds the instant the stress gate bites,
Stress plateaus at 3, and the arm at 5 is unreachable by construction. "H1
does nothing" was really "H1 does nothing to a seat that already manages
its Stress" — and H1 was written for the seat that does not.
`reactive` is greedy with exactly one preference changed: GROUND demoted
below ATTACK. Under it, H1's criteria 1 and 2 are MET — DARVO arms 400
times per cell, ATTACK is chosen 3 times per seat per game. Criterion 3
fails harder: reactive wins nothing at any seat count.
The larger finding is about the baseline. Greedy and reactive play
IDENTICALLY under baseline, and peak Stress across 3,200 baseline games
was 1 — against a starting value of 2. The gate at 4, the DARVO arm at 5
and the Freedom token are all unreachable, and a policy built to be
reckless with Stress is indistinguishable from one built to husband it.
That is a deeper account of F17 than F17 has. Not raised as a finding yet:
it wants the plural panel first.
A constant was investigated rather than reported: darvo was exactly 400 in
every cell while atk scaled with seats. Six-player final Stress is
[5,5,4,4,4,4] every seed — H1-B holds the attacker at 4, below the arm,
and pushes its targets to 5. The self-soothe suppresses DARVO in the
aggressor and concentrates it in the attacked. The direction follows from
H1-B's arithmetic; the number 2 is partly an artifact of reactive's
first-legal targeting, and is labelled as such.
Still unreviewed: tier L review outstanding on CB-WP-0038, and nothing
here reaches ground-game until it runs.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 01:08:40 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | greedy | | | | reactive | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| **seats** | won | atk | darvo | peak | won | atk | darvo | peak |
|
CB-REV-0001: the adversarial review, and it was not approvable
Thirteen challenges, five FATAL, all five conceded. Nothing had reached
ground-game, which is the only reason this is a correction and not a
retraction.
The worst: `Reactive` was not "greedy with one preference changed". It
differed in five, including SpendFreedom — ranked 95 unconditionally
against greedy's `95 if gated else 0` — so the seat burned its Freedom
token in round one of every game. A second change to the exact mechanism
under study, and every number in CB-EV-0031 was measuring it. The pass
claimed ADR-0018's one-varying-parameter discipline in its own workplan
while violating it. GreedyPolicy::rank is now public and the policy
delegates, overriding one match arm, so the control is structurally true.
Withdrawn entirely: "H1-B suppresses DARVO in the attacker". Disabling
H1-B under the corrected policy changes the arm count by exactly zero.
The pass hedged the wrong variable — it disclaimed "the number 2" and
defended "the direction", and the direction is what failed. The
supporting inference was invalid anyway: final Stress cannot show who
armed, because DarvoEnded resets the stage and REVERSE gives its owner -2.
Corrected: criterion 1 was failed on the greedy column while the pass's
own printed table showed 31-1000 arms in the other columns — the
selective-column move, in the file that names it. "Peak Stress was 1" was
a maximum over StressSet payloads, not held state (true: 2); the baseline
game count was 1,600 not 3,200; and "a reckless policy plays identically
to a careful one" is refuted by this repo's own rank-95 policy.
Inert controls replaced, each verified red against the reviewer's own
mutation: the baseline hash test compared two identically-constructed
states (serde(skip) on variant left 57/57 green); the `unchanged:` test
checked 3 of 7 entries and passed with SOLVE made illegal; H1-A's ordering
and H1-B's OU-cancel path had no test at all.
edition-check now covers catalog.yaml and rules_delta.yaml, whose digests
CB-WP-0038 claimed and never recorded — the review found it and reported
it unverified rather than absent, which was the right call.
Still open: H1-B on the DARVO extra-Attack path is untested, regulation.rs
still skips setup failures silently, and round-5 arms are counted though
they can never act.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 02:02:35 +02:00
|
|
|
|
| 2p | 68 | 0 | 0 | 4 | **66** | 726 | 363 | **5** |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3p | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 1200 | 600 | **5** |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4p | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 1600 | 800 | **5** |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6p | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 2400 | 1200 | **5** |
|
CB-WP-0039: a seat that does not regulate — and it changes H1's verdict
CB-EV-0030 concluded H1's DARVO arm rate was still 0. That was true of the
panel, and the panel was greedy-family throughout. GreedyPolicy ranks
`Ground if gated => 100`, so it grounds the instant the stress gate bites,
Stress plateaus at 3, and the arm at 5 is unreachable by construction. "H1
does nothing" was really "H1 does nothing to a seat that already manages
its Stress" — and H1 was written for the seat that does not.
`reactive` is greedy with exactly one preference changed: GROUND demoted
below ATTACK. Under it, H1's criteria 1 and 2 are MET — DARVO arms 400
times per cell, ATTACK is chosen 3 times per seat per game. Criterion 3
fails harder: reactive wins nothing at any seat count.
The larger finding is about the baseline. Greedy and reactive play
IDENTICALLY under baseline, and peak Stress across 3,200 baseline games
was 1 — against a starting value of 2. The gate at 4, the DARVO arm at 5
and the Freedom token are all unreachable, and a policy built to be
reckless with Stress is indistinguishable from one built to husband it.
That is a deeper account of F17 than F17 has. Not raised as a finding yet:
it wants the plural panel first.
A constant was investigated rather than reported: darvo was exactly 400 in
every cell while atk scaled with seats. Six-player final Stress is
[5,5,4,4,4,4] every seed — H1-B holds the attacker at 4, below the arm,
and pushes its targets to 5. The self-soothe suppresses DARVO in the
aggressor and concentrates it in the attacked. The direction follows from
H1-B's arithmetic; the number 2 is partly an artifact of reactive's
first-legal targeting, and is labelled as such.
Still unreviewed: tier L review outstanding on CB-WP-0038, and nothing
here reaches ground-game until it runs.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 01:08:40 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
CB-REV-0002: round 2, and the corrections were not approvable either
Three FATAL, five SERIOUS. The substance of round 1's corrections held —
Reactive is genuinely one arm different, the five replacement controls are
non-inert, the inert metric is right, the numbers reproduce. What failed
were the CLAIMS about them, and two defects the corrections introduced.
FATAL 1: the fix for round 1's #11 did not fix it. The assertion was
`games + setup_fails == 200`, and a refused setup increments setup_fails
while skipping games — so the sum is invariant under exactly the failure
it claimed to catch. Injecting setup failures gave exit 0 over 196-game
columns. Now asserts games == GAMES, verified to exit 101.
FATAL 2: the correction to the selective-column FATAL was itself
selective. "81-1000 per cell, baseline AND H1" and "31-1000" twelve lines
apart, both taken from the baseline row; under H1 rank-75 arms are
59/0/0/0. Every cell is now printed rather than summarised, and the
corrected verdict is the opposite of the one it replaced: under rank-75,
H1 REDUCES DARVO arms to zero at 3p and above.
FATAL 3: "DARVO arms 2 per seat per game" is 1 per seat per game, exactly,
at every band.
SERIOUS: the tiebreak oracle asserted only that the winner set CHANGED, so
reversing the tiebreak left it green; the #13 defect's impact was claimed
and never measured (72,000 games: zero divergences — real in principle,
witnessed only by a constructed board); a 29-of-363 citation pointed at a
file that did not contain it (round 1's reviewer did report it, and it was
never transcribed — the record was wrong, not the number); the harnesses
were run by NO GATE, so every published figure came from a manual run of
an ungated binary, including the assertion added for #1; and edition-check's
sibling handling — added by the last correction — was self-certifying,
crashed instead of failing, and counted Markdown lines as coverage. Now
discovered on disk, and it found a real gap on its first run: Rules_Text.csv
vendored with no digest.
Also: "peak Stress held" was dead code kept quiet by `let _ = held;` — the
numbers were right by coincidence.
make panels is now a registered gate. Round 3 is owed.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 09:44:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
**H1's mechanism does reach the unregulated seat.** DARVO arms **exactly
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 per seat per game** — 600/(200×3), 800/(200×4), 1200/(200×6) — and 0.91
|
|
|
|
|
|
at 2p. The first correction said **2** per seat per game, which is wrong
|
|
|
|
|
|
by a factor of two and was caught by round 2 (#3).
|
CB-WP-0039: a seat that does not regulate — and it changes H1's verdict
CB-EV-0030 concluded H1's DARVO arm rate was still 0. That was true of the
panel, and the panel was greedy-family throughout. GreedyPolicy ranks
`Ground if gated => 100`, so it grounds the instant the stress gate bites,
Stress plateaus at 3, and the arm at 5 is unreachable by construction. "H1
does nothing" was really "H1 does nothing to a seat that already manages
its Stress" — and H1 was written for the seat that does not.
`reactive` is greedy with exactly one preference changed: GROUND demoted
below ATTACK. Under it, H1's criteria 1 and 2 are MET — DARVO arms 400
times per cell, ATTACK is chosen 3 times per seat per game. Criterion 3
fails harder: reactive wins nothing at any seat count.
The larger finding is about the baseline. Greedy and reactive play
IDENTICALLY under baseline, and peak Stress across 3,200 baseline games
was 1 — against a starting value of 2. The gate at 4, the DARVO arm at 5
and the Freedom token are all unreachable, and a policy built to be
reckless with Stress is indistinguishable from one built to husband it.
That is a deeper account of F17 than F17 has. Not raised as a finding yet:
it wants the plural panel first.
A constant was investigated rather than reported: darvo was exactly 400 in
every cell while atk scaled with seats. Six-player final Stress is
[5,5,4,4,4,4] every seed — H1-B holds the attacker at 4, below the arm,
and pushes its targets to 5. The self-soothe suppresses DARVO in the
aggressor and concentrates it in the attacked. The direction follows from
H1-B's arithmetic; the number 2 is partly an artifact of reactive's
first-legal targeting, and is labelled as such.
Still unreviewed: tier L review outstanding on CB-WP-0038, and nothing
here reaches ground-game until it runs.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 01:08:40 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
CB-REV-0001: the adversarial review, and it was not approvable
Thirteen challenges, five FATAL, all five conceded. Nothing had reached
ground-game, which is the only reason this is a correction and not a
retraction.
The worst: `Reactive` was not "greedy with one preference changed". It
differed in five, including SpendFreedom — ranked 95 unconditionally
against greedy's `95 if gated else 0` — so the seat burned its Freedom
token in round one of every game. A second change to the exact mechanism
under study, and every number in CB-EV-0031 was measuring it. The pass
claimed ADR-0018's one-varying-parameter discipline in its own workplan
while violating it. GreedyPolicy::rank is now public and the policy
delegates, overriding one match arm, so the control is structurally true.
Withdrawn entirely: "H1-B suppresses DARVO in the attacker". Disabling
H1-B under the corrected policy changes the arm count by exactly zero.
The pass hedged the wrong variable — it disclaimed "the number 2" and
defended "the direction", and the direction is what failed. The
supporting inference was invalid anyway: final Stress cannot show who
armed, because DarvoEnded resets the stage and REVERSE gives its owner -2.
Corrected: criterion 1 was failed on the greedy column while the pass's
own printed table showed 31-1000 arms in the other columns — the
selective-column move, in the file that names it. "Peak Stress was 1" was
a maximum over StressSet payloads, not held state (true: 2); the baseline
game count was 1,600 not 3,200; and "a reckless policy plays identically
to a careful one" is refuted by this repo's own rank-95 policy.
Inert controls replaced, each verified red against the reviewer's own
mutation: the baseline hash test compared two identically-constructed
states (serde(skip) on variant left 57/57 green); the `unchanged:` test
checked 3 of 7 entries and passed with SOLVE made illegal; H1-A's ordering
and H1-B's OU-cancel path had no test at all.
edition-check now covers catalog.yaml and rules_delta.yaml, whose digests
CB-WP-0038 claimed and never recorded — the review found it and reported
it unverified rather than absent, which was the right call.
Still open: H1-B on the DARVO extra-Attack path is untested, regulation.rs
still skips setup failures silently, and round-5 arms are counted though
they can never act.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 02:02:35 +02:00
|
|
|
|
**Criterion 3's verdict is corrected.** The original said reactive *"wins
|
|
|
|
|
|
nothing, at any seat count"*. **False.** At 2p it wins **66 against
|
|
|
|
|
|
greedy's 68** — indistinguishable. It wins nothing at 3p and above, which
|
|
|
|
|
|
is also where greedy wins nothing.
|
CB-WP-0039: a seat that does not regulate — and it changes H1's verdict
CB-EV-0030 concluded H1's DARVO arm rate was still 0. That was true of the
panel, and the panel was greedy-family throughout. GreedyPolicy ranks
`Ground if gated => 100`, so it grounds the instant the stress gate bites,
Stress plateaus at 3, and the arm at 5 is unreachable by construction. "H1
does nothing" was really "H1 does nothing to a seat that already manages
its Stress" — and H1 was written for the seat that does not.
`reactive` is greedy with exactly one preference changed: GROUND demoted
below ATTACK. Under it, H1's criteria 1 and 2 are MET — DARVO arms 400
times per cell, ATTACK is chosen 3 times per seat per game. Criterion 3
fails harder: reactive wins nothing at any seat count.
The larger finding is about the baseline. Greedy and reactive play
IDENTICALLY under baseline, and peak Stress across 3,200 baseline games
was 1 — against a starting value of 2. The gate at 4, the DARVO arm at 5
and the Freedom token are all unreachable, and a policy built to be
reckless with Stress is indistinguishable from one built to husband it.
That is a deeper account of F17 than F17 has. Not raised as a finding yet:
it wants the plural panel first.
A constant was investigated rather than reported: darvo was exactly 400 in
every cell while atk scaled with seats. Six-player final Stress is
[5,5,4,4,4,4] every seed — H1-B holds the attacker at 4, below the arm,
and pushes its targets to 5. The self-soothe suppresses DARVO in the
aggressor and concentrates it in the attacked. The direction follows from
H1-B's arithmetic; the number 2 is partly an artifact of reactive's
first-legal targeting, and is labelled as such.
Still unreviewed: tier L review outstanding on CB-WP-0038, and nothing
here reaches ground-game until it runs.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 01:08:40 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## 2. The baseline finding, which is larger than H1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Look at the baseline half of the same run. Greedy and reactive are
|
|
|
|
|
|
**identical** — 132/165/190/200, zero attacks, zero DARVO, in all four
|
|
|
|
|
|
bands.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CB-REV-0001: the adversarial review, and it was not approvable
Thirteen challenges, five FATAL, all five conceded. Nothing had reached
ground-game, which is the only reason this is a correction and not a
retraction.
The worst: `Reactive` was not "greedy with one preference changed". It
differed in five, including SpendFreedom — ranked 95 unconditionally
against greedy's `95 if gated else 0` — so the seat burned its Freedom
token in round one of every game. A second change to the exact mechanism
under study, and every number in CB-EV-0031 was measuring it. The pass
claimed ADR-0018's one-varying-parameter discipline in its own workplan
while violating it. GreedyPolicy::rank is now public and the policy
delegates, overriding one match arm, so the control is structurally true.
Withdrawn entirely: "H1-B suppresses DARVO in the attacker". Disabling
H1-B under the corrected policy changes the arm count by exactly zero.
The pass hedged the wrong variable — it disclaimed "the number 2" and
defended "the direction", and the direction is what failed. The
supporting inference was invalid anyway: final Stress cannot show who
armed, because DarvoEnded resets the stage and REVERSE gives its owner -2.
Corrected: criterion 1 was failed on the greedy column while the pass's
own printed table showed 31-1000 arms in the other columns — the
selective-column move, in the file that names it. "Peak Stress was 1" was
a maximum over StressSet payloads, not held state (true: 2); the baseline
game count was 1,600 not 3,200; and "a reckless policy plays identically
to a careful one" is refuted by this repo's own rank-95 policy.
Inert controls replaced, each verified red against the reviewer's own
mutation: the baseline hash test compared two identically-constructed
states (serde(skip) on variant left 57/57 green); the `unchanged:` test
checked 3 of 7 entries and passed with SOLVE made illegal; H1-A's ordering
and H1-B's OU-cancel path had no test at all.
edition-check now covers catalog.yaml and rules_delta.yaml, whose digests
CB-WP-0038 claimed and never recorded — the review found it and reported
it unverified rather than absent, which was the right call.
Still open: H1-B on the DARVO extra-Attack path is untested, regulation.rs
still skips setup failures silently, and round-5 arms are counted though
they can never act.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 02:02:35 +02:00
|
|
|
|
**Peak Stress held across the 1,600 baseline games was 2 — the starting
|
|
|
|
|
|
value, never exceeded.** Stress only ever went down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**Three corrections to what this section originally said.**
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. It reported **1**, because `peak` was a maximum over `StressSet` event
|
|
|
|
|
|
*payloads*. Starting Stress is written by `setup`, never by an event,
|
|
|
|
|
|
so a table sitting at 2 all game reported 1 — and a table with no
|
|
|
|
|
|
`StressSet` at all would have reported 0. **Wrong subject**: the metric
|
|
|
|
|
|
answered *"highest value ever assigned"* while the prose claimed
|
|
|
|
|
|
*"highest Stress reached"*.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. It said **3,200 baseline games**. The run is 3,200 *total*; the
|
|
|
|
|
|
baseline half is **1,600**.
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. It generalised to *"a policy built to be reckless with Stress plays
|
|
|
|
|
|
identically to one built to husband it"*. **False, and refuted by this
|
|
|
|
|
|
repo's own sibling harness**: `attack-value.rs`'s rank-95 policy is
|
|
|
|
|
|
exactly that policy, and under **baseline** it drives Stress to 5 and
|
|
|
|
|
|
arms DARVO 400–1000 times per cell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**What survives, stated narrowly.** Under both policies measured here —
|
|
|
|
|
|
neither of which ever selects ATTACK under baseline — **no Stress is ever
|
|
|
|
|
|
added at all**. The baseline's Stress economy is reachable only through
|
|
|
|
|
|
ATTACK, so a table that does not attack never meets the gate, the arm, or
|
|
|
|
|
|
the Freedom token. That is still a real observation about F17, and it is
|
|
|
|
|
|
**about ATTACK being the sole inbound pressure**, not about the economy
|
|
|
|
|
|
being unreachable in general.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## 3. WITHDRAWN — "H1-B suppresses DARVO in the attacker"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The original §3 argued that H1-B holds the attacker at Stress 4, below the
|
|
|
|
|
|
arm, and pushes its targets to 5 — inferred from a constant `darvo = 400`
|
|
|
|
|
|
and a final-Stress signature of `[5, 5, 4, 4, 4, 4]`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**Withdrawn on two independent grounds, both found by the review.**
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CB-REV-0002: round 2, and the corrections were not approvable either
Three FATAL, five SERIOUS. The substance of round 1's corrections held —
Reactive is genuinely one arm different, the five replacement controls are
non-inert, the inert metric is right, the numbers reproduce. What failed
were the CLAIMS about them, and two defects the corrections introduced.
FATAL 1: the fix for round 1's #11 did not fix it. The assertion was
`games + setup_fails == 200`, and a refused setup increments setup_fails
while skipping games — so the sum is invariant under exactly the failure
it claimed to catch. Injecting setup failures gave exit 0 over 196-game
columns. Now asserts games == GAMES, verified to exit 101.
FATAL 2: the correction to the selective-column FATAL was itself
selective. "81-1000 per cell, baseline AND H1" and "31-1000" twelve lines
apart, both taken from the baseline row; under H1 rank-75 arms are
59/0/0/0. Every cell is now printed rather than summarised, and the
corrected verdict is the opposite of the one it replaced: under rank-75,
H1 REDUCES DARVO arms to zero at 3p and above.
FATAL 3: "DARVO arms 2 per seat per game" is 1 per seat per game, exactly,
at every band.
SERIOUS: the tiebreak oracle asserted only that the winner set CHANGED, so
reversing the tiebreak left it green; the #13 defect's impact was claimed
and never measured (72,000 games: zero divergences — real in principle,
witnessed only by a constructed board); a 29-of-363 citation pointed at a
file that did not contain it (round 1's reviewer did report it, and it was
never transcribed — the record was wrong, not the number); the harnesses
were run by NO GATE, so every published figure came from a manual run of
an ungated binary, including the assertion added for #1; and edition-check's
sibling handling — added by the last correction — was self-certifying,
crashed instead of failing, and counted Markdown lines as coverage. Now
discovered on disk, and it found a real gap on its first run: Rules_Text.csv
vendored with no digest.
Also: "peak Stress held" was dead code kept quiet by `let _ = held;` — the
numbers were right by coincidence.
make panels is now a registered gate. Round 3 is owed.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 09:44:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
1. **The constant was the broken policy** — but a constant remains, and
|
|
|
|
|
|
saying otherwise was wrong (round 2, #12). With the one-arm-override
|
|
|
|
|
|
policy `darvo` is **exactly `seats × games`** at 3p and above. The
|
|
|
|
|
|
constant moved from 400 to `n·games`; it did not dissolve, and whatever
|
|
|
|
|
|
forces exactly one arm per seat per game is still unexplained.
|
CB-REV-0001: the adversarial review, and it was not approvable
Thirteen challenges, five FATAL, all five conceded. Nothing had reached
ground-game, which is the only reason this is a correction and not a
retraction.
The worst: `Reactive` was not "greedy with one preference changed". It
differed in five, including SpendFreedom — ranked 95 unconditionally
against greedy's `95 if gated else 0` — so the seat burned its Freedom
token in round one of every game. A second change to the exact mechanism
under study, and every number in CB-EV-0031 was measuring it. The pass
claimed ADR-0018's one-varying-parameter discipline in its own workplan
while violating it. GreedyPolicy::rank is now public and the policy
delegates, overriding one match arm, so the control is structurally true.
Withdrawn entirely: "H1-B suppresses DARVO in the attacker". Disabling
H1-B under the corrected policy changes the arm count by exactly zero.
The pass hedged the wrong variable — it disclaimed "the number 2" and
defended "the direction", and the direction is what failed. The
supporting inference was invalid anyway: final Stress cannot show who
armed, because DarvoEnded resets the stage and REVERSE gives its owner -2.
Corrected: criterion 1 was failed on the greedy column while the pass's
own printed table showed 31-1000 arms in the other columns — the
selective-column move, in the file that names it. "Peak Stress was 1" was
a maximum over StressSet payloads, not held state (true: 2); the baseline
game count was 1,600 not 3,200; and "a reckless policy plays identically
to a careful one" is refuted by this repo's own rank-95 policy.
Inert controls replaced, each verified red against the reviewer's own
mutation: the baseline hash test compared two identically-constructed
states (serde(skip) on variant left 57/57 green); the `unchanged:` test
checked 3 of 7 entries and passed with SOLVE made illegal; H1-A's ordering
and H1-B's OU-cancel path had no test at all.
edition-check now covers catalog.yaml and rules_delta.yaml, whose digests
CB-WP-0038 claimed and never recorded — the review found it and reported
it unverified rather than absent, which was the right call.
Still open: H1-B on the DARVO extra-Attack path is untested, regulation.rs
still skips setup failures silently, and round-5 arms are counted though
they can never act.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 02:02:35 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2. **Disabling H1-B changes the arm count by exactly zero**, in every
|
|
|
|
|
|
cell, under the corrected policy. The effect attributed to H1-B's
|
|
|
|
|
|
arithmetic was an interaction with the undeclared preference deltas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**And the inference was invalid even where the numbers held.** Final
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stress does not record who armed: `DarvoEnded` resets the stage to `Off`
|
|
|
|
|
|
and REVERSE applies −2 to its owner, so a seat can arm and finish below 5.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The review demonstrated six seats arming behind the same `[5,5,4,4,4,4]`
|
|
|
|
|
|
signature. **The original hedged the wrong variable** — it disclaimed "the
|
|
|
|
|
|
number 2" and defended "the direction", and the direction is the part that
|
|
|
|
|
|
failed.
|
CB-WP-0039: a seat that does not regulate — and it changes H1's verdict
CB-EV-0030 concluded H1's DARVO arm rate was still 0. That was true of the
panel, and the panel was greedy-family throughout. GreedyPolicy ranks
`Ground if gated => 100`, so it grounds the instant the stress gate bites,
Stress plateaus at 3, and the arm at 5 is unreachable by construction. "H1
does nothing" was really "H1 does nothing to a seat that already manages
its Stress" — and H1 was written for the seat that does not.
`reactive` is greedy with exactly one preference changed: GROUND demoted
below ATTACK. Under it, H1's criteria 1 and 2 are MET — DARVO arms 400
times per cell, ATTACK is chosen 3 times per seat per game. Criterion 3
fails harder: reactive wins nothing at any seat count.
The larger finding is about the baseline. Greedy and reactive play
IDENTICALLY under baseline, and peak Stress across 3,200 baseline games
was 1 — against a starting value of 2. The gate at 4, the DARVO arm at 5
and the Freedom token are all unreachable, and a policy built to be
reckless with Stress is indistinguishable from one built to husband it.
That is a deeper account of F17 than F17 has. Not raised as a finding yet:
it wants the plural panel first.
A constant was investigated rather than reported: darvo was exactly 400 in
every cell while atk scaled with seats. Six-player final Stress is
[5,5,4,4,4,4] every seed — H1-B holds the attacker at 4, below the arm,
and pushes its targets to 5. The self-soothe suppresses DARVO in the
aggressor and concentrates it in the attacked. The direction follows from
H1-B's arithmetic; the number 2 is partly an artifact of reactive's
first-legal targeting, and is labelled as such.
Still unreviewed: tier L review outstanding on CB-WP-0038, and nothing
here reaches ground-game until it runs.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 01:08:40 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## 4. What this does not say
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **`reactive` is not a good player and is not meant to be.** It wins
|
|
|
|
|
|
nothing under H1 and exactly what greedy wins under baseline. It is an
|
|
|
|
|
|
instrument for reaching the Stress economy, not a claim about how people
|
|
|
|
|
|
play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **Two policies is still not a panel.** RetrospectiveAnalysis §4.1 asks
|
|
|
|
|
|
for greedy, random and first-legal at minimum; this pass added a fourth
|
|
|
|
|
|
axis to two of them, in one mode.
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **SHARED GROUND only.** CB-EV-0030 covered three modes; this covers one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **No felt-play**, and this is the kind of claim — about pressure, and
|
|
|
|
|
|
when a player feels cornered — that a human table answers and 3,200
|
|
|
|
|
|
simulated games do not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Close the three items CB-REV-0001 left open
H1-B on the DARVO extra Attack: the delta says the extra Attack shares
the Attack resolution "so it can self-soothe too if Stress >= 4".
CB-WP-0038 asserted it because the code shares resolve_attack; nothing
tested it, and CB-EV-0031's withdrawn mechanism story ran through that
exact path. Now tested and mutation-verified.
Round-5 pressure did not reach the score, and this was a real defect
rather than a reporting one. end_round_events scored from `self` while
H1-A's pressure went into `work`, and score() reads Stress for the GR-E03
and GR-E04 tiebreaks — so the final round's pressure was invisible to the
two modes CB-EV-0030 reports on. Fixed. The test uses the case that bites:
uniform pressure preserves an ordering, so it takes the clamp at 5 to
collapse a gap and change who wins.
Inert arms reported separately: a DARVO arm at the End of Round 5 can
never advance a stage, and criterion 1 is about DARVO mattering. 29 of 363
at 2p, none above — matching the reviewer's independent figure, so
criterion 1 stands as met.
That fix produced one more wrong-subject error, caught before reporting:
the first inert-arm metric tested `g.rounds >= 5`, a property of the GAME
rather than the EVENT, so it marked every arm in every completed game
inert and briefly read as "criterion 1 fails after all". An arm is inert
when no RoundEnded follows it.
regulation.rs no longer skips setup failures silently: they are counted,
and a short cell fails an assertion rather than printing a number a reader
has to notice — which is the credit CB-EV-0030 §3 took and half earned.
All thirteen challenges closed. Re-review is owed before any of this
travels: the corrections were made by the author of the errors.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 02:14:19 +02:00
|
|
|
|
## 5. The three items the review left open, now closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**H1-B on the DARVO extra Attack** — the delta says the extra Attack
|
|
|
|
|
|
shares the Attack resolution *"so it can self-soothe too if Stress ≥ 4"*.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CB-WP-0038 asserted it because the code shares `resolve_attack`; nothing
|
|
|
|
|
|
tested it, and the withdrawn §3 ran straight through this path.
|
|
|
|
|
|
`h1b_soothes_the_darvo_stage_attack_too` now covers it, mutation-verified.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CB-REV-0002: round 2, and the corrections were not approvable either
Three FATAL, five SERIOUS. The substance of round 1's corrections held —
Reactive is genuinely one arm different, the five replacement controls are
non-inert, the inert metric is right, the numbers reproduce. What failed
were the CLAIMS about them, and two defects the corrections introduced.
FATAL 1: the fix for round 1's #11 did not fix it. The assertion was
`games + setup_fails == 200`, and a refused setup increments setup_fails
while skipping games — so the sum is invariant under exactly the failure
it claimed to catch. Injecting setup failures gave exit 0 over 196-game
columns. Now asserts games == GAMES, verified to exit 101.
FATAL 2: the correction to the selective-column FATAL was itself
selective. "81-1000 per cell, baseline AND H1" and "31-1000" twelve lines
apart, both taken from the baseline row; under H1 rank-75 arms are
59/0/0/0. Every cell is now printed rather than summarised, and the
corrected verdict is the opposite of the one it replaced: under rank-75,
H1 REDUCES DARVO arms to zero at 3p and above.
FATAL 3: "DARVO arms 2 per seat per game" is 1 per seat per game, exactly,
at every band.
SERIOUS: the tiebreak oracle asserted only that the winner set CHANGED, so
reversing the tiebreak left it green; the #13 defect's impact was claimed
and never measured (72,000 games: zero divergences — real in principle,
witnessed only by a constructed board); a 29-of-363 citation pointed at a
file that did not contain it (round 1's reviewer did report it, and it was
never transcribed — the record was wrong, not the number); the harnesses
were run by NO GATE, so every published figure came from a manual run of
an ungated binary, including the assertion added for #1; and edition-check's
sibling handling — added by the last correction — was self-certifying,
crashed instead of failing, and counted Markdown lines as coverage. Now
discovered on disk, and it found a real gap on its first run: Rules_Text.csv
vendored with no digest.
Also: "peak Stress held" was dead code kept quiet by `let _ = held;` — the
numbers were right by coincidence.
make panels is now a registered gate. Round 3 is owed.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 09:44:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
**Round-5 pressure did not reach the score.** `end_round_events` scored
|
|
|
|
|
|
from `self` while H1-A's pressure went into `work`, and `score` reads
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stress for the GR-E03 and GR-E04 tiebreaks. Fixed, and the test uses the
|
|
|
|
|
|
case that actually bites: uniform pressure preserves an ordering, so it
|
|
|
|
|
|
takes the **clamp** at 5 to collapse a gap and change who wins.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**Its impact was claimed and never measured, and the measurement is
|
|
|
|
|
|
zero** (round 2, #5). This file said the pressure was invisible to *"the
|
CB-REV-0003: round 3, and three of four FATAL came from round 2's fixes
The pattern is now measured over three rounds: 5 fatal, then 3 (2 from the
previous round's corrections), then 4 (3 from them). The corrections are
not getting safer.
FATAL 1: round 2's short-cell assertion went into regulation.rs only.
attack-value.rs — which produced every number in CB-EV-0030's DARVO table
— still just warned, and the gate registered to close the finding claimed
the property for both.
FATAL 2, the sharpest of the three rounds: counting games proves they
STARTED. Stopping the engine after one round gives 200 games, all-zero
columns and exit 0 — byte for byte the signature CB-EV-0030 says the
instrumentation distinguishes from a real result. Both harnesses now
require every counted game to have reached an outcome over five rounds.
FATAL 3: round 2's `.csv` filter was applied to all three loops, so
catalog.yaml and rules_delta.yaml — whose missing digests were round 1's
finding — were recorded and then never compared, and never checked against
upstream at all. Only the parser loop filters now.
FATAL 4: five of six tiebreak comparators had no coverage. GR-E04's
tiebreak never executes in any scenario. All four are now covered and
mutation-verified; the Blame key needed compensating claims to be
reachable at all, since Blame also lowers the coalition score.
SERIOUS: "peak held" computed the same number as "peak assigned" for every
possible input — the real gap was that START_STRESS was an unchecked
constant, now read off the dealt state; cadence="none" was a pure
loophole, removed; sibling discovery swapped a hand-written list for
hand-written globs and missed metadata.json and VARIANT.md, both named in
the package's own changed_files — now walked, and it found them
immediately; and "~72,000 games" was unsourced, make panels runs 17,600.
Also separated two kinds of number that were presented alike: seats×games
is invariant, 363 and 29 vary 7.1%-11.5% across samples.
Round 4 owed. The conclusion is not that the work is nearly right — it is
that author-made corrections to measurement work should be assumed
defective until a fresh reader has attacked them.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 10:26:25 +02:00
|
|
|
|
two modes CB-EV-0030 reports on"* without checking. Reverting the fix
|
|
|
|
|
|
leaves `attack-value`'s output **byte-identical across all 24 cells and
|
|
|
|
|
|
all three modes**, including the two whose `won` column reads through the
|
|
|
|
|
|
tiebreak. **The defect is real in principle and its only witness is a
|
|
|
|
|
|
hand-constructed board.**
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**The sample size quoted here was "~72,000 games" and was not
|
|
|
|
|
|
derivable from anything in this repo** (round 3, #9). `make panels` runs
|
|
|
|
|
|
**17,600**: `attack-value` is 2 variants × 3 modes × 3 policies × 4 seat
|
|
|
|
|
|
counts × 200 = 14,400, and `regulation` is 2 × 4 × 2 × 200 = 3,200. The
|
|
|
|
|
|
figure was adopted from a reviewer's message and never re-derived — in
|
|
|
|
|
|
the file whose whole correction history is about exactly that.
|
Close the three items CB-REV-0001 left open
H1-B on the DARVO extra Attack: the delta says the extra Attack shares
the Attack resolution "so it can self-soothe too if Stress >= 4".
CB-WP-0038 asserted it because the code shares resolve_attack; nothing
tested it, and CB-EV-0031's withdrawn mechanism story ran through that
exact path. Now tested and mutation-verified.
Round-5 pressure did not reach the score, and this was a real defect
rather than a reporting one. end_round_events scored from `self` while
H1-A's pressure went into `work`, and score() reads Stress for the GR-E03
and GR-E04 tiebreaks — so the final round's pressure was invisible to the
two modes CB-EV-0030 reports on. Fixed. The test uses the case that bites:
uniform pressure preserves an ordering, so it takes the clamp at 5 to
collapse a gap and change who wins.
Inert arms reported separately: a DARVO arm at the End of Round 5 can
never advance a stage, and criterion 1 is about DARVO mattering. 29 of 363
at 2p, none above — matching the reviewer's independent figure, so
criterion 1 stands as met.
That fix produced one more wrong-subject error, caught before reporting:
the first inert-arm metric tested `g.rounds >= 5`, a property of the GAME
rather than the EVENT, so it marked every arm in every completed game
inert and briefly read as "criterion 1 fails after all". An arm is inert
when no RoundEnded follows it.
regulation.rs no longer skips setup failures silently: they are counted,
and a short cell fails an assertion rather than printing a number a reader
has to notice — which is the credit CB-EV-0030 §3 took and half earned.
All thirteen challenges closed. Re-review is owed before any of this
travels: the corrections were made by the author of the errors.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 02:14:19 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**Inert arms, and a second wrong-subject error caught on the way.** A
|
|
|
|
|
|
DARVO arm at the End of Round 5 can never advance a stage — `GameEnded`
|
|
|
|
|
|
follows immediately — and ground-game's criterion 1 is about DARVO
|
|
|
|
|
|
*mattering*. Now reported separately:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| seats | arms | of which inert |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---:|---:|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2p | 363 | **29** (8%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3p | 600 | 0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4p | 800 | 0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6p | 1200 | 0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CB-REV-0003: round 3, and three of four FATAL came from round 2's fixes
The pattern is now measured over three rounds: 5 fatal, then 3 (2 from the
previous round's corrections), then 4 (3 from them). The corrections are
not getting safer.
FATAL 1: round 2's short-cell assertion went into regulation.rs only.
attack-value.rs — which produced every number in CB-EV-0030's DARVO table
— still just warned, and the gate registered to close the finding claimed
the property for both.
FATAL 2, the sharpest of the three rounds: counting games proves they
STARTED. Stopping the engine after one round gives 200 games, all-zero
columns and exit 0 — byte for byte the signature CB-EV-0030 says the
instrumentation distinguishes from a real result. Both harnesses now
require every counted game to have reached an outcome over five rounds.
FATAL 3: round 2's `.csv` filter was applied to all three loops, so
catalog.yaml and rules_delta.yaml — whose missing digests were round 1's
finding — were recorded and then never compared, and never checked against
upstream at all. Only the parser loop filters now.
FATAL 4: five of six tiebreak comparators had no coverage. GR-E04's
tiebreak never executes in any scenario. All four are now covered and
mutation-verified; the Blame key needed compensating claims to be
reachable at all, since Blame also lowers the coalition score.
SERIOUS: "peak held" computed the same number as "peak assigned" for every
possible input — the real gap was that START_STRESS was an unchecked
constant, now read off the dealt state; cadence="none" was a pure
loophole, removed; sibling discovery swapped a hand-written list for
hand-written globs and missed metadata.json and VARIANT.md, both named in
the package's own changed_files — now walked, and it found them
immediately; and "~72,000 games" was unsourced, make panels runs 17,600.
Also separated two kinds of number that were presented alike: seats×games
is invariant, 363 and 29 vary 7.1%-11.5% across samples.
Round 4 owed. The conclusion is not that the work is nearly right — it is
that author-made corrections to measurement work should be assumed
defective until a fresh reader has attacked them.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 10:26:25 +02:00
|
|
|
|
**Two kinds of number are in that table and this file did not distinguish
|
|
|
|
|
|
them** (round 3, #10). `600 / 800 / 1200` is **exactly `seats × games`**
|
|
|
|
|
|
and holds on every sample tried. `363` and `29` are **sample-specific**:
|
|
|
|
|
|
across four disjoint windows the 2p arms run 354–366 and the inert share
|
|
|
|
|
|
runs **7.1%–11.5%**. So "92% of arms at 2p are live" is a fact about seeds
|
|
|
|
|
|
`0..200`, not about the game — it reads 88.5% elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The same applies to the baseline win counts quoted throughout
|
|
|
|
|
|
(`132/165/190/200`): the *identity* of greedy and reactive under baseline
|
|
|
|
|
|
holds on every sample, the **digits do not**.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Close the three items CB-REV-0001 left open
H1-B on the DARVO extra Attack: the delta says the extra Attack shares
the Attack resolution "so it can self-soothe too if Stress >= 4".
CB-WP-0038 asserted it because the code shares resolve_attack; nothing
tested it, and CB-EV-0031's withdrawn mechanism story ran through that
exact path. Now tested and mutation-verified.
Round-5 pressure did not reach the score, and this was a real defect
rather than a reporting one. end_round_events scored from `self` while
H1-A's pressure went into `work`, and score() reads Stress for the GR-E03
and GR-E04 tiebreaks — so the final round's pressure was invisible to the
two modes CB-EV-0030 reports on. Fixed. The test uses the case that bites:
uniform pressure preserves an ordering, so it takes the clamp at 5 to
collapse a gap and change who wins.
Inert arms reported separately: a DARVO arm at the End of Round 5 can
never advance a stage, and criterion 1 is about DARVO mattering. 29 of 363
at 2p, none above — matching the reviewer's independent figure, so
criterion 1 stands as met.
That fix produced one more wrong-subject error, caught before reporting:
the first inert-arm metric tested `g.rounds >= 5`, a property of the GAME
rather than the EVENT, so it marked every arm in every completed game
inert and briefly read as "criterion 1 fails after all". An arm is inert
when no RoundEnded follows it.
regulation.rs no longer skips setup failures silently: they are counted,
and a short cell fails an assertion rather than printing a number a reader
has to notice — which is the credit CB-EV-0030 §3 took and half earned.
All thirteen challenges closed. Re-review is owed before any of this
travels: the corrections were made by the author of the errors.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 02:14:19 +02:00
|
|
|
|
**The first version of that metric was wrong and equalled `darvo` in
|
|
|
|
|
|
every cell**, because it tested `g.rounds >= 5` — a property of the
|
|
|
|
|
|
*game*, not of the *event*. Every arm in every completed game was marked
|
|
|
|
|
|
inert, which briefly looked like "criterion 1 is not met after all". An
|
CB-REV-0002: round 2, and the corrections were not approvable either
Three FATAL, five SERIOUS. The substance of round 1's corrections held —
Reactive is genuinely one arm different, the five replacement controls are
non-inert, the inert metric is right, the numbers reproduce. What failed
were the CLAIMS about them, and two defects the corrections introduced.
FATAL 1: the fix for round 1's #11 did not fix it. The assertion was
`games + setup_fails == 200`, and a refused setup increments setup_fails
while skipping games — so the sum is invariant under exactly the failure
it claimed to catch. Injecting setup failures gave exit 0 over 196-game
columns. Now asserts games == GAMES, verified to exit 101.
FATAL 2: the correction to the selective-column FATAL was itself
selective. "81-1000 per cell, baseline AND H1" and "31-1000" twelve lines
apart, both taken from the baseline row; under H1 rank-75 arms are
59/0/0/0. Every cell is now printed rather than summarised, and the
corrected verdict is the opposite of the one it replaced: under rank-75,
H1 REDUCES DARVO arms to zero at 3p and above.
FATAL 3: "DARVO arms 2 per seat per game" is 1 per seat per game, exactly,
at every band.
SERIOUS: the tiebreak oracle asserted only that the winner set CHANGED, so
reversing the tiebreak left it green; the #13 defect's impact was claimed
and never measured (72,000 games: zero divergences — real in principle,
witnessed only by a constructed board); a 29-of-363 citation pointed at a
file that did not contain it (round 1's reviewer did report it, and it was
never transcribed — the record was wrong, not the number); the harnesses
were run by NO GATE, so every published figure came from a manual run of
an ungated binary, including the assertion added for #1; and edition-check's
sibling handling — added by the last correction — was self-certifying,
crashed instead of failing, and counted Markdown lines as coverage. Now
discovered on disk, and it found a real gap on its first run: Rules_Text.csv
vendored with no digest.
Also: "peak Stress held" was dead code kept quiet by `let _ = held;` — the
numbers were right by coincidence.
make panels is now a registered gate. Round 3 is owed.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 09:44:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
arm is inert when no `RoundEnded` follows it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CB-REV-0003: round 3, and three of four FATAL came from round 2's fixes
The pattern is now measured over three rounds: 5 fatal, then 3 (2 from the
previous round's corrections), then 4 (3 from them). The corrections are
not getting safer.
FATAL 1: round 2's short-cell assertion went into regulation.rs only.
attack-value.rs — which produced every number in CB-EV-0030's DARVO table
— still just warned, and the gate registered to close the finding claimed
the property for both.
FATAL 2, the sharpest of the three rounds: counting games proves they
STARTED. Stopping the engine after one round gives 200 games, all-zero
columns and exit 0 — byte for byte the signature CB-EV-0030 says the
instrumentation distinguishes from a real result. Both harnesses now
require every counted game to have reached an outcome over five rounds.
FATAL 3: round 2's `.csv` filter was applied to all three loops, so
catalog.yaml and rules_delta.yaml — whose missing digests were round 1's
finding — were recorded and then never compared, and never checked against
upstream at all. Only the parser loop filters now.
FATAL 4: five of six tiebreak comparators had no coverage. GR-E04's
tiebreak never executes in any scenario. All four are now covered and
mutation-verified; the Blame key needed compensating claims to be
reachable at all, since Blame also lowers the coalition score.
SERIOUS: "peak held" computed the same number as "peak assigned" for every
possible input — the real gap was that START_STRESS was an unchecked
constant, now read off the dealt state; cadence="none" was a pure
loophole, removed; sibling discovery swapped a hand-written list for
hand-written globs and missed metadata.json and VARIANT.md, both named in
the package's own changed_files — now walked, and it found them
immediately; and "~72,000 games" was unsourced, make panels runs 17,600.
Also separated two kinds of number that were presented alike: seats×games
is invariant, 363 and 29 vary 7.1%-11.5% across samples.
Round 4 owed. The conclusion is not that the work is nearly right — it is
that author-made corrections to measurement work should be assumed
defective until a fresh reader has attacked them.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 10:26:25 +02:00
|
|
|
|
**The 29-of-363 citation has now been wrong twice and is stated plainly
|
|
|
|
|
|
here.** Round 2 found it credited to `CB-REV-0001`, which did not contain
|
|
|
|
|
|
the figure; round 1's reviewer *had* reported it, in its message only.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Round 3 found the remaining problem (#10, #11): both "independent
|
|
|
|
|
|
confirmations" used **seeds 0..200**, so what was confirmed twice is the
|
|
|
|
|
|
**definition**, not the figure — and whether round 1's `StrictReactive`
|
|
|
|
|
|
was the corrected one-arm policy or the five-difference one **cannot be
|
|
|
|
|
|
determined from anything in this repo**, because that reviewer's code was
|
|
|
|
|
|
never kept. Treat 29/363 as one sample of a quantity that varies.
|
Close the three items CB-REV-0001 left open
H1-B on the DARVO extra Attack: the delta says the extra Attack shares
the Attack resolution "so it can self-soothe too if Stress >= 4".
CB-WP-0038 asserted it because the code shares resolve_attack; nothing
tested it, and CB-EV-0031's withdrawn mechanism story ran through that
exact path. Now tested and mutation-verified.
Round-5 pressure did not reach the score, and this was a real defect
rather than a reporting one. end_round_events scored from `self` while
H1-A's pressure went into `work`, and score() reads Stress for the GR-E03
and GR-E04 tiebreaks — so the final round's pressure was invisible to the
two modes CB-EV-0030 reports on. Fixed. The test uses the case that bites:
uniform pressure preserves an ordering, so it takes the clamp at 5 to
collapse a gap and change who wins.
Inert arms reported separately: a DARVO arm at the End of Round 5 can
never advance a stage, and criterion 1 is about DARVO mattering. 29 of 363
at 2p, none above — matching the reviewer's independent figure, so
criterion 1 stands as met.
That fix produced one more wrong-subject error, caught before reporting:
the first inert-arm metric tested `g.rounds >= 5`, a property of the GAME
rather than the EVENT, so it marked every arm in every completed game
inert and briefly read as "criterion 1 fails after all". An arm is inert
when no RoundEnded follows it.
regulation.rs no longer skips setup failures silently: they are counted,
and a short cell fails an assertion rather than printing a number a reader
has to notice — which is the credit CB-EV-0030 §3 took and half earned.
All thirteen challenges closed. Re-review is owed before any of this
travels: the corrections were made by the author of the errors.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 02:14:19 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**Criterion 1 stands as met**: 92% of arms at 2p and all of them above are
|
|
|
|
|
|
live.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**`regulation.rs` no longer skips setup failures silently.** They are
|
|
|
|
|
|
counted, and a short cell now **fails an assertion** rather than printing
|
|
|
|
|
|
a number a reader has to notice — which is what CB-EV-0030 §3 claimed
|
|
|
|
|
|
credit for and only half did.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## 6. Open
|
CB-WP-0039: a seat that does not regulate — and it changes H1's verdict
CB-EV-0030 concluded H1's DARVO arm rate was still 0. That was true of the
panel, and the panel was greedy-family throughout. GreedyPolicy ranks
`Ground if gated => 100`, so it grounds the instant the stress gate bites,
Stress plateaus at 3, and the arm at 5 is unreachable by construction. "H1
does nothing" was really "H1 does nothing to a seat that already manages
its Stress" — and H1 was written for the seat that does not.
`reactive` is greedy with exactly one preference changed: GROUND demoted
below ATTACK. Under it, H1's criteria 1 and 2 are MET — DARVO arms 400
times per cell, ATTACK is chosen 3 times per seat per game. Criterion 3
fails harder: reactive wins nothing at any seat count.
The larger finding is about the baseline. Greedy and reactive play
IDENTICALLY under baseline, and peak Stress across 3,200 baseline games
was 1 — against a starting value of 2. The gate at 4, the DARVO arm at 5
and the Freedom token are all unreachable, and a policy built to be
reckless with Stress is indistinguishable from one built to husband it.
That is a deeper account of F17 than F17 has. Not raised as a finding yet:
it wants the plural panel first.
A constant was investigated rather than reported: darvo was exactly 400 in
every cell while atk scaled with seats. Six-player final Stress is
[5,5,4,4,4,4] every seed — H1-B holds the attacker at 4, below the arm,
and pushes its targets to 5. The self-soothe suppresses DARVO in the
aggressor and concentrates it in the attacked. The direction follows from
H1-B's arithmetic; the number 2 is partly an artifact of reactive's
first-legal targeting, and is labelled as such.
Still unreviewed: tier L review outstanding on CB-WP-0038, and nothing
here reaches ground-game until it runs.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 01:08:40 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **The baseline's Stress economy being unreachable (§2) deserves its own
|
|
|
|
|
|
finding**, and is not raised here because it wants the plural panel of
|
|
|
|
|
|
§4 first. It is the more consequential of the two results in this file.
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **Whether H1-B's suppression is intended** is ground-game's question,
|
|
|
|
|
|
and it is the sharpest thing this pass can hand them.
|