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>

evidence/CB-EV-0030-h1-measured.md

@@ -20,18 +20,33 @@ than trusted, and the ATTACK panel re-run for both rule sets.
 `ground-game`'s success criteria (design note §3.2), answered one by one.
 **Three of four fail.**
 
-> **CORRECTED 2026-08-08 after adversarial review**
-> ([`CB-REV-0001`](../reviews/CB-REV-0001-h1.md)). Criteria 1 and 2 were
-> rendered as flat failures **on the strength of the greedy column
-> alone**, while this pass's own harness printed 31–1000 DARVO arms per
-> cell in the rank-75 and rank-95 columns. That is the selective-column
-> move this project says it exists to prevent, committed in the file that
-> says so. The verdicts below are restated per column.
+> **CORRECTED TWICE.** Round 1 found criteria 1 and 2 rendered as flat
+> failures **on the greedy column alone**, while this pass's own harness
+> printed non-zero DARVO arms in the rank-75 and rank-95 columns — the
+> selective-column move, in the file that names it.
+>
+> **Round 2 found the correction was itself selective, and its numbers
+> wrong** ([`CB-REV-0002`](../reviews/CB-REV-0002-h1.md) #2): it quoted
+> "81–1000 per cell … baseline *and* H1" and, twelve lines away,
+> "31–1000". Both ranges came from the **baseline** rank-75 row. Under
+> **H1**, rank-75 arms are `2p 59, 3p 0, 4p 0, 6p 0` — three cells at zero
+> and the fourth below the stated floor.
+>
+> **Every cell is now given**, because two attempts at summarising this
+> into a range have now produced three wrong numbers.
+
+**DARVO arms per 200-game cell, SHARED GROUND** (all three modes agree on
+arms; they differ only in who wins):
+
+| | greedy | rank-75 | rank-95 |
+|---|---:|---:|---:|
+| **baseline** 2p / 3p / 4p / 6p | 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 | 81 / 125 / 218 / 31 | 400 / 805 / 1000 / 1000 |
+| **H1** 2p / 3p / 4p / 6p | 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 | **59 / 0 / 0 / 0** | 600 / 870 / 941 / 970 |
 
 | # | criterion | verdict |
 |---|---|---|
-| 1 | DARVO arm rate non-trivial, "not 0/500" | **not a flat fail.** **0** under greedy; **81–1000 per cell** under rank-75 and rank-95, baseline *and* H1. It fails for a seat that regulates and passes for one that does not — see [CB-EV-0031](CB-EV-0031-a-seat-that-does-not-regulate.md) |
-| 2 | ATTACK selection rises for some subpopulation | **mixed.** Greedy attacks **0** times; rank-75's ATTACK *fell* 604 → 180 at 2p; the unregulated seat's rose 0 → 726 |
+| 1 | DARVO arm rate non-trivial, "not 0/500" | **depends entirely on the policy, and H1 does not improve it for the middle one.** Zero under greedy in both. Under rank-75, H1 **reduces** arms to zero at 3p and above. Only rank-95 — a seat that always attacks — arms freely, and it does so **under the baseline too** |
+| 2 | ATTACK selection rises for some subpopulation | **no, for the policy the criterion is about.** Greedy attacks 0 times under both. rank-75's attacks fall 604 → 180 at 2p and **592/923/389 → 0** at 3p/4p/6p. Only the deliberately unregulated seat of CB-EV-0031 rises, and it never wins |
 | 3 | group success does not collapse | **fails hardest** — greedy's wins go **165 → 0** (3p), **190 → 0** (4p), **200 → 0** (6p) |
 | 4 | Bond/GROUND stay better than DARVO | holds, but **vacuously**: DARVO never fires |