# CB-REV-0003 — round 3

Fresh agent again. Run 2026-08-08 against the corrections made after
[`CB-REV-0002`](CB-REV-0002-h1.md).

> **Verdict: not approvable. Four FATAL, five SERIOUS, two MINOR — and
> three of the four FATAL were created or left by round 2's corrections.**
>
> **The pattern is now established over three rounds** and is the most
> useful thing this review has produced.

| round | challenges | FATAL | of which introduced by the previous round's fix |
|---|---:|---:|---:|
| 1 | 13 | 5 | — |
| 2 | 8 | 3 | 2 |
| 3 | 11 | 4 | 3 |

---

## The four fatal ones

### 1. The fix for round 2's #1 was applied to one of the two harnesses

`regulation.rs` got `assert_eq!(games, GAMES)`. **`attack-value.rs` — which
produced every number in CB-EV-0030's DARVO table — kept `if games != 200
{ eprintln!(..) }`.** Injected setup refusals gave exit 0 and a full table
over 195-game columns.

**And the gate registered to close the finding asserted the property for
both.** Its `checks` line was false of half of what it gates.

**Conceded.** Both harnesses assert now; the `checks` line says what is
actually checked.

### 2. Counting games proves they STARTED, not that they were PLAYED

Stopping the engine after one round (`round >= 5` → `>= 1`) gives **200
games in every cell, every value zero, exit 0, `make panels` green** —
byte for byte the signature CB-EV-0030 §3 claims the instrumentation
distinguishes from a real result.

**Conceded, and it is the sharpest finding of the three rounds.** The
counter answered *"did `play` return `Ok`"* while the claim made of it was
*"the zeros are real"*. Both harnesses now require every counted game to
have reached an outcome over five rounds; the one-round mutation fails
with the right message.

### 3. Round 2's `.csv` filter disabled the checks it was added beside

The filter was applied to **all three** loops — digest comparison, the CSV
parser check, and upstream freshness. 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. Tampering with both produced `[ok] × 12, exit 0`.

**Conceded.** Only the parser loop filters; tampering with either YAML now
fails on digest *and* freshness.

### 4. Five of six tiebreak comparators had no coverage

The strengthened oracle covered GR-E03's Stress key. **GR-E03's Bond key
and both of GR-E04's keys could be reversed with 179 tests and 26
scenarios green** — GR-E04's tiebreak never executes in any scenario,
because the only GR-E04 scenario sets `group_success: false`.

**Conceded.** All four are now covered and each was verified red under
mutation. **The Blame key took care to reach**: a coalition's score is
`sum(claimed − blame)`, so a Blame token lowers the score and key 1
decides first — the key is only reachable when claims compensate, and the
test asserts the scores tie before relying on it.

## The serious ones

| # | challenge | outcome |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | "peak Stress **held**, not assigned" — `peak_held ≡ max(start, peak_payload)` for every possible input, so the correction computed the same number | **conceded.** The fix was cosmetic and the comment was false of the new code too. The real coupling was missing, which is #6 |
| 6 | `START_STRESS` was an unchecked constant — setting it to 7 printed `peak 7` everywhere | **conceded.** Now read off the dealt state. Verified: changing setup's Stress to 3 moves the reported peak to 3 |
| 7 | `cadence = "none"` was a pure loophole — a real target that runs nowhere and passes | **conceded, removed.** It had one user, the empty-target CHAOS entry, which the loop already skips. `manual` remains self-declared and unchecked, and that is now stated rather than implied |
| 8 | sibling discovery swapped a hand-written list for three hand-written globs; `metadata.json` and `VARIANT.md` were invisible, and both are named in the package's own `changed_files` | **conceded.** Walked, not globbed. **It found both immediately**, plus nested files the globs could never reach |
| 9 | "~72,000 games" is not producible; `make panels` runs **17,600** | **conceded.** Adopted from a reviewer's message and never re-derived — in the file whose correction history is about exactly that. The conclusion (zero divergence) reproduces |

## The minor ones

- **10 — two kinds of number were presented alike.** `600/800/1200` is
  exactly `seats × games` on every sample; **`363` and `29` vary** —
  7.1%–11.5% inert across four windows. "92% of arms are live" is a fact
  about seeds `0..200`. Now separated.
- **11 — the 29/363 citation, wrong twice, is now stated as one sample**
  of a varying quantity. Both "independent confirmations" used the same
  seeds, so what was confirmed was the *definition*. Whether round 1's
  `StrictReactive` was the corrected policy cannot be determined: **that
  reviewer's code was never kept**, which is itself worth fixing.

## What held, after being attacked

**Every one of the 24 cells in CB-EV-0030's DARVO table reproduces
exactly** — the first of three attempts at that table to produce no wrong
number. `regulation`'s `assert_eq!(c.games, GAMES)` catches both the setup
and the `play` path. The #13 fix is genuinely controlled. H1-B's mutation
coverage is real. `make all` runs `panels` and fails on it. The
1-arm-per-seat-per-game invariant holds on every sample — **and is still
unexplained.**

## What could not be checked

Upstream freshness (`../ground-game` not checked out, so that half of
`edition-check` has never run here); whether `metadata.json` and
`VARIANT.md` are load-bearing to anything; round 1's `StrictReactive`;
felt-play; cost.

---

## The finding that outlasts H1

Three rounds, each correcting the last, each introducing defects of the
same class. **The corrections are not getting safer.**

> A correction is written under the belief that the error is now
> understood. That belief is the condition under which this class of
> error is produced — so the correction inherits it, and the next round
> finds the same shape one level in.

**Round 4 is owed by the same argument.** The honest 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**, and this project should stop treating "corrected" as a
state closer to done than "found wrong".