2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Vuong Hoang	e8eb1594d9	docs(lv-mccarthy): five-arm ladder -- ckpt300 wins every axis, held at the gate by 0.02 ... 1,200 generations across five arms. ckpt300 (epoch 0.652) is the best arm in the run on every axis that resolves: VOICE +0.177 at 3.2x its pairwise floor (primary), +0.128 at 2.8x with every punctuation mark stripped. Best point estimate AND best margin of any arm, spread 0.055/0.038 with no outlier seed. MEMORISATION 0.12 against real unseen McCarthy's own 0.12 -- identical -- with a longest match of 10 words against the author's coincidental 12. All 31 matches read: stock grammar, names are the renamed inventions, nothing protectable. DAMAGE ran-on +0.12. Clears the operator's ratified v2 floor of 0.200 by 40%. FAILS AMENDMENT 3's self-imposed 0.100 bar by 0.02. NOT SHIPPED, and the reason is the bar rather than the adapter. AMENDMENT 3 fixed ran-on <= 0.100 before either new arm existed, precisely so a marginal number could not be talked into a ship, and shipping at 0.12 would make that pre-registration theatre. But the bar's stated rationale was written against ckpt450's pass by 0.01 -- 5% of the threshold -- and ckpt300 clears by 40%. The number excludes a candidate the reasoning does not. That is an operator call. ckpt325/350/375 are on disk and one may sit under 0.100. They were deliberately NOT gated: searching the checkpoint space until something clears is candidate-shopping, the same family as threshold-shopping approached from the other side. THREE CLAIMS FROM EARLIER THIS SESSION ARE REFUTED and are corrected in the record: 1. "The damage is flat across epochs and only rotates direction" -- FALSE. ran-on is non-monotonic (0.38 -> 0.13 -> 0.20 -> 0.28 across epochs 0.49/0.65/0.98/ 1.96) with a real minimum near 0.65, and ckpt225 is 48% out-of-band against ckpt300's 35%. 2. "ckpt300 runs far too short, ckpt225 will clear ran-on by being short" -- FALSE on both. ckpt225 runs LONG (median 127, 38% over-band) and is the worst arm in the run. I generalised from SIX generations of one arm, which is the exact n=1 violation the measurement-discipline rule names, committed in the same breath as a note about being careful. 3. The original "gate an earlier checkpoint, the overshoot may not have arrived yet" recommendation was RIGHT. Retracting it an hour later on a three-arm read was the error, not the recommendation. What is true and unresolved by any checkpoint choice: 35% of ckpt300's generations miss the 90-140 band against base's 11%, and in-band is 0.65 against 0.89. An adapter that buys a voice and costs a third of the length compliance is a trade, not a defect -- but it is the operator's trade to accept. Raw artifacts for all five arms at scripts/mccarthy-corpus/gate-results/.	2026-09-21 17:53:43 -07:00
Vuong Hoang	4c3f3896f1	docs(lv-mccarthy): record the gate result -- voice passes, memorisation is the cleanest in the line, NOT shipped ... 720 generations, 3 arms x 60 held-out beats x 4 seeds, against the design frozen in GATE-PREREG.md before any arm existed. AXIS A VOICE -- PASS, both candidates, both reads. Span 0.661 -> 0.370 = 0.291 achievable; ckpt900 closed 59.1% (+0.172, but only 1.2x its floor), ckpt450 52.2% (+0.152 at 2.9x). The normalised secondary read HOLDS at +0.124 / +0.114, so about three quarters of the gain survives stripping every punctuation mark -- the voice is not the cheap win the register made available. AXIS B NOT COPIED -- ckpt450 is the cleanest result in the line. 0.12 hit-rate against the author's own held-out 0.12, and its longest match (11 words) is SHORTER than the author's coincidental longest (12). All 96 matched runs were read: stock grammar in the commonest words, the name-shaped hits are the RENAMED inventions, nothing protectable. The amendment is why this reads as clean -- the defective base control would have shown 0.12 vs 0.00 as a 12x red flag. Separately measured: the "his register makes collisions inevitable" story that was FALSE for Hemingway (0.01) is TRUE for McCarthy (0.12). Neither transfers. AXIS C NO DAMAGE -- FAIL, both, and it survives reading. 20% (ckpt450) / 28% (ckpt900) of generations overshoot the 90-140 band against base's 1%; p90 171/190 words, max 297/279. The worst case is degenerate looping, not a long McCarthy sentence. Base is GOOD on this axis here (0.89 in-band vs Hemingway's 0.05), so the adapter measurably makes instruction-following worse. NOT SHIPPED. Section 7 rule 3 makes axis C disqualifying outright. Recorded honestly: my own prereg's axis C transcribed score_beats.py's v1 criteria, including "in-band up on base", which the operator RETIRED on 2026-09-15 for exactly the reason it fails here -- base maxes it, so it is unsatisfiable on this corpus regardless of adapter quality. Under the operator's v2 (ran-on only) ckpt450 passes by 0.01 against a 0.200 floor. That reading was found AFTER the numbers and was NOT used; lv-bronte's floor defect is the in-line precedent for finding one and declining to exploit it. The prereg gets fixed prospectively for the next author, not re-read for this one. And the finding worth more than the adapter: the two-epoch recipe is now 0 for 3, and this time the loss curve was CONFIDENTLY wrong. On Bronte and Hemingway the epoch-1/epoch-2 checkpoints were tied, so preferring the earlier one cost nothing. Here the curve resolved epoch 2 as better at 4.9x the median neighbour jitter -- and epoch 2 lost every axis that resolves: 4.0x wider seed spread, 1.8x the author's memorisation rate against 1.0x, more ran-on, worse on-beat. Its only win is a 0.019 voice point estimate, inside the floor, and its spread is one outlier seed -- the third occurrence of that shape in the later checkpoint after lv-bronte's ckpt925 and lv-hemingway's ckpt1750. Raw artifacts committed at scripts/mccarthy-corpus/gate-results/ so the claims can be re-read without gx10.	2026-09-21 16:31:41 -07:00