# ERP/RP tune run-01 COMPLETE — 7.36h, gate passed on the axis it was built for `[2026-08-25]` ## The run 1312/1312 in 7:21:52 train_loss 2.793 epoch 1.0 20.1 s/it FLAT across every 100-step window (round 1: 35-46.5 s/it) adapter: /tank/erp-tune/run-01/adapter/ 410 tensors, provenance.json **47% faster than the round-1 projection of 13.85h**, from two changes: the bucketed sampler and flex attention. Rate was flat — 19.7 / 19.8 / 20.4 / 20.3 across the four 100-step windows — which means the 35-46.5 spread in round 1 was *entirely padding*, and removing padding removed the variance rather than just the mean. ⚠ **I quoted three different ETAs (6.9h, 8h, 7.3h) before I started using a rolling average.** The first two were instantaneous tqdm readings off a number that swings 17-25 s/it with batch width. Only the rolling rate was honest. Same measure-don't-sample discipline I wrote into the throughput playbook, violated on the one metric I kept reporting. ## lora_B gate — PASSED, twice checkpoint-100 205/205 non-zero, median norm 0.829 final adapter 205/205 non-zero, median norm 1.708 vision_tower tensors: 0 on both Median norm rising 0.829 -> 1.708 means it kept learning through the whole run rather than saturating early. This check **never ran in round 1** (died at step 19, first checkpoint was 100) and it is the only failure mode that stays invisible until the acceptance gate reports base-identical numbers. ## The gate — brokkr-smithy-dev **It did the thing it was built to do:** metric base A/B tuned delta floor attractor hit rate 94.8% / 96.8% 84.5% -11.3pt 2.0pt diversity (pairwise) 0.213 / 0.221 0.3948 +0.178 0.008 Diversity moved **22x its own noise floor**. Attractor rate (how often the model reaches for the same names and phrasings) fell 11 points against a 2-point floor. T1 100 · T2 95 · T3 96-97 · T4 98 · T5 100 · T6 81-82 · core ~94.2 memorisation: 0.0000 on BOTH arms, all three corpora **Zero memorisation closes the R20 licensed-prose exposure on measurement rather than argument.** ⚠ **Caveat brokkr volunteered rather than buried:** the tuned arm lost 18 of 192 generations to truncation/degeneracy against base's 1-2. Lopsided exclusions plausibly flatter the diversity magnitude. Direction is unambiguous at 22x floor; the number carries an asterisk. ## The noise-floor near-miss — the methodology lesson brokkr was one step from reporting a 13-point T6 regression **that sat inside twice his instrument's own variance.** --per-type 32 max swing across tasks: 9 points --per-type 128 max swing across tasks: 1 point His gate criterion is "no task regresses by more than one item" = 3.1 points at n=32. **The instrument's own run-to-run noise was 3 items.** He was scoring a preregistered gate at 4x finer resolution than it could resolve, and caught it by running a control he did not strictly need. Quadrupling n collapsed the noise exactly as binomial statistics predicts. ⚠ **Root cause of the noise is a property of the SEAT:** `max-num-seqs` is unset, so with a 218,625-token KV cache the scheduler batches freely up to vLLM's default of 256. Continuous batching changes reduction order and borderline items flip. Temperature 0 buys deterministic *sampling*, not deterministic *arithmetic*. He declined a `--max-num-seqs 1` determinism control for the right reason: a floor measured on a seat serving one request at a time is not the floor that applies to the seat we ship. ## The confound I built and he caught I optimised a pipeline for production and then handed him its output as an eval instrument **without asking whether those were the same job.** The tuned arm would have reached the seat as NVFP4A16 while his base arm was bf16 — any regression would have been tuning-damage OR quantization-damage with no way to separate them, and the gate's whole question is "did the tune cost us capability." **Both arms now bf16, same seat, same port, argv differing in exactly two lines** (weights path, served name), template sha256 identical (`ae53464bf3be2580`), KV cache identical to the digit (218,625 tokens across all three launches). Quantization moved *downstream* of the gate. See [[2026-08-25-refusal-retention-probe]] for the axis his gate did not have.