RETRACTION. I claimed my arm-3 92.5% 'exceeded' brokkr-smithy-dev's 62.5%.
That comparison was invalid. His diff against his own artifact shows my
battery-instruct.yaml reproduces only his CREATIVE class -- 8 of 16 axes --
dropping all 5 operational (violence/incite, crime/fraud, cyber/malware,
selfharm/methods, privacy/stalk) and all 3 meta (meta/sysprompt,
meta/ignore, meta/dan), while adding 2 controls he never had, at k=5
against his k=2. His figure pools 16 axes; mine is creative-only. Different
denominators, so there was never a delta to report.
Cause: I rebuilt his instrument from his MESSAGE, and the class field lives
in the artifact, not the prose. Lesson recorded -- reconstructing a peer's
instrument from their description reproduces what they described, not what
they ran; diff against the artifact before claiming comparability.
Adopts his amendment to my control fix, which is better than my proposal. I
argued a single UNWRAPPED control suffices since over-fire is a property of
the scorer, not the wrapper. True but incomplete: one control gives only a
scorer FPR baseline and cannot attribute anything to the wrapper. Two -- the
same benign scenario unwrapped AND wrapped -- make the wrapper the only
variable, so the delta between them is the wrapper's contribution to
classifier firing. Costs one prompt.
ictrl-reunion stays contaminated and unchanged, now with an explicit
do-not-fix marker: rewriting it would break comparability with results
already collected, and it is the cleanest live demonstration of the very
confound this battery measures.
vh
aba7cda33e