From ea0f3bfb14cb06a2ebad824af22fc2d90507c6aa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Levi Neuwirth Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2026 13:24:27 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] docs(framing): apply the corrections 18b74d7 claimed but did not make MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 18b74d7's message said the framing was corrected on all three findings. It was not. That script asserted its anchors and died on the second one --- the endpoint-table rows carry a two-space indent my anchor omitted --- and since it writes only at the end, NONE of the framing edits landed. The manifest and ledger edits in that commit are real; the framing ones were not, and I pushed the claim anyway. The assertions worked exactly as intended and I ignored their verdict: the shell chain ran `git commit` regardless of the script's exit status. Asserting the edit is not enough if the commit does not depend on it. Now actually applied to the framing: - §4b: "source hypothesis is eliminated", "the interval cannot contain the transition" and "not reachable by source" are withdrawn. What survives is that the two commits DO NOT DISCRIMINATE UNDER CURRENT CONDITIONS, so no bisect is justified now. A historical regression could be masked by a later environmental effect or a source/ environment interaction; failing to discriminate is not the same as not differing. The onset window is deprioritised, not excluded. - §7 endpoint table: both uniform-same rows now say the commits do not discriminate under current conditions, rather than that the interval does not contain the transition. - §7 D0b: retired as a precondition, with the reason recorded and the obligation preserved under A3 --- if D1/D2 do not account for the subset-vs-full difference, D0b runs before this lane closes. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_016bqGA6s9tTUFzYpbeW3tai --- docs/gpu-probe-sigint-framing.md | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/gpu-probe-sigint-framing.md b/docs/gpu-probe-sigint-framing.md index f662d34..499b9b2 100644 --- a/docs/gpu-probe-sigint-framing.md +++ b/docs/gpu-probe-sigint-framing.md @@ -280,11 +280,18 @@ run. **Zero voids, zero splits.** endpoint table this is *both endpoints uniform the same way*: the difference is **not captured by those two commits**. -- **No bisect of `7599661..724b785` is justified, and none will run.** - `7599661` passed inside `sweep-crdt` on 08-15 and fails 5/5 clean - today, so the interval cannot contain the transition. -- **The onset window is demoted.** Still a true observation, but not - reachable by source. +- **No bisect of `7599661..724b785` is justified UNDER CURRENT + CONDITIONS**, and none will run. `7599661` passed inside `sweep-crdt` + on 08-15 and fails 5/5 clean today, so the two commits **do not + discriminate now**. +- **That is the entire causal claim.** Earlier wording here — "the + source hypothesis is eliminated", "the interval cannot contain the + transition", "not reachable by source" — is **withdrawn**. + Uniform-red today says nothing about 08-15: a historical source + regression could be **masked** by a later environmental effect, or by + a source/environment interaction under which both commits now fail. + **Failing to discriminate is not the same as not differing.** +- **The onset window is deprioritised, not excluded.** - **A reliable reproduction now exists** — 10/10 today across two commits, ~4 minutes per run. This is D0a's most useful product: **D1/D2 no longer wait on a rare event.** @@ -417,8 +424,8 @@ group. |---|---|---| | uniform green | uniform red | **clean split → bisect `7599661..724b785` permitted** | | uniform red | uniform green | clean split, **direction inverted** — a real difference, but it falsifies which endpoint was believed good; record loudly and re-examine the onset reading before bisecting | - | uniform green | uniform green | **no difference captured**: the failure does not reproduce at either commit under current conditions → not a source question at these two commits; ask what else changed across the window | - | uniform red | uniform red | **no difference captured**: both reproduce, so the interval does not contain the transition → same next step | + | uniform green | uniform green | **the commits do not discriminate under current conditions** → no bisect now; ask what else changed across the window. This does **not** exclude a source difference that current conditions mask | + | uniform red | uniform red | **the commits do not discriminate under current conditions** → same. A historical regression masked by a later environmental effect, or a source/environment interaction, remains possible | | mixed | any | **intermittent under fixed source → no bisect**; back to D1/D2 | | any | mixed | as above | @@ -432,7 +439,21 @@ group. agrees. A bisect whose steps are cheaper than its endpoints would inherit exactly the weakness this contract exists to remove. -- **D0b — re-run the §4 matrix with captured provenance**, at `main`, +- **D0b — RETIRED as a precondition on 2026-08-19, kept as a + contingency.** It existed to make the §4 reduction matrix trustworthy + so the subset-vs-full comparison could locate the mechanism + *indirectly*. D0a has since produced a **reliable direct + reproduction** (10/10 across two commits, ~4 min/run), and D1/D2 + measure the mechanism itself. Sharpening an indirect instrument while + a direct one is in hand is the wrong order of work. + + **The obligation is not discharged.** A3 still binds: if D1/D2 do not + account for why every subset passed while the full sweep fails, + **D0b runs before this lane closes**, and its result is recorded + either way. Retiring it as a *precondition* does not retire the + question. + + As written, the retired step read: re-run the §4 matrix, at `main`, recording the artifact hashes actually executed **at run time**. Revision 2's strongest claim collapsed because command shape silently changed the binary; no further reduction should be trusted until each