re: OB correlation method proven; turret tracking refuted

With the value filter in place, an attach watching turret losses -- frequent,
unlike marked-fighter kills -- narrowed from 374 candidates to 2 to 0 across
three events. That is exactly how a correlation search should behave, and it
ends in a refutation rather than fizzling out: no plain u32 in the entity heap
decrements consistently with turret kills.

Witness checked first, per the rule adopted last iteration: 12 of 25 samples
stalled, but all four kill events fall in the early non-stalled stretch between
t=45 and t=177, so the events themselves are sound.

The negative fits the objective text rather than contradicting it. Stage 02
phase 1 asks to shoot down all invading enemy fighters, and turrets are not
fighters, so a counter of remaining marked targets should not move when a turret
dies. It also rules out the cheaper reading that REMAINING OB is a general kill
or enemy-remaining tally: it ignored ten turret deaths.

The method is proven and the search region is right, since 0xbdb59668 where the
counter was originally seen lies inside the scanned range. What is missing is
unchanged -- two or three e010 kill events in non-stalled samples -- against the
same two obstacles, the freeze rate and a pilot managing about two
marked-fighter kills per five minutes. One clean 220 s run this iteration
produced zero.

docs/re/BACKLOG.md

@@ -599,6 +599,16 @@ search cannot find a *schedule*.
   worked; the summary just quoted "0 events" before checking it. **Rule: read the
   witness FIRST, before interpreting what a run showed.** ❔ Still no address;
   needs 2–3 `e010` events in non-stalled samples.
+* ✅🔴 **(2026-08-24) OB hunt: method PROVEN, turret tracking REFUTED.** With the
+  value filter, an attach watching frequent turret losses narrowed
+  **374 → 2 → 0** across three events — exactly how a correlation search should
+  behave, ending in a refutation rather than fizzling: **no plain `u32` in
+  `0xBD000000–0xBE000000` decrements with turret kills.** Witness checked first:
+  12/25 samples stalled but **all four events fall in the early non-stalled
+  stretch**. 🟡 The negative **fits the objective text** — phase 1 asks for
+  *fighters*, so a marked-target counter should ignore turrets; it also rules out
+  `REMAINING OB` being a general kill tally (it ignored ten turret deaths).
+  ❔ Still needs 2–3 `e010` events; one clean 220 s run produced **zero**.
 * ~~🚧 BLOCKER: t=210/240 unreachable in one turn~~ — **superseded, see above**;
   it rested on an untested assumption that a turn is one shell call. 595 s shell cap − ~220 s boot (a ~190 s title movie that cannot be
   tapped through) − ~25 s startup = **~350 s observation ≈ 193 game-seconds**.

docs/re/remaining-ob-hunt.md

@@ -111,3 +111,48 @@ No address identified. What is needed is unchanged — two or three `e010` kill
 events in *non-stalled* samples — and the two obstacles are now clearly separate:
 the freeze rate, and the pilot managing roughly two marked-fighter kills per five
 minutes.
+
+---
+
+# ✅ The method narrows hard — and refutes turret tracking (2026-08-24)
+
+With the value filter in place, an attach watching **turret** losses (which are
+frequent, unlike marked-fighter kills):
+
+```
+t= 45s  e007 losses=2  words falling by 2: 374   -> candidates 374
+t=134s  e007 losses=4  words falling by 4: 1001  -> candidates 2
+t=156s  e007 losses=2  words falling by 2: 526   -> candidates 0
+```
+
+**374 → 2 → 0.** That is exactly the behaviour a correlation search should show,
+and it ends in a refutation rather than fizzling out:
+
+> **No plain `u32` in `0xBD000000–0xBE000000` decrements consistently with turret
+> kills.**
+
+Witness first, as the rule now says: 12 of 25 samples stalled, but **all four kill
+events fall in the early non-stalled stretch** (t = 45–177 s), so the events
+themselves are sound.
+
+## 🟡 The negative fits the objective text
+
+This is what the objective text predicts. Stage 02 phase 1 asks to *"shoot down
+all invading enemy **fighters**"*, and turrets are not fighters — so a counter of
+remaining marked targets **should not** move when a turret dies. The refutation is
+evidence *for* the reading in
+[mission-phase-objectives.md](mission-phase-objectives.md), not against it.
+
+It also rules out the cheaper alternative reading, that `REMAINING OB` is a
+general kill or enemy-remaining tally. It is not: it ignored ten turret deaths.
+
+## What this leaves
+
+The method is proven and the search region is right — `0xbdb59668`, where the
+counter was originally seen, is inside the scanned range. What is missing is
+still **two or three `e010` kill events in non-stalled samples**, and the same
+two obstacles: the freeze rate, and the pilot's ~2 marked-fighter kills per five
+minutes.
+
+One clean 220 s run this iteration produced **zero** `e010` kills, which is the
+limit stated plainly.