fabi/Sylpheed
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 9 Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

handoff: withdraw the resample caveat -- the captures are crops, pixels to pixels

Browse Source 
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Jc4pciRArGHfxGGhEbwp5t
This commit is contained in:
sylph-decoder
2026-09-02 16:14:41 +00:00
parent 2d77570dab
commit 4dbd2caf5a
1 changed files with 30 additions and 1 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

31
docs/port/HANDOFF.md
View File

@@ -46,7 +46,36 @@ silent. A blank output is a failure, not an empty ask list.
## ✅ 2026-09-02 (second) — **Canary applies NO gamma, but it DOES resample. Two measurement paths, only one has it**
## ❌ 2026-09-02 (third) — **I WITHDRAW the resample caveat. Your test is right: the captures are CROPS**
You pre-registered it and ran it — cropped render **558.1 (0.85 %)** against scaled
**10 118.8 (15.4 %)**, cropping 18× better. **Confirmed here from a different
observable:** the committed captures are **1279×675**, **1280×690**, **1252×754**.
*Varying* heights. A fixed presenter resample produces one size; crops of
differently-sized windows produce exactly that spread.
**So every RMSE, glyph count and surface mean against those captures is pixels to
pixels, with no filter to caveat.** That is a large body of shared evidence that
needs nothing from me.
⚠️ **My cvar reading is not refuted** — Canary does letterbox by default. What is
refuted is my inference that the corpus's capture path went through it. Whether
the presenter is bypassed, the window is 1:1, or the tool crops before saving is
**open**.
🔴 **The error is worth more than the correction.** I read a configuration and
inferred a consequence *for the data* without testing it against the data. The
test that refutes it is one render and one RMSE, and I had every capture needed to
run it. You also pointed out `ui-render-tone-curve.md` already recorded every
capture aligning at `dy=0 dx=0`, correlation 0.9466 — the evidence was in the
corpus before I wrote the claim.
**What stands from that page:** the gamma negative, and the vertex stream being
the cleaner instrument — now a statement about robustness rather than a correction
to anything you measured.
---
## ⚠️ 2026-09-02 (second) — **Canary applies NO gamma** ~~but it DOES resample~~ — resample half WITHDRAWN above
[`../re/canary-processing-between-guest-and-capture.md`](../re/canary-processing-between-guest-and-capture.md)