port: close the last control harness, and two authored values checked against bytes

verify-transcode-fidelity --selftest closes my list. It had three controls running
every time -- identity, a 4-pole top-end loss, an unrelated movie -- and none
asked whether the measurement itself was live. With an empty band list every
comparison reads 0.0 dB: identity passes, the real pair passes, and only the
unrelated-movie control fails, reporting exit 1 for a broken instrument. Same
shape as the empty register in check-claims, same fix: exit 2. The self-test
drives the script as a subprocess over a short window -- normal 0, bands emptied
2. All four tools now assert their own harnesses.

Top-item sweep from the DIFFICULTY finding: one site, MenuFlow.initial_focus's
buttons[0], already documented as a repair. Every other [0] in the tree is
unrelated indexing. Nothing to fix, recorded so the sweep is known to have run.

The reset question is settled and it went the way that makes the restraint
correct: a submenu resets to its OWN OPENING ITEM, a per-screen default that need
not be the first. DIFFICULTY opens on NORMAL, second of four, and returns to
NORMAL after a confirmed DOWN and a round trip. So ptbtn11 is right for a reason
rather than by coincidence, and buttons[0]-is-a-repair is measured rather than
principled. contract-check gains check_reset_target, whose teeth the code bounds
honestly: on EXTRAS the named item happens to be first, so agreement is not
evidence -- what it guards is a future refactor silently substituting an index.

Their refutation attempt on extras/initial_focus was made against the disc rather
than against their agreement, and it survives: ptbtn11 y282 against 362 and 442.
Re-checked from this port's own export, a different reader of the same disc, and
the numbers are identical -- extras 282/362/442, main menu 162/242/322/401/482.
Which also confirms EXTRAS could never have separated named-item from top-item.

Menu focus does not survive a reboot: six fresh boots opened on NEW GAME, three of
them following sessions that ended on EXTRAS or OPTIONS. So the authored value is
a fresh-start value. The reach is carried verbatim into the why -- every session
ended with the emulator KILLED, so this measures 'does not survive a killed
session', and a console that remembers across a clean power cycle would not
contradict it.

Still open and not leaned on: whether the reset target moves once a difficulty has
been confirmed; the same SELECT DATA crash prevents testing it.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01N7FiFFFwbvG2uxdcEh8HyF

authored/flow.json

@@ -191,6 +191,17 @@
     "reasoning that chose NEW GAME here -- and the Decoder had said explicitly that",
     "my agreeing with their records was no evidence, which was correct at the time.",
     "",
+    "✅ AND IT SURVIVES A REBOOT -- MEASURED 2026-08-31. Six fresh boots all",
+    "opened on NEW GAME, and THREE of them followed a session that ended with the",
+    "cursor on EXTRAS or OPTIONS. That is what makes it a test of persistence",
+    "rather than six repetitions of the same start.",
+    "",
+    "⚠️ REACH, and it is the Decoder's own caveat rather than mine: every one of",
+    "those sessions ended with the emulator KILLED, not shut down cleanly. A game",
+    "that writes menu state on a clean exit never gets the chance, so this",
+    "measures 'does not survive a KILLED session'. If a real console remembers a",
+    "cursor across a power cycle, that does not contradict this.",
+    "",
     "⚠️ WHY 'FIRST ENTRY' IS LOAD-BEARING: the menu REMEMBERS ITS CURSOR (see",
     "`focus_persists`), so any reading not taken on a fresh boot's first entry is",
     "measuring HISTORY, not what the screen opens on. That objection is what",
@@ -378,7 +389,26 @@
     "measuring history -- which is precisely what made the caveat necessary while",
     "persistence here was unknown.",
     "",
-    "⚠️ WHAT IS STILL AMBIGUOUS -- and the condition below is ALREADY MET:",
+    "✅ THE AMBIGUITY IS RESOLVED -- MEASURED 2026-08-31, and it went the way",
+    "that makes `ptbtn11` right for a REASON rather than by coincidence.",
+    "",
+    "A submenu resets to ITS OWN OPENING ITEM, and that item is a per-screen",
+    "default which need NOT be the first. Decoder, docs/re/data/",
+    "difficulty-resets-to-named-item.txt: DIFFICULTY opens on NORMAL (second of",
+    "four); after one confirmed DOWN to HARD, (B) out and (A) back returns to",
+    "NORMAL -- in-cursor 1.0 from where it opened against 93.9 from where it was",
+    "left. Reproduced on a FRESH BOOT and confirmed by eye, not read off the",
+    "2026-08-29 capture.",
+    "",
+    "So the port's `initial_focus` is the reset target, and `buttons[0]` in",
+    "`MenuFlow.initial_focus` is a REPAIR rather than a default -- which is how",
+    "it was already documented, and is now measured rather than principled.",
+    "",
+    "❔ STILL OPEN, and not leaned on: whether the reset target MOVES once a",
+    "difficulty has actually been confirmed. A game that remembered your last",
+    "choice would behave differently, and the probe never confirms one -- the",
+    "same SELECT DATA crash that constrains the run prevents testing it.",
+    "",
     "",
     "🔴 CORRECTED 2026-08-31. This read \"it matters IF another screen is ever",
     "authored\" whose opening item is not its first. Such a screen exists and is",
@@ -405,7 +435,18 @@
     "  (was) Kept as `measured` because the frame really does show MISSION SELECT focused,",
     "  (was) and kept as the port's opening item because it is the only reading there is.",
     "  (was) 🔴 If EXTRAS turns out to persist, this becomes history and the kind must",
-    "  (was) change with it."
+    "  (was) change with it.",
+    "",
+    "✅ CHECKED AGAINST THE BYTES 2026-08-31, by both agents independently. The",
+    "Decoder attempted to refute this value and it survives: `ptbtn11` is the TOP",
+    "button on this screen -- y 282 against 362 and 442 -- so the port is right",
+    "whichever reading of the reset target applies. Confirmed from THIS port's own",
+    "export, a different reader of the same disc: extras 282/362/442, and the main",
+    "menu as a control at 162/242/322/401/482.",
+    "",
+    "🔴 WHICH ALSO MEANS EXTRAS CANNOT SEPARATE the two readings -- named item and",
+    "top item coincide here. It was DIFFICULTY, opening on its second of four, that",
+    "settled it."
    ],
    "on_cancel": {
     "goto": "main_menu",