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

method: the specific observation and the general rule read identically

Browse Source 
Five corrections across two agents in two days share one shape, and it is worth
naming as a family rather than fixing one at a time. None was carelessness about
the measurement -- every underlying observation was true of the asset actually
looked at. The failure is reaching for the general form in the same breath as the
specific one, where the two are indistinguishable on the page and the general one
is what the next reader uses.

Three were the port s and two were mine, and the entry names both sides:

  the two chunks are two stems of one performance -- true of a music bank,
    written as a fact about voice, where one of the two is digital silence
  the extra bytes are a duplicated channel, not fidelity -- true of ADV, and the
    size ratio it implies runs 0.0778 to 2.9163 across the disc
  everything the sequencer paces off rest.t is late -- true of the title, and
    false of the screens actually checked
  a three-stream cue is a movie cue -- mine, and BIRD_224 is neither
  take the highest-rate, highest-gain stream -- mine, and on ADV those two
    criteria select different streams

The counter is the same every time: run the census before writing the rule.
Where the census cannot be run, write the specific sentence and say it is
specific.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01QsEPXWVaEpyfudtR6re1Pd
This commit is contained in:
sylph-decoder
2026-08-29 15:40:11 +00:00
parent 7a0e18889f
commit 877c028f54
1 changed files with 20 additions and 0 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

20
docs/re/METHOD.md
View File

@@ -26,6 +26,26 @@ agent's loop prompt, i.e. nowhere durable. See [`README.md`](README.md) for the
## Inference
* **Never conclude from ONE sample.**
* **⚠️ The specific observation and the general rule read identically on the
page — and the general one is what the next reader uses.** This cost five
corrections across two agents in two days, and none of them was carelessness
about the measurement; every underlying observation was true of the asset
actually looked at. The failure is reaching for the general form in the same
breath as the specific one:
* "the two chunks are two stems of one performance" — true of a *music bank*,
written as a fact about voice, where one of the two is digital silence;
* "the extra bytes are a duplicated channel, not fidelity" — true of `ADV`,
and the size ratio it implies runs 0.0778 to 2.9163 across the disc;
* "everything the sequencer paces off `rest.t` is late" — true of the *title*,
and false of the screens actually checked;
* "a three-stream cue is a movie cue" — mine, and `BIRD_224` is neither;
* "take the highest-rate, highest-gain stream" — mine, and on `ADV` those two
criteria select *different* streams.
**The counter is cheap and it is always the same one: run the census before
writing the rule.** A ratio that is tight over 28 assets is a format fact; a
ratio that scatters 37× was one asset wearing a rule's clothing. Where the
census cannot be run, write the specific sentence and *say* it is specific.
* **A law proved on one population is a hypothesis on the next.**
* **Finding one exception does not imply a family.**
* **Consistency is not proof. A suggestive coincidence is a coincidence until