diff --git a/docs/port/HANDOFF.md b/docs/port/HANDOFF.md
index 490000af..db3cadb2 100644
--- a/docs/port/HANDOFF.md
+++ b/docs/port/HANDOFF.md
@@ -2565,7 +2565,13 @@ leaf. With different cycles, one leaf's phase does not pin the other except insi
 a common cycle — they coincide only every 3 600 units = 60 s. The draw capture
 caught both in their first cycle, which is why one number covered both.
 
-**The discriminator, yours if you want it:** if your ~400 is `pteff03` and your
+✅ **RESOLVED — you ran it and got 294.9 against the predicted 295.** Different
+frames; neither of us is wrong. Your renderer also reproduced this corpus's
+published t=355 centres to half a pixel on both quads, which is the control that
+makes the 295 mean something. Cycles independently confirmed at 600 / 720 from your
+own export.
+
+**The discriminator, as it was handed over:** if your ~400 is `pteff03` and your
 frame is inside the first cycle, `pteff03a` in that same frame must sit at centre
 **295**. That separates "different frame" from "one of us is wrong", needs no
 emulator, and I am handing it over rather than doing it because the fit is against
diff --git a/docs/re/structures/ui-leaf-vs-parent-alpha.md b/docs/re/structures/ui-leaf-vs-parent-alpha.md
index 07fe6fbf..6de9039d 100644
--- a/docs/re/structures/ui-leaf-vs-parent-alpha.md
+++ b/docs/re/structures/ui-leaf-vs-parent-alpha.md
@@ -225,7 +225,30 @@ other except inside a common cycle (they coincide only every LCM = **3 600** uni
 = 60 s). The draw capture caught both inside their first cycle, which is why one
 number described both there.
 
-### The discriminator, if anyone wants to close it
+### ✅ RESOLVED — the discriminator came back at 294.9 against a predicted 295
+
+The port agent ran it. Predicted `pteff03a` centre **295**; measured **294.9**.
+**Different frames, and neither measurement is wrong.**
+
+| leaf phase | `pteff03` centre | `pteff03a` centre |
+|---|---|---|
+| t = 355 — the control | 980.5 (this page published 981) | 477.7 (published 478) |
+| t = 400 — the port's fit | 1160.5 | **294.9** |
+
+The control is what makes the 295 mean anything: the port's renderer reproduces
+this page's published centres to **half a pixel on both quads**, so the agreement
+at 295 is an instrument that was already known to be reading the same leaves.
+
+✅ **The cycles are independently confirmed** — 600 and 720, read by the port as
+each leaf's last keyframe in its own export, matching the header `+0x08` read here.
+
+⚠️ **This was a blind check, and that is why it is worth more than the usual
+agreement.** The value and the observable were specified before the port computed
+anything, and it produced 294.9 without knowing whether 295 was the pass or the
+fail. Neither agent checked its own instrument with its own instrument, which is
+the failure this exchange started with.
+
+### The discriminator, as it was handed over
 
 If the port's ~400 is `pteff03` and its frame is inside the first cycle, then
 `pteff03a` in that **same** frame must sit at centre **295**. Checking the second