re: kill run -- arrival timing reproduced (n=2), decrement inconclusive, "live attackers" refuted

pilot.py with SYLPH_PREFER=e010, 300s, mission clock sampled throughout.

RISES REPRODUCED: 004 -> 008 in (114.8s, 134.7s] and 008 -> 012 in (196.4s,
213.3s], both brackets containing the predicted 120 and 210.  Second independent
run, so the arrival half is now n=2.

DECREMENT INCONCLUSIVE.  The pilot fought properly -- 424 fire=1 samples, 865 with
the target inside 1500 units, closest approach 79, target e010 throughout, hull
untouched -- and 13 ADAN died (129 -> 116).  The counter held 012 for 98s.  That is
NOT evidence against the decrement: the 13 dead were not identified by class, this
pilot's kills historically skew to turrets, and the live e010 count ROSE over the
run so attacker deaths cannot be inferred from it.  Recording it as inconclusive
rather than as a negative, which is the error this corpus has already logged twice.

POSITIVE RESULT: at TIME 05:56.85, both arms sampled together, REMAINING OB = 012
while live UN_e010_ADAN_Attacker_S = 23.  So the counter is NOT the live attacker
head-count; it tracks a subset, and 12 is exactly the three A-route squadrons'
membership (3 x n=4).  Phase 1 fields only 16 e010, so 23 live means later-phase or
F-route squadrons joined without touching the counter.

Anomaly recorded, not explained: the enumeration reports 2 _Player entities at two
distinct positions.

docs/re/ob-counts-marked-attackers.md

@@ -273,3 +273,71 @@ The kill test is unchanged and is now the only open half:
 
 1. Kill ONE `e010` and nothing else → the counter must fall by exactly **1**.
 2. Kill a turret → it must not move.
+
+---
+
+# 2026-08-27 — the kill run: rises reproduced (n=2), decrement still not shown
+
+`pilot.py` with `SYLPH_PREFER=e010`, 300 s, Stage 02, mission clock sampled
+throughout ([capture](captures/ob-kill-run-timeline.png)).
+
+## ✅ The arrival timing reproduces exactly — second independent run
+
+| mission `TIME` | `OB` |
+|---|---|
+| 01:35.20, 01:54.77 | `004` |
+| **02:14.67** | **`008`** — step in (114.8 s, 134.7 s] |
+| 02:28 → 03:16.39 | `008` |
+| **03:33.32** | **`012`** — step in (196.4 s, 213.3 s] |
+| 03:47 → 05:11.56 | `012` |
+
+Both brackets contain the predicted **120** and **210**. The arrival half is now
+confirmed on **two independent runs**.
+
+## 🟡 The decrement: INCONCLUSIVE, and the reason is specific
+
+The pilot flew and fought properly this time — **424 `fire=1` samples**, 865 of
+them with the target inside 1500 units, closest approach **79** units, target
+`e010_ADAN_Attacker_S` throughout, hull never scratched (1500/1500). And the
+hostile population **fell 129 → 116**: thirteen ADAN died.
+
+**The counter did not move**, holding `012` for 98 s across that.
+
+❌ **But this is not evidence against the decrement**, and saying so would repeat
+the exact error this corpus has logged twice. To read a null result I must show
+the thing that would produce it happened — *a **marked** attacker dying* — and I
+cannot:
+
+* The thirteen dead were not identified by class. The corpus's own history is
+  that this pilot's kills skew overwhelmingly to `e007` turrets, which are seven
+  times more numerous and much closer.
+* The live `e010` count **rose** over the run rather than fell, so attacker
+  deaths cannot be inferred from it either.
+
+## ✅ One thing the run does establish: the counter is NOT "live attackers"
+
+Measured at `TIME 05:56.85`, both arms at the same instant:
+
+| | |
+|---|---|
+| `REMAINING OB` | **012** |
+| live `UN_e010_ADAN_Attacker_S` (definition-pointer enumeration, deduped by position) | **23** |
+
+**23 ≠ 12.** So the counter tracks a *subset* of the attackers, not all of them —
+and 12 is exactly the membership of the three `A`-route squadrons (3 × n=4).
+Phase 1 fields only 16 `e010` in total, so 23 live means later-phase or `F`-route
+squadrons have joined the scene without touching the counter.
+
+That kills the simplest competing reading ("the counter is the live attacker
+head-count") and is a positive result for the *marked-subset* interpretation,
+independent of the decrement question.
+
+⚠️ One anomaly, recorded not explained: the same enumeration reports **2**
+`UN_f001_TCAF_DeltaSaber_T_Player`. Deduplication is by position value, so two
+distinct positions carry the player definition. Not investigated.
+
+## What the decrement test still needs
+
+A run in which a **marked** attacker demonstrably dies — which means logging the
+per-class roster before and after each kill, not just the ADAN total. The pilot
+already prefers `e010`; what is missing is the bookkeeping to prove it hit one.