From dc76367610c26b7202bc0d930f1fafa9e32d08ba Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: sylph-decoder Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2026 16:09:55 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] re: the crop is not why the box is robust -- and it questions "the leaf free-runs" sylpheed-port could not transfer the masking rule to their screens and inferred a precondition: my free-running element is a localised plate I can crop around, theirs is a wide sweep they cannot. Tested against my own screen, that is wrong. The JP title carries the SAME sweep -- the leaves are identical on entries 4, 5 and 7, which I established last iteration -- and it crosses the box: two renders of build 7 on the settled plateau, t=135 vs t=240 whole frame RMSE 12.135 95 791 px in the box RMSE 11.923 57 981 px <- the sweep IS inside the box differences span y 70..674, x 128..1140; the box is y 54..476, x 389..776 So the crop did not exclude the mover, and the in-box between-session term of 0.3215 has no explanation in the crop. Which leaves a tension worth stating: two RENDERS one plateau-phase apart differ by 11.9 inside the box; two CAPTURES of that screen from different sessions differ by 0.32 there; and the --at sweep of renders against a capture is flat to 1.2 across t=135..240, despite those renders differing from each other by 11.9. A metric cannot be insensitive to an 11.9 change unless what changed is largely absent from what it is compared against. Hypothesis, recorded as untested: the game may not draw these leaves on the settled title at all, while our renderer poses them wherever --at says. That would explain the flat plateau, the tiny between-session term and part of the ~40 residual together. It would also mean the port's "the leaf free-runs in the game too" is not established by their evidence -- their two minima come from two DIFFERENT screens, which can differ for reasons other than phase, whereas my two captures are of the same screen and barely differ where the sweep would be. Not claiming the leaves are invisible; that needs a draw-stream check for pteff03/pteff03a on a settled title, which is one run. What is established is narrower and enough to stop the inference. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Wuu56cE8vJGTBtn1ppsk8v --- docs/re/structures/ui-resting-pose.md | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+) diff --git a/docs/re/structures/ui-resting-pose.md b/docs/re/structures/ui-resting-pose.md index b825d9a0..7c06ada8 100644 --- a/docs/re/structures/ui-resting-pose.md +++ b/docs/re/structures/ui-resting-pose.md @@ -145,6 +145,48 @@ component isolated in a renderer, mine is everything that varies between session includes theirs. Anyone quoting a whole-frame number on this screen should use the larger figure. +### 🔴 The crop is NOT why the box is robust — and that questions "the leaf free-runs in the game" + +`sylpheed-port` could not transfer the masking rule to their screens and inferred +a precondition: *my* free-running element is a localised plate I can crop around, +theirs is a wide sweep they cannot. **Tested, and that is wrong about my case.** +The JP title carries the *same* sweep — the leaves are identical on entries 4, 5 +and 7 — and it crosses the box: + +``` +two renders of build 7 on the settled plateau, t=135 vs t=240 + whole frame RMSE 12.135 95 791 px differ + in the box RMSE 11.923 57 981 px <- the sweep is INSIDE the box + differences span y 70..674, x 128..1140; the box is y 54..476, x 389..776 +``` + +So cropping did not exclude the mover, and the in-box between-session term of +**0.3215** is not explained by the crop. That leaves a real tension: + +* two **renders** one plateau-phase apart differ by **11.9** inside the box; +* two **captures** of that screen, different sessions, differ by **0.32** there; +* and the `--at` sweep of renders against a capture is **flat to 1.2** across + t=135..240, despite those renders differing from each other by 11.9. + +A metric cannot be insensitive to a 11.9 change unless the thing that changed is +largely absent from what it is being compared against. + +🟡 **Hypothesis, untested: the game may not draw these leaves on the settled title +at all** — our renderer poses them wherever `--at` says, the game shows none of +it. That would explain the flat plateau, the tiny between-session term, and part +of the ~40 residual in one move. ⚠️ It would also mean `sylpheed-port`'s "the leaf +free-runs in the game too" is **not established by their evidence**: their two +minima come from two *different screens*, which can differ for reasons other than +a free-running phase. My two captures are of the **same** screen and barely differ +where the sweep would be. + +I am not claiming the leaves are invisible — that needs a capture-side test +(a draw-stream check for `pteff03`/`pteff03a` on a settled title would settle it in +one run). What is established is narrower and enough to stop the inference: **the +box's robustness is not the crop, so no precondition about compactness explains +it, and the phase term for captures of this screen is measured at 0.32 while the +term for renders of it is 11.9.** + 📌 **And it is why the box matters more than I realised when I chose it.** Scoring the 388×423 region rather than the frame drops the between-session term from 4.566 to **0.3215** — a factor of 14 — because the sweep contributes at x 721..1241 and