diff --git a/docs/port/HANDOFF.md b/docs/port/HANDOFF.md
index 5224e2ff..2f1a5653 100644
--- a/docs/port/HANDOFF.md
+++ b/docs/port/HANDOFF.md
@@ -2566,9 +2566,13 @@ 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.
 
 ✅ **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
+frames; neither of us is wrong. ⚠️ Your own correction to that is taken: your
+980.5/477.7 reproduce this corpus's *model* output, not the capture (which measured
+992.0 / 467.2, the 11.5 px residual). Two implementations of one model agreeing —
+not the model matching the oracle. ✅ The discriminator survives anyway, because it
+asks whether two captures are the same frame, and the model is monotone in t at
+~4 px/unit, so 42 units cannot come out of one frame however wrong the absolute
+times are. Cycles independently confirmed at 600 / 720 from your
 own export.
 
 **The discriminator, as it was handed over:** if your ~400 is `pteff03` and your
diff --git a/docs/re/METHOD.md b/docs/re/METHOD.md
index c3716bab..99563d1d 100644
--- a/docs/re/METHOD.md
+++ b/docs/re/METHOD.md
@@ -1181,3 +1181,31 @@ what drives the guest's unbounded keystroke queue into a failed 128 MB allocatio
 plus the guest code path and a host-vs-guest address retraction. A join between two
 recorded facts is a real finding; but it is much cheaper when neither fact has to be
 rediscovered.
+
+## …and its mirror: a finding with TWO records and nothing keeping them equal
+
+The section above is about a measurement whose only record was a script comment, so
+the document that needed it could not see it. The port agent ran the same audit
+against its own tree and found the **opposite** failure, which is worth pairing here
+because the fix for one is the cause of the other.
+
+Its voice-verification control was recorded in **two** places — a tool's control
+table and a prose document — and they had drifted: **53.3 %** in the tool, **53.2 %**
+in the doc, twice each. The control file was transient and is gone, so neither copy
+can be re-measured and there is no way to tell which is right.
+
+⚠️ **Both copies look authoritative.** That is the whole problem: a single record
+that is hard to find announces itself as missing the moment you look; two records
+that disagree announce nothing at all, and a reader takes whichever they opened.
+
+**So the rule is not "write it down twice".** It is:
+
+* **one record, in `docs/re/`**, for anything that is a measurement;
+* **everything else cites it** — a tool comment says *why the flag is there* and
+  links to the page, and never restates the number;
+* if a number must appear in two places, one of them has to be **generated** from
+  the other, not typed.
+
+The port fixed its case by deleting the duplicate rather than picking a winner,
+which is right: with the evidence gone, choosing between 53.2 and 53.3 would have
+been authoring a measurement.
diff --git a/docs/re/structures/ui-leaf-vs-parent-alpha.md b/docs/re/structures/ui-leaf-vs-parent-alpha.md
index 6de9039d..bf93ff0e 100644
--- a/docs/re/structures/ui-leaf-vs-parent-alpha.md
+++ b/docs/re/structures/ui-leaf-vs-parent-alpha.md
@@ -235,9 +235,21 @@ The port agent ran it. Predicted `pteff03a` centre **295**; measured **294.9**.
 | 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 control is weaker than it was first written, and the port said so
+itself.** Its 980.5 / 477.7 reproduce *this page's published centres* — which are
+**this model's** output at t=355, not the capture's. The capture measured **992.0
+and 467.2**, and the 11.5 px between them is the residual this page explicitly
+declines to fit. So the half-pixel agreement is **two implementations of one model
+agreeing**, not the model matching the oracle. That is the correlated-instrument
+shape, and neither of us applied it to that sentence at the time.
+
+✅ **The discriminator survives the correction, and here is why.** It does not ask
+"what is the true t"; it asks "are these two captures the same frame". Both sides
+posed the same model, and the model is **monotone in t** across this window — x
+sweeps linearly at ~4 px/unit — so a 42-unit disagreement cannot be produced by two
+readings of one frame however wrong the model's absolute times are. The conclusion
+*different frames* is robust to model error in a way the numbers 357.7 and 400 are
+not.
 
 ✅ **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.
diff --git a/tools/re-capture/plate_timeseries.py b/tools/re-capture/plate_timeseries.py
new file mode 100755
index 00000000..0bcc0d95
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/re-capture/plate_timeseries.py
@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env python3
+"""The `PRESS Ⓐ` plate over time: does it stay up, pulse, or blink once?
+
+`fast_title_probe.py` answers "is the title up yet" — a threshold crossing. This
+logs the **whole series**, because the port's question is about the shape: an
+authored `looping_focus_records` entry is deleted if the plate blinks once and
+kept if it pulses.
+
+Counter is byte-identical to `is_title.py`. ⚠️ Controls, run before this was
+pointed at anything unknown:
+
+    live-title-press-a.png        753   (plate up)
+    live-main-menu.png            327   (documented)
+    live-title-build4-no-plate.png 159  ← the FLOOR: the title art alone carries
+                                          159 green pixels, so 0 is not the
+                                          plate-absent value and a series that
+                                          bottoms at ~159 is a plate going away,
+                                          not a black screen.
+
+🔴 The stream is torn down every RESTART_S. A single long-lived x11grab degrades
+to 1.60 fps and then reports a stale frame forever — see `fast_title_probe.py`.
+
+    plate_timeseries.py SECONDS OUT.tsv
+"""
+import subprocess
+import sys
+import time
+
+import numpy as np
+
+W, H = 1280, 720
+LIMIT = float(sys.argv[1]) if len(sys.argv) > 1 else 300
+OUT = sys.argv[2] if len(sys.argv) > 2 else "/dev/stdout"
+RESTART_S = 30
+
+
+def _open():
+    return subprocess.Popen(
+        ["ffmpeg", "-loglevel", "error", "-f", "x11grab", "-draw_mouse", "0",
+         "-video_size", f"{W}x{H}", "-i", ":98", "-r", "6",
+         "-f", "rawvideo", "-pix_fmt", "rgb24", "-"],
+        stdout=subprocess.PIPE, bufsize=W * H * 3 * 2)
+
+
+p = _open()
+n = W * H * 3
+t0 = time.time()
+seg = t0
+with open(OUT, "w") as f:
+    f.write("# t_s\tglyph_px\tsurface_mean\n")
+    while time.time() - t0 < LIMIT:
+        if time.time() - seg > RESTART_S:
+            p.kill(); p = _open(); seg = time.time()
+        buf = p.stdout.read(n)
+        if len(buf) < n:
+            p.kill(); p = _open(); seg = time.time(); continue
+        a = np.frombuffer(buf, np.uint8).reshape(H, W, 3).astype(int)
+        r, g, b = a[:, :, 0], a[:, :, 1], a[:, :, 2]
+        c = int(((g > 130) & (g - r > 45) & (g - b > 45)).sum())
+        f.write(f"{time.time()-t0:.3f}\t{c}\t{a.mean():.3f}\n")
+        f.flush()
+p.kill()