Two results, one of which corrects me.
1. The R1-re-opened 'declared keyframe timeline reproduces the captured
splash' resolves in FAVOUR of the declared timeline. Instrument is a disc
keyframe table against the guest's vertex stream -- no renderer in the chain,
which is what the 'our-reader' tag demanded. Calibration-free test: is each
captured alpha an exact member of the declared piecewise-linear value set at
integer t? 39/50 exact under truncation, 30/50 under rounding, and the worst
error under either rule is ONE alpha level in 255. All 11 non-exact samples
are low by exactly 1 and all are on falling segments. The old refutation
rested on 'still at a=255 nine frames after its declared a=32' -- under the
fixed layout a=32 is at t=206, four units from the end of a 210-unit
timeline. That was the off-by-one association.
2. The unit->seconds rate is PER-GAMEPART, which corrects what I told the
port an hour ago. Title ~57 units/guest-second; splash ~35-40. The splash
figure is confirmed two ways that share no algebra: a 15-unit ramp (T read
off the disc, not borrowed) and a 160-unit HOLD, which is a declared
duration with no T, no alpha slope and no interpolation in it.
And my 'the borrowed T=15 does not apply' was wrong in the other direction:
the disc says T=15 plainly. What failed was the premise of a single global
rate, not the T. Noted at the foot of that page rather than by editing it.
The trap worth recording: all four elements give 650-679 alpha/s, agreeing
to 2%, which reads exactly like one clock. It is a coincidence -- T differs
22 vs 15 and the rates differ 57 vs 37, and the ratios nearly cancel. A
quantity that looks constant across screens is not evidence of one clock
when the thing that would vary is inside it. The hold breaks the tie.
For the port: a single keyframe_units_per_second cannot be right, and a
splash played at 60 runs 1.5-1.7x too fast -- shorter, sharper fades than
the game's, which is the direction the play-test reported.
The title still said 'not yet a number' after the second half resolved it to
56.8. Kept the failed first half in place and in order -- the borrowed T is
the lesson -- but a reader must not stop at the header.
The capture reached the title AFTER the harness stopped classifying, so the
plate's ramp was in the log with tick stamps after all.
ptbtn00: alpha 11->231 over 334.4 guest ms = 657.9 alpha/s. With its
independently attested T=22 that is 56.8 units per guest second, inside the
pre-registered 55-65 band. The final step of every ramp is excluded because
it clamps at 255 and reports more elapsed time than it consumed -- including
it drags the plate to 633.0 alpha/s, a 4% error entirely inside the clamp.
Control passes at 1.15%: ptcopyright gives 650.4 alpha/s, and at one shared
clock that makes its own segment T=22.25. Two elements agreeing on a rate
AND independently landing on a round declared length is stronger than either.
Why my earlier 29.9 was wrong, and it is the failure the page predicted: it
used T=15 borrowed from a row that is about A element with a 15-unit fade,
generalised to splash B's quads, which is not what that row says. At 56.8 the
splash elements' implied T is 23-34, none of them 15. And the step quantum
does not rescue 15: splash steps are multiples of 17 = 255/15, which is what
made 15 look confirmed, but at T=28.5 a step of 17 is simply TWO units of
8.9. A quantum fixes T only if you already know the step is one unit.
60 is NOT refuted -- 5.6% away against ~5% quantisation resolution -- so the
port keeps it. But this DOES eliminate the unit constant as a cause of a late
plate: at 56.8 units/s t=236 lands at 4.15 s against the port's 3.93 s, so
the port is fractionally early.
Reported against the pre-registration, failure first.
HELD, and by a cleaner argument than the regression: the clock is NOT
frame-counted. The same animation takes 21 frame labels in one capture and
33 in another, and splash A's logo steps +136,+34 in one and
+17,+51,+34,+34,+17,+17 in the other. A fixed per-frame increment cannot do
that. Steps are always integer multiples of 17 (255/15 = one unit), so the
clock advances in whole units at a rate set by how long the frame took.
That retires '2 units per submitted frame' as a MECHANISM -- including my own
page from two hours ago. The measurement stands; 2 was that run's frame
pacing. units = 2 x frames computes an emulator artefact. Recorded as a
proposal against the register, not enacted, and noted at the head of the H3
page rather than by editing it.
FAILED: predicted 60 units per guest second, accept 55-65. Measured median
29.9 over six elapsed-ratio estimates (25.2-36.6). Prediction 3 said 30 was
excluded and 30 is what came out.
Why the rate is not a number yet: units/s = (d_alpha/dt) * T/255, and T is
the load-bearing term. d_alpha/dt is measured cleanly six ways. T=15 for
these elements comes from a corpus row whose usual derivation is circular
with the thing just retired -- a step of 34/frame implies T=15 only GIVEN 2
units/frame. T=30 would give ~60. No amount of re-measuring alpha settles it.
Settles with ptbtn00, whose T=22 is attested by two independent readers with
no clock anywhere in the chain. That capture did not reach the title in 531 s
of attract loop against 243 s in the previous run -- the variable attract
loop capture-harness-status.md already documents at up to 604 s. Instrument
built and control-passed; one run is missing.
Instrument: guest timebase, 50 MHz per emulator.cc:225, scalar 1.0 per
clock.cc:37, so no host wall clock enters any number. Control: 123.24 guest
seconds across a capture running ~118 wall seconds.
Told the port to change NOTHING today: ~30 rests on an unverified T, and
retiring 2 x frames does not by itself supply a replacement.
