Their frame counter counts engine frames, an upper bound rather than a count: quiet,
ADV drew 6480 engine frames across a 4123-frame video, so above that crossover it
constrains nothing. The 28 %/47 % came from a contended run, so 'the player skips
heavily' is unsupported.
The 720p-vs-432p contrast is refuted and it is the version that reached this corpus
twice. Quiet, both videos run +6.7 %..+6.9 %, 5 runs, resolution-independent. The
-0.5 % was contention, not resolution.
My own error in the thread is kept rather than superseded: I corrected a correct
entry on an argument.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Wuu56cE8vJGTBtn1ppsk8v
They measured what they had argued: the player presents 28 % of S00A's frames and
47 % of ADV's. S00A held real time BECAUSE it dropped three frames in four, so the
overrun is not evidence against skipping, and the entry I rewrote on their argument
was correct before I touched it.
I corrected a correct entry on an argument, having just written that a consumption
counter is what makes an audit. Accepting an argument from an absence is the same
error as making one.
Their figure is also a spread, not a value: 146.42 / 146.60 / 140.77 s = +2.4 % to
+6.7 %, n=3, load-dependent, and a lower bound measured under skipping. Both places
this corpus quoted +6.7 % are updated.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Wuu56cE8vJGTBtn1ppsk8v
sylpheed-port warned that wall clock on their box carries a +6.7 % decode deficit
and that cross-agent timing comparisons must go through media length. It reaches
this page's headline: a guest at ~92 % of real time and a game presenting at 27.6
fps produce identical measurements, and the three trials share the container, so
they are three samples of one confound rather than three confirmations. Same shape
as the plate-pulse phase lock.
The 8.5 % splash-dwell excess is the same number from the other side.
The port is not exposed -- it authors declared units and reads seconds from nothing
here. And the BGM_103 loop figures cannot audit it: that page states both
derivations are wall-clock, converting no bits to seconds.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Wuu56cE8vJGTBtn1ppsk8v
sylpheed-port generalised the heading rule: an index is an amplifier, since
anything republishing headings multiplies whatever they assert. Checked mine --
INDEX.md's generated table republishes each file's H1 and Status line, a narrower
amplifier than their TOC but the same mechanism -- and then swept headings for the
dead-rule vocabulary.
The strongest hit is not a heading. ui-keyframe-time-unit.md, the Q1 page, told
readers a comparison was "Gated by SYLPHEED_KF_TIME_SHIFT=1, default unchanged"
and referred to "the other reading behind SYLPHEED_KF_TIME_SHIFT=1". That
variable was REMOVED with the record-layout fix and appears nowhere in crates/.
A reader following it sets something inert, gets default behaviour, and concludes
the two readings agree. A stale instruction that no-ops MANUFACTURES A FALSE
CONFIRMATION -- strictly worse than a stale description, and the same shape as
screen-transitions.md telling the port to author a value that is decoded.
Also demoted the section heading "and the shifted reading wins every time": the
shifted reading was itself superseded, the fix having established the same
association by a better route and timed pose 0 as well, which the shifted reading
never did. The evidence stands and is now evidence for the corrected reading.
METHOD gains three things: rank instructions above descriptions when sweeping for
stale text; an index is an amplifier; and the denominator, stated because it is
unflattering -- this corpus has 2 989 headings, 401 of which make a negative or
absolute assertion, and I have audited this session's plus the dead-vocabulary
intersection. That is a sample, not a sweep, and older headings are likelier to be
stale for having had more chances to be overturned.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Wuu56cE8vJGTBtn1ppsk8v
Last iteration I retracted three claims because `--build 10/11` on GP_TITLE are
entries 12/15, and named the untested remainder in my own report: how much else
in the corpus used a build ordinal as an entry index. This is that sweep.
`screen --build N` indexes a predicate-filtered list, so every rejected entry
shifts every later ordinal. Disc-wide: 21 of 24 build-bearing archives diverge,
18 of them at ordinal 0 -- `--build 0` is entry 108 in each GP_MAIN_GAME_*2D,
24/26 in GP_HANGAR_ARSENAL/GP_READY_ROOM. GP_TITLE is the ONLY archive whose
first ten ordinals are the identity, which is the sole reason 207 of the
corpus's 226 build citations are safe. Second foot-gun: `--all` swaps the
predicate and renumbers 18 archives, so `--build N` and `--build N --all` are
not the same object.
The instrument failed its control first. A version using parse_build as the
predicate reported GP_TITLE as 16 builds, ordinal == entry throughout -- it
would have certified the exact bug it was built to find. The shipped version
uses the same predicates screen_builds() uses and reproduces `screen list` on
GP_TITLE exactly.
Audited all 226 citations. One real defect: a five-row table in
ui-keyframe-time-unit.md headed "declared element (build 11)" spans builds 10
and 11 -- palogo_sqex is in 10. All five placements re-verified and correct, so
the linear-ramp measurement is untouched; only the label was wrong. Fixed with a
per-row bundle column. GP_DIALOG --build 0 and GP_DEBRIEFING_PILOTLOG --build 10
re-run and reproduce.
Refutation attempted: sylpheed-port's corrected mid-ramp test rests on
ptlogo_all_eff holding a=127 from t=112 to t=246. Their quote is exact and it is
a plateau. The refutation fails; their correction stands.
METHOD already carried the rule I broke, and ui-splash-addressing already said
the splashes need --all. The failure was not missing knowledge -- it was
addressing a bundle by index without grepping for the index first.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Wuu56cE8vJGTBtn1ppsk8v
The case for reading +36 as "the time the NEXT pose is reached" rested on
one element's fade-out shape, then on one element's hold duration. Both
splash halves supply more, and they agree.
element screen observed hold as decoded shifted
palogo_gamearts developer splash 83 f 8 f 80 f
palogo_seta developer splash 83 f 6 f 80 f
palogo_sqex publisher splash >=77 f * 6 f 102 f
* the capture opens mid-hold at frame 1, so 77 is a floor.
The readings predict opposite structures. For palogo_gamearts, as decoded:
hold 8f, in 80f, hold 2f, out 6f, out 2f -- an eighty-frame FADE-IN and a
two-frame hold. Shifted: in 8f, hold 80f, out 2f, out 6f, out 2f. The
capture shows an 83-frame hold and no fade-in at all.
The elements that cannot discriminate are not contradicted:
palogo_gamearts_eff observed in 7f / hold 7f / out 8f, and both readings
give 8f phases -- with four blocks the shift only relabels which phase is
which. So the glows, which is where Q1's linear law was measured, say
nothing either way rather than arguing against.
The decoder's default is still unchanged, and the reason is now
articulated rather than assumed. The single thing opposing the shift is
rest() on ptlogo_eff3, where the shifted reading makes the longest-dwell
fallback return the bloom's 200% peak. That fallback is unsound whenever
it runs -- it returns an endpoint of a movement, neither of which is held
-- and checked: the shift does not fix it either. So the objection was
never evidence about the times. Timing had three discriminating
measurements; pose selection had a heuristic guessing.
For the port: animation timing should use the shift; static composites are
unaffected and the five screens' correlations stand. Classified measured,
not decoded -- three elements in one screen family, not a disc-wide check.
Follow-up on last iteration's unadopted candidate (+36 holds the NEXT
pose's time, not its own). Two new results, pointing opposite ways, and
both are reported.
FOR, and calibration-free: the observed full-alpha hold : fade-out ratio
on palogo_gamearts is 83 : 13 frames = 6.38. The shifted reading predicts
8.00. The current reading predicts 0.25 -- off by 26x. With the glow's 2
units/frame fixed and nothing else free, the current reading says the
logo holds full alpha for 2.0 frames; the capture holds it for 83. This
is no longer the shape argument the candidate rested on.
Also for: rest()'s plain max-dwell fallback picks a=0 -- a transparent
pose, for a publisher logo -- under the current reading, and the visible
a=255 hold under the shift. Only the rest_plateau special case rescues
the render today, and that is the case the port agent reported a bug in.
AGAINST: rendering every build of six UI paks under both readings, 10 of
11 compared are byte-identical and one changes -- GP_TITLE build 7, the
Japanese twin of build 4, by 13.1% of pixels. Build 4, the one verified
against a live capture, is unchanged either way, so the single build the
shift moves is the one with no capture to adjudicate it. The proxy goes
against the shift: language twins are the same artwork, and build 7 reads
70.94 mean luminance as decoded against build 4's 71.41, but 76.32
shifted. Correlation does not separate them (0.6206 vs 0.6201).
These constrain different things -- timing versus pose selection -- and
rest() is a heuristic layered on the times, so moving the times moves its
tie-breaks. Adopting the shift means revisiting that heuristic in the
same change, with no build-7 capture to verify against.
Default UNCHANGED. Experiment reachable via SYLPHEED_KF_TIME_SHIFT=1.
Shifted-mode suite: 122 passed, 0 failed across 3 suites at commit time.
Q1's gate asks whether the ramp is linear. It is, and that result stands:
it rests on the splash's _eff glows, which reproduce exactly. This adds
the part that does not.
The test is a calibration, not a fit. Fix the clock on
palogo_gamearts_eff -- declared 15-unit fade-in 0@15 -> 255@30 against
captured alphas 34,68,102,136,170,204,238, a constant step of 34, giving
t = 2f - 171 -- then check that against the glow's own next landmark: its
declared hold ends t=45, predicted frame 108.0, observed last full-alpha
frame 107. Then apply it to palogo_gamearts in the same bundle and the
same frames, with no free parameter left:
declared a=232 at t=206 -> frame 188.5, observed alpha 255
declared a= 32 at t=210 -> frame 190.5, observed alpha 255
The logo is still at full alpha nine frames after it should read 32; its
fade-out runs ~17 frames late; its declared 80-frame fade-in is never
drawn. Not culling -- the same element is submitted down to a=7 on the
way out. Calibration-free version: the declared fade-out spends 12 of 16
units dropping 23/255 of the alpha, and the capture has no such plateau.
Candidate, offered and NOT adopted: if +36 held the NEXT keyframe's time,
the fade-out shape fits (RMS 4.05 vs 12.13, two elements) and the
decoder's "last block's time is unreadable" special case disappears --
the last block would simply have no successor. Rejected for now because
it explains neither the missing fade-in nor the lateness, and because the
_eff elements cannot discriminate between the readings at all (with four
blocks the shift only relabels the phases). Decoder unchanged.
Also withdrawn, mine, within the iteration: "the _eff glows hold a
constant alpha 33". They ramp 34 -> 255 in steps of 34. I printed the
series minimum and read it as its range, with a "14 distinct colours"
column sitting next to it saying otherwise.
1/60 s, and the 60 Hz reading is excluded
ui-keyframe-time-unit.md named its own re-test and nobody had run it: time
300 submitted frames on the IDLE title, where nothing is streaming from
the ISO. Reaching the title is cheap now that one A skips the intro, so
this cost one boot.
Two clean trials: 300 frames in 10.40 s and 10.60 s, i.e. 28.8 and 28.3
fps. That is the same rate as the 27.6 fps measured during the loading
splash, which is exactly the page's own criterion for "the game is 30 Hz
and the unit is 1/60 s". The 60 Hz alternative is now excluded rather
than disfavoured: it needs the emulator at 47% of real time while sitting
idle on a screen the capture says costs 1526 draws over 300 frames, about
five per frame. Nothing there halves an emulator.
So the durations stand as written -- title 4.2 s, main menu 1.1 s, EXTRAS
0.87 s -- and Q1 leaves the handoff's open-residue table. It stays
MEASURED, not decoded: no field on the disc says sixtieths of a second.
One trap, and it nearly cost the conclusion. My first attempt reported
39.5 fps, which sits between the two hypotheses and would have left the
question open. It was a harness bug: I polled the log for a "done" line
rather than for the COUNT of them increasing, so it matched a capture
that had already completed and timed 0.1 s of nothing. METHOD gets the
general form -- a log-polling probe must compare a count, not test for
presence.
Q1 of the menu port, measured against the running game rather than reasoned
about. The developer-logo splash is the cheap target: it is the first thing the
guest draws and its bundle declares short, unambiguous ramps.
Two results, both frame-exact and both emulator-speed-independent (frame numbers
are VdSwap counts, the guest's own frames):
* the ramp is LINEAR. A declared 15-unit fade lands on round(255*k/15) for all
seven of its samples with zero error, k stepping 2,4,6,8,10,12,14. No ease
can reproduce a constant step of 34 at both ends.
* the animation clock advances 2.000 time units per submitted frame, over six
consecutive intervals with no residual, with 1 unit as the quantum
underneath (one frame in the fade-out advances by 1).
The conversion to seconds is one step further and is flagged as such: 300 frames
took 10.87 s = 27.6 present-frames/second, which reads as a 30 Hz title at 92 %
under the emulator and gives 1 unit = 1/60 s -- the title build 4.2 s, the main
menu build 1.1 s. That reading is not proven, because the rate was measured
while the guest was still streaming from the ISO; the page names the one test
that would settle it and says what changes if it goes the other way.
Committed beside it: the raw draw capture and the per-frame quad CSV, so the
numbers can be re-derived without a disc or an emulator.
