# Are this corpus's negatives about the WORLD or about an INSTRUMENT?
# 2026-08-31. The sweep I said I owed after fixing one instance by hand.
#
# The mission's third classification is "undecodable, WITH REACH". A negative
# written as a property of the SUBJECT when what was established is a property of
# the METHOD is the failure that put "an individual SE's audio is not extractable
# yet" at the head of a page whose own later section had located the waves, and
# left INDEX quoting it for days. sylpheed-port swept their tree and reported
# clean; this is mine.
#
# TOOL: tools/re-capture/impossibility_scope.py
#
################################################################################
# 🔴 THE TOOL FAILED ITS OWN CONTROL TWICE, and the control is the only reason
# this sweep means anything. The control is the ONE KNOWN true positive -- the
# heading I fixed by hand this week.
#
#   FAILURE 1: the pattern required a sentence-ending period. HEADINGS DO NOT END
#   IN PERIODS, and the known instance was a heading. It matched nothing in any
#   heading in the corpus, so a "clean" report would have been vacuous.
#
#   FAILURE 2: with that fixed, the scoring HID it. "yet" was in my list of words
#   that scope a negative to a method. ⚠️ IT IS NOT ONE. "yet" and "so far" are
#   temporal HEDGES that name no instrument, no search and no place looked -- and
#   that is precisely what let "not extractable yet" read as bounded while
#   claiming a property of the audio. A scope names a METHOD or a PLACE
#   ("from the file", "by sorting", "from the hash alone").
#
# ✅ Control passes now: the known heading is matched and shown.
#
################################################################################
# ✅ RESULT, where it matters most: the two AMPLIFIER files are CLEAN.
# Every hit in INDEX.md and HANDOFF.md was read. All are legitimate:
#   * logical facts -- "layers that never touch the same pixel cannot be ordered
#     wrongly", "95 s apart is impossible";
#   * the legend's own definition of *measured* ("not on the disc in any form we
#     found" -- itself scoped);
#   * claims quoted in order to mark them retracted;
#   * INDEX 158, which is my own strikethrough of the refuted SE-audio claim.
#
# ⚠️ REACH, and it is large: 147 candidate sentences corpus-wide, 130 of which
# name no scope in the same sentence. I read the INDEX and HANDOFF subset only.
# The other files are NOT swept, and the regex has a high false-positive rate --
# "for a directory that no longer exists" is a match. This is a prompt to read,
# not a defect count, and reading 130 by hand is the cost nobody has paid yet.