sylph-decoder 0c9224fbbc re: propose settle-instant posing -- and my control cannot validate it
The proposal: pose every element at the SCREEN's settle instant rather than
asking each element for its own resting pose. On the 2 249 fallback elements in
settling bundles the visible-pose rate falls 73.6 % -> 34.7 %.

But the control fails twice. Naive, over every plateau element: 46.6 %. That one
was misspecified and I caught it by asking what the number means physically --
rest() finds *a* held pose and many elements hold one during the build-in then
move on, so it answers a different question and disagreement proves nothing.
Restricted to elements HOLDING ACROSS the settle instant: 78.1 %, still not a
pass.

And the residual is ambiguous by construction: rest_plateau() picks one plateau,
so an element with two whose settle instant falls in the other will disagree --
and there pose_at(settle) is RIGHT. The control cannot separate 'the candidate is
wrong' from 'the incumbent is wrong'.

Recorded as the general point: comparing a candidate to the incumbent cannot
adjudicate when the incumbent is the thing under suspicion. It is the wrong shape
of experiment, not a tuning problem.

What does adjudicate is the oracle and it is the port's measurement, not mine --
publisher splash against a committed capture, settle-instant pose RMSE 2.17 /
0.01 % differing against --pose=rest 9.05 / 0.75 %. My numbers describe the
proposal's effect; they do not establish it.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Wuu56cE8vJGTBtn1ppsk8v
2026-08-30 12:22:44 +00:00

Sylpheed

A clean-room reverse engineering and port project for Project Sylpheed: Arc of Deception (Xbox 360, 2007).

Three things live here, in one repository so that a change spanning them lands as one commit:

The decoders crates/sylpheed-formats — the disc's formats, read and verified disc-wide
The port port/ — a Godot 4 project, plus crates/sylpheed-export which converts a disc into the open asset tree it reads
The corpus docs/re/ — what has been reverse engineered, with its evidence, its retractions and its dead ends

You need your own copy of the game. No game content is in this repository and none ever will be. The exporter reads the disc you supply.

The oracle is the real game

sylpheed-cli and the Explorer are tools for verifying our decoding. They are hypotheses under test and they have been wrong. When something must be checked against the truth, the truth is the game running in Xenia Canary, captured — not any renderer of ours.

This is stated first because getting it backwards is the most expensive mistake this project has made.

Layout

crates/
  sylpheed-formats/   the decoders. Disc-wide verified; the corpus is its spec
  sylpheed-cli/       headless tools -- render a screen, dump a table, probe audio
  sylpheed-viewer/    the Explorer: a human's window onto the disc. STATIC data only
  sylpheed-export/    disc -> the open, moddable asset tree
port/                 the Godot 4 project. Reads open formats ONLY
authored/             decisions that are NOT on the disc, each with its reason
data/
  base/               generated by the exporter. Gitignored, never hand-edited
  mods/               drop-in overrides. Yours
docs/
  re/                 the corpus: findings, refutations, method traps
  game/               how the game is navigated -- menus, modals, flight
  port/               the port's mission, its handoff contract, modding rules
  agents/             how the agent team works together
tools/                capture harnesses, probes, the share tool
exchange/             transient inter-agent files. NOT in git
docker/               the agent containers

Where to start

Xenia Canary is a separate repository: it is a fork tracking upstream, and it carries our instrumentation.

Conventions

Confidence is per claim, never per document: CONFIRMED · 🟡 PROBABLE · HYPOTHESIS · REFUTED. A withdrawn result is kept with its reasoning rather than deleted — that is why the numbers here can be trusted.

Description
No description provided
Readme MIT 820 MiB
Languages
Rust 57.6%
Python 27.7%
Shell 10.6%
GDScript 3.5%
Dockerfile 0.4%
Other 0.1%