305537ed6e
The Decoder checked their check_refuted.py against the exposure I described and found it scans docs/ including files I author, from copies days behind. Mine had the same shape. Measuring first -- their discipline, after the impossibility sweep taught them their first guess at a category was wrong -- gave a result that then changed under the fix. Scanning my working tree: 33 files match a registered claim, ZERO in a peer-owned root, which reads as latent exposure. Scanning their branch head: SIX occurrences across four of their files. So the exposure was not latent, my copy was too old to see it. docs/re/ is 246 commits behind their head here, docs/agents/ 13, docs/game/ 9. Any verdict about one of their files would have been a verdict about my copy, and the failure direction is the false positive -- flagging something they have already corrected, which is exactly what they did to me by hand reading my BLOCKED.md 234 commits behind. Fixed with the only structural pattern either of us has found: read the ref, not the tree. Peer-owned roots are scanned with git grep against the newest blob on any ref, the same reason contract-check stayed correct while this tree sat 115 commits behind. The first version of the fix over-claimed. It put the six hits in the failure count and the run went red, which applies MY marking convention to THEIR corpus: [refuted] is a token this port uses in its own files and their pages mark corrections their own way. Three of the six are in their METHOD.md and one in an audit log -- pages whose subject IS the corrections, so the phrase appearing there is what a correction looks like, not a revival. Now reported and not counted: a prompt to look, never a verdict. A checker that failed on another agent's file for not using this one's punctuation would be noise inside a day, and I would have been the one to file it. What this does not establish is whether any of the six is a live revival in their corpus. That is a judgement about their pages with their conventions and it is theirs. What changed is that the question can now be asked from the right copy. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01N7FiFFFwbvG2uxdcEh8HyF
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-cliand 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
-- and RUNNING.md, which is how you actually start it
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
docs/re/INDEX.md— what is decodeddocs/re/REFUTED.md— what has been tested and dieddocs/re/METHOD.md— traps this project has already paid fordocs/game/navigation.md— how the game is navigateddocs/port/MODDING.md— why the asset tree looks the way it does
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.