311bd16ad8
test that refutes 105 Two claims shipped this morning are withdrawn, and the port had already acted on one of them. WITHDRAWN 1: "eff3 was never drawn because a 2-unit flash peak is sub-frame." eff3's alpha is non-zero for t in (58,64), and the capture's frames 133 and 134 sit at t = 60.0 and 62.2 -- squarely inside that window, with eff2 and eff4 both drawn in the same frames. It should have been submitted and was not. The absence is real and UNEXPLAINED; it is not sampling phase. WITHDRAWN 2: "a port drawing all five flashes shows more sweep than the console". No evidence behind it. The port checked against its own renderer and found it draws them sequentially at their declared times, never more than two at once -- which is exactly what frames 131-135 show the game doing. The pile-up worth warning about was the rest() bug, now fixed. Kept, at the port's request: a frame-by-frame comparison of the build-in WILL disagree about which flash lands in which frame -- 2 units per submitted frame against this run's 2.231 units per presented frame -- and neither side is wrong. Without that stated, the discrepancy reads as a port defect. Added, and stronger than the argument it replaces: a calibration-free test of 105 vs 120. The glow's draw is omitted when its alpha reaches zero, and the smallest alpha actually submitted across 807 drawn frames is 1, so the culling threshold is read off the data rather than assumed. Measured dark fraction 17.7% (173 of 980 settled frames); a 120-unit cycle with its declared 15-unit hold predicts 14.4%; a 105-unit cycle predicts 2.2%. 105 is out by 8x and would need a threshold of alpha 11 out of a peak of 80, while the capture contains submitted draws at alpha 1..12. No frame rate, no pacing factor, no wall clock. Also recorded: a regression of five build-in events against their declared times (residuals <=0.9 frames) recovers t=0 at frame 106.1 when the composite spike, not in the fit, is frame 107 -- and that same slope makes the glow's period imply a 114-unit cycle against a declared 120, which is unexplained. And the vertex-alpha identity holds for the glow but does NOT generalise: eff4 reads 255/127/254 on consecutive frames. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01QsEPXWVaEpyfudtR6re1Pd
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
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.