sylph-decoder 9e73990d1b re: the clock is FRAME-based, 1 unit per present -- my own test refuted my claim
Ran --framerate_limit=30 against predictions committed beforehand. Every
discriminating row went to the frame-based column:

                       frame-based   time-based (mine)   measured
  presents/s           ~27           ~27                 28.4
  modal alpha step     17 unchanged  34 doubled          17 UNCHANGED
  units/s              ~30 halved    ~60 unchanged       30.2 / 30.3
  publisher dwell      ~8.5 s        ~4.2 s              8.450 s DOUBLED
  developer dwell      ~7.0 s        ~3.5 s              6.923 s DOUBLED

Both controls passed first. The limiter took effect (28.4 presents/host-s
against 51-55, interval mass moving from one 60 Hz vblank to two, 422 of
468), and all 8/8 splash quad rects are identical so nothing but the frame
rate differs.

So the UI clock advances exactly 1 unit per presented frame. The step is 17
on every quad at 28.4, 51.4 and 54.8 presents/s, and 255*1/15 = 17 with the
declared T=15. units/second = presents/second, and seconds are not a
property of the game.

The port's 60 stands: the guest presents once per 60 Hz vblank
unconstrained, and 1 unit per present at 60/s is 60 units/s. Same answer as
my first position, finally with a tested mechanism instead of an inference.

This withdraws units-per-frame-is-not-a-constant.md in its central claim.
My "a time-based clock is immune to dropped frames so the dwell is stable"
was a real prediction and it failed -- the dwell doubled. The four-run
agreement I read as evidence was four runs at similar frame rates.

h3-units-per-frame-measured.md's +34 is now the anomaly rather than the
rule: 34 per label at 27.2 labels/s against 17 per present at 28.4
presents/s. Both cannot be presents. Not asserting it is wrong, only that
one of them must explain the disagreement.

Three of my four positions came from inference over a measured quantity;
this one came from changing an input and watching what moved. The
opportunistic comparison pointed exactly the wrong way because nothing
controlled what else differed between those captures.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Jc4pciRArGHfxGGhEbwp5t
2026-09-01 19:39:30 +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%