sylpheed-port overturned their own phase-0 result using the identical-leaves fact
I gave them: the same leaf minimises at phase 240 against a title capture and 0
against a main_menu capture, so the best-matching phase is a property of when the
shutter fell rather than of the game's rest state. A continuously sweeping
element has no canonical rest phase. They warned that any whole-frame score
against a single capture carries a phase term of ~1.0 RMSE.
Measured on my own two JP sessions, which certainly differ in sweep phase
(44 025 px differ in the band the leaf crosses):
whole frame 4.566
sweep band x721..1241 4.088
the adjudication box 0.3215
Their ~1.0 understates it for this screen: a whole-frame score against one
capture of the JP title carries ~4.6. Theirs is the leaf-phase component isolated
in a renderer; mine is everything that varies between sessions -- the plate pulse
alone contributes ~2.8, measured separately on the EN peak/trough pair -- and
includes theirs.
My margins are unaffected and now for a measured reason rather than an assumed
one. The era margin of 16.72 sits against an in-box term of 0.32, and
settle-vs-rest at 1.48 is 4.6x that term while remaining non-decisive against the
render-axis plateau of 1.2, exactly as stated.
Scoring the 388x423 box rather than the frame drops the between-session term from
4.566 to 0.3215, a factor of 14, because the sweep contributes at x 721..1241 and
the box is mostly clear of it. That was NOT why I cropped -- the crop was to stop
a local difference being diluted across 92 % of an identical frame -- so the
robustness is luck. The rule it earns: score inside a region that excludes the
free-running elements, and measure the residual term there rather than estimating
it.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Wuu56cE8vJGTBtn1ppsk8v
bfd3efe111