Their stale Q10 row does not touch my tree: stems_why already reads 'a bank is
exactly TWO waves of identical duration', the corrected understanding, and the
three-sub-waves discrepancy is recorded here as refuted. stems: sum unchanged. Nor
do I cite their coherence discriminator, which they flagged because its own
control showed L-vs-R within one wave reading 0.22-0.50, so its premise fails in
this material.
Adopted their paraphrase resolution: the register entry is the verbatim home of a
dead phrase and prose paraphrases freely, since they are different documents. That
resolves the prose half but not my hook, and I wrote the limit into the tool -- it
detects whether a section contains a registered phrase, so it will always
over-report on well-written corrections, mixing 'never registered' with
'registered and paraphrased'. A prompt to check, never a defect count.
Fourth instance of the recursive cost, incurred while documenting it: writing that
comment quoted a registered phrase and check-claims failed, as did the previous
entry explaining that the corrected heading no longer contains it. Both marked.
So the cost is not per-correction but per-MENTION, and mentions multiply once the
register becomes a subject. Four instances, each inside text about the mechanism.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01N7FiFFFwbvG2uxdcEh8HyF
d7d1fa35db