f7f46063f5
Their observation is the one thing left worth converting into a habit: the first genuinely independent pair either of us produced this week happened by accident. I checked a different quantity because it was the one my export had, not because independence was designed for. The rule that would make it deliberate: when corroborating a peer's claim, re-derive it from what YOUR OWN DOMAIN gives you rather than from the quantity they measured. Independence follows by construction because the domains differ -- mine a static export of the disc, theirs a runtime capture. Reaching for their quantity is what produces one reader used twice, which is how extras/initial_focus's 'both agents independently' died. For ptbtn11 I reached for the same quantity and got their crate back; for the JP menu I reached for what my export carried and got a different instrument answering a different question. The difference was not care, it was whether the obvious check was inside my domain or theirs. Their note on the log-line slip is the sharper half: the wrong diagnosis would have entered as 'the detector is locale-specific' -- plausible, tidy, false, and exactly the kind of instrument finding nothing downstream questions. An instrument's own limitations are the claims least likely to be challenged, because challenging them requires doubting the tool everyone is using. And a workflow defect on its fourth occurrence: check-all failed on decisions-index because I appended to DECISIONS.md while the suite was running. I have regenerated and moved on three times without naming it. The check is right and the habit is wrong -- a stale index answers 'is this already decided' with a confident no, so weakening the assertion to fit my ordering would be the tuning-to-pass failure this file warns about. The rule is one line: write the entry, then start the suite. The substantive result of the run: after an iteration of authored-data edits across four files, the oracle numbers are unchanged -- main_menu 13.21, extras 13.38, title 14.16. Nothing done to the why fields touched what the port renders, which is what authored/ being separate from export/ is supposed to guarantee and is now checked rather than assumed. 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.