f8a8d17327
Two milestones' known-wrong bits, both now answered by the RE agent, both taken. P5 -- the focus ring. It was drawn at 0 with a comment saying so. The period is now measured (continuous spin, eight evenly spaced autocorrelation peaks over nine revolutions, no angle estimated anywhere) and it needs NO authored constant: the period is the element's own declared t=120, and what the measurement adds is only that the turn repeats rather than stopping -- which "groups hold" could not decide, because 0 and 360 are the same pose. `spin_period_units` is structural and narrow on purpose: two keyframes, differing in nothing but rotation_deg, by a full 360, first timed and second untimed. 16 of 212 elements in this export match and all 16 are focus rings, zero false positives. That check is the point -- the measurement was taken on ONE button of ONE screen, and a rule that caught anything else would be extrapolating it to elements nobody watched. Verified on the port's own render with the RE agent's own control: bit-identical one period apart across the whole frame, 3.6/255 inside the ring's box at quarter-period steps, and box luminance conserved to 0.027 % over eight phases -- which is the observable they used to separate rotation from a pulse. Not claimed: direction (no signed angle was ever measured) and phase across a focus change (their run held focus throughout). P3 -- the plate. Last iteration I refuted their authoring instruction and shipped it anyway rather than pick between two of their numbers. The refutation held and the answer came back better than either option I offered: AUTHOR NOTHING. Both builds run on one clock started together and the plate arrives at its own declared t=238. The 2.13 s constant is deleted. The premise that failed was mine: rest.t IS NOT WHEN A SCREEN SETTLES. It is the last hold keyframe before the exit. ptlogo1 stops MOVING at t=42 and then creeps 5 px and 31 alpha steps to t=251. Reading rest.t put build 4's arrival at 4.350 s instead of 1.967 s, and the "2.51 s, which is not a landmark of anything" I sent them is that error wearing a decimal point. 238 - 118 = 120 units = 2.000 s against a measured 2.135 s at 28.1 fps presentation. Checked against my own export before touching anything. `ScreenView.settle_time()` still uses rest.t, and so the boot sequencer paces every screen off the wrong landmark. NOT changed here: "visible arrival" is a heuristic and getting it wrong re-paces everything. Filed, and asked for a timed boot instead now that their oracle is live. REFUTATION: two of their pages measure the same declared 120 units of wall clock during a static hold and disagree by 2 % -- plate 2.135 s (28.10 fps implied), ring 2.177 s (27.56 fps). That is seven times the plate page's own 6 ms run-to-run agreement, and it lands on the argument that page uses to justify itself: "the build-in is where frames are dropped; the static hold is not". Also the ring page's band, 27.6-28.8 fps, does not contain its own measurement -- the mean needs 27.56 and four of seven spacings are outside. Filed, not worked around: my port uses the declared 120 units either way. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WM5XL4HfrHuxz8RiMWdCMC
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.