re(ui): the eff-name implication for bit 0x02 is refuted disc-wide

Last iteration I killed the biconditional and reported that the one-way
reading survived: all 10 bit-set sprites on GP_TITLE build 4 are eff
names, so "bit set => eff name". Checked over the disc, that is false.

  sprites with a resolvable preceding name   14 709
    bit SET   & name has 'eff'                2 338
    bit SET   & name lacks 'eff'              2 657   <-- counterexamples
    bit clear & name has 'eff'                1 399
    bit clear & name lacks 'eff'              8 315

  P(eff | set)   = 0.468
  P(eff | clear) = 0.144

The implication fails more often than it holds. What survives is an
association -- 3.3x enrichment -- and build 4's 10/10 was a local naming
habit in an 18-element bundle, not a format rule.

The counterexamples are the useful part: pv_loading_ring0,
pv_loading_light0-3, pv_loading_line, px_bunk_line, px_top_extra. Rings,
glows, lights, thin lines -- effect-like artwork that does not carry the
eff naming convention. Consistent with the bit marking effect sprites by
authoring intent rather than by name, which is a description and not a
decode, and is labelled as such.

Names here come from the string immediately preceding each T8aD,
validated 17/18 on build 4 against the RATC child order; the single
mismatch is the known pteff04.t32 -> registered as 8AX case, so this is
the element (opt) name rather than the sprite's registered name. That
mismatch is itself an independent confirmation of the 8AX finding,
reached from the opposite direction.

METHOD: a pattern perfect on one screen can be near-chance on the disc;
and when an association survives a refuted implication, the
counterexamples are the finding.

docs/port/HANDOFF.md

@@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ authored version can be deleted.
   ⚠️ **Correlation only — untested.** Nothing yet shows it *means* additive; the
   test is to blend bit-`0x02` sprites additively and re-correlate the title
   against the capture. Note `ptlogo_back2eff` is `0x8830` despite its name, so
-  this is a field and not a naming pattern. ❔ Not diagnosed — but two candidate meanings are now dead: **not** "the name contains `eff`" (`ptlogo_back2eff` is an `eff` name with the bit clear — confirmed by a validated name→header pairing, not a size guess) and **not** "the element is transient" (`pteff03`/`pteff03a` carry the bit and persist to `t=250`). ⚠️ Practical note for an asset pipeline: `T8aD` headers appear in **RATC child order** (18/18 verified on build 4 against decoded dimensions), which is the only sound way to attribute a header to a name when two sprites share a size — and two here do.
+  this is a field and not a naming pattern. ❔ Not diagnosed — but two candidate meanings are now dead: **not** "the name contains `eff`" — and not even the one-way "bit ⇒ `eff` name", which held 10/10 on the title but fails on **2 657 of 4 995** bit-set sprites disc-wide (`P(eff|set) = 0.468`). What survives is a 3.3× association, and the counterexamples are rings, glows and lights — effect-like art without the naming convention and **not** "the element is transient" (`pteff03`/`pteff03a` carry the bit and persist to `t=250`). ⚠️ Practical note for an asset pipeline: `T8aD` headers appear in **RATC child order** (18/18 verified on build 4 against decoded dimensions), which is the only sound way to attribute a header to a name when two sprites share a size — and two here do.
   ⚠️ **The rotated draw is NOT the swoosh.** It was identified as the swoosh by
   elimination; that is **refuted** — its quads span y −209…925 in screen space,
   the swoosh is a band at y 126…360. ✅ **It is the two `ptloop` sweeps**