Last iteration I claimed the splash's measured_paint_order [0,2,4,6,1,3,5]
records, between its glow and logo halves, the temporal order they were
seen in rather than depth -- because the halves never share a frame.
The no-overlap measurement is right (glows f94-115, logos f116-211). The
inference is wrong, on two independent grounds:
* Wrong source. That vector is not a read of the draw capture. It is a
read of the live screen object's CHILD ARRAY -- ui-screen-runtime.md
records it literally as "paint order (child slots)". A child list has
a definite order whether or not its children are ever drawn together,
so co-occurrence does not bear on it. The capture was the CHECK.
* The order is in the file anyway. paint_order_audit on GP_TITLE entry
11: derived == measured, 0 inverted pairs, 0 same-layer-key ties. The
glows and logos carry distinct T8aD keys (0xa100 < 0xa110), so the
file orders the halves statically, no capture involved.
I asked the question that started this iteration -- do the title and menu
orders have the same problem -- and the answer is that none of the three
does, for the same reason.
What survives is narrower and now recorded with numbers: how much of each
order its capture actually cross-checks. The title capture is stable (8
draws / 12 quads / 5 textures, identical in all five captured frames
across two logs) and confirms 7 of 24 positions; the menu capture is not
(texture 0x11C30000 present in frame 0, gone by frame 3); the splash
capture cannot cross-check its middle at all.
A counting trap worth the tool: count QUADS, not draws. The menu's draw 9
is indices=24 -- six quads batched from one texture. Counting draws reads
9 where 16 are on screen, and an earlier pass of this analysis briefly
"found" three quads for six declarations that way and concluded elements
were missing. They were batched.
METHOD: check what a "measured" value was measured FROM before reasoning
about its limits. The co-occurrence rule is real, and it is specific to
orders read from draw captures.
ui-prm-primitives recorded that where a .prm paints on a screen without a
measured order is unsolved. For the developer splash it is now measured.
Every frame opens with two full-screen draws before any sprite. The
second is untextured in all 212 frames with a constant vertex colour of
FF000000 -- opaque black -- matching palogo_eff0.prm's declaration
exactly: kind 0x10, pivot (640,360) -> 1280x720, one keyframe, a = 255.
So the splash backdrop is an opaque black full-screen quad from the
bundle itself, painted behind every sprite, which is why a splash render
needs --black rather than the default backdrop.
Not a general rule, and said so: the measured main-menu order puts
pteff02.prm at position 4 and pteff00.prm LAST, the latter being the
screen-transition fade.
And a correction to an existing row. measured_paint_order returns
[0, 2, 4, 6, 1, 3, 5] for the splash, described as "the .prm, then all
three glows, then the three logos". But the glows and the logos never
appear in the same frame -- 0 overlapping frames in 235 -- and two
elements that never co-occur have no observable relative depth. Between
those halves the vector records the order they were SEEN IN, not a
front-to-back relationship.
That does not make the render wrong, and element 0 is a real depth
observation since the .prm co-occurs with everything. But the type of the
claim matters: reading the vector as depth invites compositing all seven
elements at once, which is exactly what does not reproduce the screen.
METHOD: two things that never co-occur have no observable relative order;
when recording an order, note which pairs actually appeared together.
The activation decision is code, and MISSION already says the port
authors the sequence -- so the useful move is to hand over the sequence
measured rather than chase the code. From the 235-frame draw capture, at
1 frame = 1/30 s (2 units/frame, 1 unit = 1/60 s, both settled in Q1):
publisher: SQUARE ENIX logo f1-90 90 frames 3.00 s+ at 0.00
(gap, nothing drawn) f91-93 3 frames 0.10 s at 3.00
developer: both glows f94-115 22 frames 0.73 s at 3.10
developer: both logos f116-211 96 frames 3.20 s at 3.83
Three limits, stated with the numbers rather than after them. The capture
opens with palogo_sqex already at a=255, so the publisher phase began
before the window and 3.00 s is a FLOOR -- every "starts at" is relative
to the capture, not to boot. palogo_anima and palogo_anima_eff get 0
draws in all 214 frames, so a third pair's phase is not in this
measurement. And it is one capture, one run: the glow->logo switch being
a single frame boundary with no overlap is a strong shape, but each
duration is one sample.
What is solid is the part that matters: the 0.73 s and 3.20 s phases are
each within 2% of their element's declared span, so the durations are the
bundle's own and only the ordering is authored. That is the difference
between a port transcribing timing and inventing it.
Last iteration I withdrew "a bundle is a palette" because the evidence
did not choose between selective activation within one bundle and two
compositions shown in sequence. The alternative can be killed from the
disc, which I had not tried.
Hypothesis 2 needs a bundle declaring the GLOWS WITHOUT THE LOGOS. There
is none. Every GP_TITLE entry carrying palogo elements:
10, 13 (publisher twins) palogo_eff0.prm, palogo_sqex, palogo_sqex_eff
11, 14 (developer twins) palogo_eff0.prm + all three logos + all three glows
Four entries, and each developer entry declares the complete set of six.
So whichever bundle was active across frames 94-211 -- entry 11, entry
14, or both in turn -- it declared the logos and the glows, while the
game drew two sprites at a time in disjoint phases.
Therefore only a subset of a bundle's elements is drawn at any moment,
whatever the bundle-loading story is. The conclusion no longer depends on
resolving how many bundles are involved, which is why the texture-base
test's failure stopped mattering.
So the claim is reinstated -- this time by eliminating the alternative
rather than by assuming it away. What worked was not a better capture but
asking what the competing hypothesis would REQUIRE on the disc and
finding it absent.
METHOD: a hypothesis that predicts an artefact can be killed by looking
for the artefact, which is often far cheaper than measuring the behaviour.
Last iteration I wrote that a bundle is a palette whose elements are
selectively activated. The disjoint glow/logo phases have two
explanations and I asserted one:
1. one bundle, some elements run then others;
2. two bundle-loads shown in sequence (entries 11 and 14 are twins
declaring identical sprites).
The draw log's tex[base=...] looked like it would separate them. It does
not, and the control is in the same table:
publisher splash f1-90 0x11C30000, 0x10000000
glows f94-115 0x11C30000, 0x10000000
logos f116-211 0x11C30000, 0x10000000
The publisher splash is certainly a DIFFERENT bundle from the developer
splash, and it uses the same base. So 0x11C30000 is a reused upload slot,
not a bundle identity, and the test cannot choose between the two
hypotheses.
Survives: a bundle's declared elements are not what gets drawn.
palogo_anima and palogo_gamearts carry byte-identical keyframe times and
in the same run one is drawn 95 frames and the other none -- and
whichever twin was active declares both. The phases are strictly disjoint
(0 overlapping frames in 235).
Withdrawn: the mechanism. The practical consequence is unchanged --
compositing every element of a bundle does not reproduce what the game
shows over time -- but the why is not established and I stated it as
though it were.
What would separate them: a per-draw capture recording the bundle each
draw came from, or a file-IO log showing whether a second RATC entry is
read between frames 115 and 116.
METHOD: a shared resource address does not identify the resource's owner;
and state the mechanism as a separate claim from the observation, or the
weaker one inherits the stronger one's evidence.
Two checks on last iteration's "sequential, not simultaneous" reading.
First, the phases really are disjoint. If glows and logos ever shared a
frame the claim would be wrong. Across all 235 captured frames the count
of frames containing both is ZERO, and the switch is a single clean
boundary -- f110-115 draw 1280x720 + 262x108 + 525x90, f116 onward
1280x720 + 243x86 + 499x72. Two sprites either side, no transition frame.
Second, and larger: a third of the bundle is never drawn. Entry 11
declares three logo/glow pairs and only two appear.
palogo_gamearts / _eff 95 / 22 frames
palogo_seta / _eff 95 / 22 frames
palogo_anima / _eff never
palogo_anima declares the SAME keyframe times as palogo_gamearts. Two
elements with byte-identical data, 95 frames and 0 frames in one run.
Reach: the capture covers frames 1-214, so this is "never in the window".
So a bundle is a palette, not a script. Its elements say what to draw and
for how long; which of them run, and when each starts, is decided outside
the placement data. That is the same conclusion the boot-order work
reached from the other end -- the driver is code, not data -- now with a
per-element measurement behind it.
For the port, concretely: compositing every element of a bundle does not
reproduce what the game shows over time. It is the right thing for a
static screen that settles, and it is not a timeline.
METHOD: two elements with identical data and different outcomes is the
strongest possible evidence that the decision is elsewhere.
Tested whether the splash timeline, played, reproduces the capture --
the last gap in the animation model. Half of it does.
Durations match. At 2 units/frame under the shifted reading, from the
235-frame draw capture of the developer splash:
glows drawn f94-115 (22 frames = 44 units) declared ~0..45 = 45 97.8%
logos drawn f116-211 (96 frames = 192 units) declared 15..210 = 195 98.5%
Each element is on screen for its declared span to within 2%.
Starts do not. Every glow declares the same times 15,30,45 and every
logo the same 15,30,190,194,206,210, so on one clock they would overlap
almost entirely -- and they do not overlap at all. The glows run 94-115
and the logos 116-211, strictly sequential, the logos starting the frame
after the glows end. Fitting one origin needs f0 ~ 93.5 for gamearts_eff
and ~103 for gamearts, about 19 units apart, and aligning one throws the
other off by ~9 frames at both ends.
The obvious candidate is refuted. parse_placements reads each group
header as (element index, keyframe count) plus one undecoded LEAD-IN
WORD -- exactly where a per-group start offset would live. It is
0x00000000 for all seven elements, glows and logos alike.
Reach: not the keyframe times (identical within each family), not that
word (zero), not declaration order (which interleaves logos and glows
where the observed sequencing groups them), not the RATC child order.
What remains is that the sequencing is code-driven, which agrees with
what the boot-order work concluded independently.
For the port: a group says how long an element animates and what it does,
not when it starts relative to its neighbours. The observed order on the
developer splash -- both glows, then both logos -- is measured for one
screen, not a decoded rule, so the sequencing has to be authored.
METHOD: when a model reproduces durations but not positions, the missing
piece is an origin, not a rate.
The model's sharpest prediction, tested with its control. The draw log
says that on the developer splash the _eff glows are drawn on frames
94-115 and the logos on 116-211, so at the moment the reference capture
was taken EVERY glow is already finished -- including the two that have
plateaus and which rest_plateau therefore renders visible. Suppressing
them should help on the splashes and hurt where a screen genuinely
settles.
publisher splash +0.9604 -> +0.9982 +0.0377
developer splash +0.9659 -> +0.9980 +0.0321
title (control) +0.9500 -> +0.9480 -0.0020
main menu(control) +0.9460 -> +0.8544 -0.0916
EXTRAS (control) +0.9440 -> +0.8370 -0.1070
Both splashes jump to about 0.998; all three persistent screens get
worse. The control is what makes this a finding rather than a
coincidence: the same edit helps exactly where the model says it should
and hurts exactly where it says it should not.
So rest_plateau is not over-drawing in general -- it over-draws on
TRANSIENT screens. A plateau mid-animation means the element is held at
that point in the timeline, not that it is on screen once the screen has
settled. Where a screen settles, the held pose IS the settled pose and
the rule is measurably right.
And that answers the question left open several iterations ago -- what
"rest" means for a transient element. It does not mean anything: the
splashes never rest. A static composite of them can match a chosen frame,
and about 0.998 is what these captures' frame is worth, but the format
does not answer a question the screen never poses.
For the port: play the timeline for the two splashes, which the settled
keyframe timing now supports, and composite statically for title, main
menu and EXTRAS.
METHOD: an edit that improves one set of cases is only interesting once
you have shown it damages the cases where it should.
The weakness in the rest-rule finding was that `last` had been SCORED on
only two elements. It cannot be scored on more -- only two ambiguous
elements sit on a screen with a live capture -- but the entry -> hold ->
exit model makes a prediction that can be checked on all 2 305: what does
each element's FINAL keyframe look like?
final keyframe invisible (a = 0) 1 618 transient: gone at rest
final keyframe visible, at max alpha 675 faded in and stopped
final keyframe visible, BELOW max alpha 12 genuinely unclear
Of the 687 that end visible, 472 have monotonically non-decreasing alpha
-- a plain fade-in that stops, [0, 255] over two keyframes in the
commonest case (pjex_eff.rat, pghud_speed_cut.t32) -- and another 203 end
at their maximum after dipping.
So `last` is structurally defensible for 2 293 of 2 305 (99.5 %), against
a dwell rule that returns a mid-movement frame by construction. Observed
correct for 2, structural for 675, model-consistent for 1 618, unclear
for 12.
The assumption carrying the 1 618 is stated rather than buried: that a
plateau-less element's animation has finished by the time the screen is
settled. The draw log establishes exactly this for the two splash glows
(drawn frames 94-115, logos 116-211) and establishes nothing for the
rest.
Default still unchanged. The case is now observational, structural and
model-based rather than two data points, but it would move 1 896 elements
and the decision belongs with whoever owns the renderer.
The shifted keyframe-time reading looked like it implied something
simple: the final pose is reached at a definite time and nothing follows,
so rest should just be the last keyframe and the plateau heuristic could
go. Tested by applying it to EVERY element:
title +0.9500 -> +0.6819 -0.2681
main menu +0.9460 -> +0.6416 -0.3044
EXTRAS +0.9440 -> +0.5745 -0.3695
publisher splash +0.9600 -> blank (zero variance, corr undefined)
developer splash +0.9643 -> blank
Refuted, and the failure supplies the model. A group is entry -> hold ->
exit, and the exit is the screen's DISMISSAL. While a screen is displayed
it has not reached its last keyframe; it is sitting at the hold. So
rest_plateau is the correct primary rule, and the last keyframe is the
post-exit state -- correct only once the screen is gone, which is why
applying it everywhere blanks the splashes.
This does not contradict the shifted reading. That reading says when each
pose is reached; it says nothing about the group being played to
completion while the screen is still up. The step between them was mine.
And it explains why last wins for the two plateau-less elements: an
element with no hold is a transient, it flashes and is over, and at any
settled moment it is gone -- which is its last keyframe. The draw capture
says the same independently: on the developer splash the _eff glows draw
on frames 94-115 and the logos on 116-211, so the glows are already
finished when the logos are up.
Three independent observables -- animation timing, static composites, and
the per-frame draw log -- now agree on one rule: plateau where there is
one, last keyframe where there is not.
METHOD: a blank render is a NaN correlation, not a low score, and that
NaN was the strongest form of the result; and when a model predicts
something the measurement refuses, suspect the step you supplied between
them.
The open question was whether "last keyframe" holds beyond the two
elements I could score against a capture. It cannot be scored disc-wide --
only two ambiguous elements sit on a screen with a live capture -- but the
blast radius can be measured, and it argues the same way.
genuinely ambiguous elements 2 305
the two rules AGREE on 409 (17.7 %)
they DIFFER on 1 896 (82.3 %)
dwell (current): invisible pose 1 711 (74.2 %), zero-scale 195 (8.5 %)
last : invisible pose 1 618 (70.2 %), zero-scale 43 (1.9 %)
Two things follow. It is not a marginal choice: the rules disagree on 82%
of the affected elements, so "either is fine" is not available. And the
current rule produces 4.5x more degenerate poses -- a zero-scale pose is
collapsed to nothing, i.e. an element's PRE-ROLL before it has grown in,
which is definitionally not a rest. 195 elements currently rest at a frame
they are only passing through, against 43 under last.
That is an argument from the data's own structure rather than from the two
captures, and it points the same direction.
Kept honest: it is indirect. Fewer degenerate results is not the same as
more correct results, and last still returns an invisible pose 70% of the
time -- right for a transient element, wrong for a persistent one. The
default stays put; the numbers are in HANDOFF for whoever decides.
Scored candidate rest-pose rules by rendering and correlating instead of
arguing, and both results correct something I had published.
First, the exposure. The guessing fallback is reached only by an element
that is plateau-less AND multi-keyframe -- a single-keyframe element
short-circuits at `match len { 1 => first }`. Per screen:
title (4) 24 elements 2 plateau-less 0 reach the fallback
main menu (5) 16 5 0
EXTRAS (6) 18 5 0
publisher splash (10) 3 2 1
developer splash (11) 7 2 1
So on the three screens the port cares most about, rest() never guesses.
That is why three different rules render builds 4/5/6 to identical
correlations -- the code is unreachable there, which I nearly read as
"the choice does not matter".
Second, where it does fire, the last keyframe is markedly better:
publisher splash dwell +0.9600 last +0.9982 maxalpha +0.9600
developer splash dwell +0.9643 last +0.9758 maxalpha +0.9643
That refutes my own earlier refutation. I had killed the last-keyframe
rule by arguing it makes palogo_anima_eff invisible while its two
siblings stay lit, which looked like an artefact. The capture says
otherwise: making it invisible is what improves the match. The sibling
symmetry was my expectation, not evidence.
Caveat kept in front: both captures are single frames of a transient
animation, so this fixes which pose matches THOSE frames, not which is
canonically at rest. Default unchanged -- better on both screens where it
fires and identical on the other three, but it would move 2 305 elements
disc-wide on two measurements. Reachable via SYLPHEED_REST_RULE=last.
Also confirmed: all 195 zero-scale rest poses are inside the corrected
2 305 ambiguous population; none is a single-keyframe element.
METHOD: score a rule where it can differ, or you measure nothing; and an
argument from symmetry is a prediction, not a refutation.
Two corrections from one experiment.
A keyframe group is entry -> hold -> exit, and the exit ends invisible:
on the five port screens the final keyframe is invisible for 21/24
(title), 8/16 (main menu), 12/18 (EXTRAS), 2/3 and 6/7 (splashes). So the
screen as seen is the HOLD, which is why rest_plateau is the right
primary rule and why "rest = last keyframe" would empty every screen.
That suggested a fix: an element with no hold has no representative pose,
so draw nothing rather than guess an endpoint. Tested through compose's
visible mask and correlated against the live captures:
title +0.9500 -> +0.6839 -0.2661
main menu +0.9460 -> +0.9037 -0.0423
EXTRAS +0.9440 -> +0.9094 -0.0346
Refuted on all three, and the reason invalidates a number I published. An
element with a SINGLE keyframe has no adjacent pair, so the plateau test
marks it plateau-less -- but its one pose is unambiguously its rest.
Suppressing those removes backgrounds and full-screen layers, which is
the title's -0.27.
no plateau (as published) 3 807 (24.57 %)
... single-keyframe 1 502 trivially at rest, not a guess
genuinely ambiguous 2 305 (14.88 %)
So rest() guesses for 2 305 elements, not 3 807 -- the figure I gave the
port overstated the defect by 65%. Corrected in HANDOFF and the page.
METHOD: a predicate over adjacent PAIRS silently misclassifies a
one-element list; and acting on a claim is a better test of it than
re-reading it -- this flaw survived a census, a write-up and a handoff
row, and died the moment the rule was used to change a rendering.
The case for reading +36 as "the time the NEXT pose is reached" rested on
one element's fade-out shape, then on one element's hold duration. Both
splash halves supply more, and they agree.
element screen observed hold as decoded shifted
palogo_gamearts developer splash 83 f 8 f 80 f
palogo_seta developer splash 83 f 6 f 80 f
palogo_sqex publisher splash >=77 f * 6 f 102 f
* the capture opens mid-hold at frame 1, so 77 is a floor.
The readings predict opposite structures. For palogo_gamearts, as decoded:
hold 8f, in 80f, hold 2f, out 6f, out 2f -- an eighty-frame FADE-IN and a
two-frame hold. Shifted: in 8f, hold 80f, out 2f, out 6f, out 2f. The
capture shows an 83-frame hold and no fade-in at all.
The elements that cannot discriminate are not contradicted:
palogo_gamearts_eff observed in 7f / hold 7f / out 8f, and both readings
give 8f phases -- with four blocks the shift only relabels which phase is
which. So the glows, which is where Q1's linear law was measured, say
nothing either way rather than arguing against.
The decoder's default is still unchanged, and the reason is now
articulated rather than assumed. The single thing opposing the shift is
rest() on ptlogo_eff3, where the shifted reading makes the longest-dwell
fallback return the bloom's 200% peak. That fallback is unsound whenever
it runs -- it returns an endpoint of a movement, neither of which is held
-- and checked: the shift does not fix it either. So the objection was
never evidence about the times. Timing had three discriminating
measurements; pose selection had a heuristic guessing.
For the port: animation timing should use the shift; static composites are
unaffected and the five screens' correlations stand. Classified measured,
not decoded -- three elements in one screen family, not a disc-wide check.
The answers for the port's five screens were spread across a dozen
documents and none of them said how good the result IS. Measured:
screen build drawn corr vs capture alignment
title 4 15/24 +0.9500 dy=0 dx=0
main menu 5 11/16 +0.9460 dy=0 dx=0
EXTRAS 6 13/18 +0.9440 dy=0 dx=0
publisher splash 10 2/3 +0.9600 dy=0 dx=0
developer splash 11 6/7 +0.9643 dy=0 dx=0
Every one aligns at exactly zero offset over a +/-2 px search in both
axes, so placement and scale are right and the residual is tone and
detail rather than geometry.
The drawn/total counts are not slack. Each undrawn element has a reason
already documented: kind & 0x4 ghost instances (4 on the title), .prm
primitives off by default (2 per menu, 1 per splash), loop* animations
off by default and off-screen at rest (2 per menu screen), and the 8AX
name mismatch (1 per menu screen) whose art reaches the screen anyway via
ptbase. 4+2+2+1 = 9, 2+2+1 = 5, 1. Nothing unexplained.
The residual is ranked for a consumer: tone first (gamma 1.34-1.49, the
game's own display ramp), then 8AX resolution, then one drawable
paint-order tie on EXTRAS alone, then rotation-decoded-but-not-rendered
which does not affect these five at rest.
Reach stated: these are static composites at the resting pose against
single frames, so nothing here speaks to animation, and a whole-frame
correlation is a sanity figure rather than a per-element check.
A per-sprite premultiplied-vs-straight-alpha flag would matter a lot to a
port and has a sharp static signature: premultiplied means RGB <= A
everywhere. Over the 170 decoded GP_TITLE textures that pair to a flag
word:
bit SET n= 61 mean %(RGB>A) 55.52 median 52.52
bit clear n=109 mean %(RGB>A) 33.66 median 30.17
Premultiplied requires ~0% for the flagged group. Both groups are far
from it and the flagged group violates MORE -- the opposite of the
hypothesis. Refuted.
What remains is a weak association: flagged sprites carry more
bright-RGB/low-alpha pixels, which is what glow art looks like. But the
best single threshold classifies 76.5% against a 64.1% base rate -- a
12-point lift with badly overlapping distributions. A tendency, not a
rule, and reported with its base rate so it cannot read as more.
Noted for whoever returns: "0x02 selects an additive blend" was refuted
by blending those sprites additively and finding every measure worse
against the capture -- but that ran through a title render since fixed
twice (rest_plateau, and the 8AX background the composer drops). The
refutation may well stand; it was measured through a renderer with known
other errors, so it is worth one re-run if blit ever gains additive
blending.
Parking the field. Four candidate meanings are dead -- additive blend,
eff name in both directions, transient element, premultiplied alpha --
none produced a positive account, and the bit blocks nothing: the port's
screens composite at 0.947 correlation against a capture without it. The
negative space and the sound attribution method (child order, not size)
are written down so a later attempt starts here.
METHOD: report a classifier's lift over its base rate; and park a field
after N failed hypotheses, saying what was eliminated.
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.
The bit at +0x04 was recorded as a real field with its meaning "not
diagnosed", noting ptlogo_back2eff is 0x8830 "despite its name". That note
rested on a size match -- and its size is ambiguous, which is the trap
this corpus already records.
First, a sound attribution. T8aD headers appear in the bundle in RATC
CHILD ORDER, verified on GP_TITLE build 4 against an independent property
-- each header's decoded dimensions versus the dimensions the named child
should have: 18 of 18 match, 0 mismatches. Two of those eighteen share a
size (ptlogo_back2eff and ptlogo_back2eff5, both 1133x280), so a size-keyed
lookup cannot separate them; ordering can. Index 12 is back2eff5 (0x8832,
bit set), index 14 is back2eff (0x8830, bit clear). The documented
counterexample is real and correctly attributed -- now on evidence.
Two candidate meanings tested and refuted:
bit <=> name contains "eff" REFUTED: ptlogo_back2eff is an eff
name with the bit clear. All 10
bit-set sprites are eff names, so
the implication holds one way only.
bit <=> the element is transient REFUTED: pteff03/pteff03a carry the
bit and run to t=250, ramping to
a=255 and holding.
Up close, the exception pair differs in two header words: +0x04
0x8832/0x8830 and +0x08 0x8083/0x8081 -- layer keys 32899 and 32897. They
are NOT duplicates: their alpha summaries agree to one decimal (4.5%
opaque, 86.7% clear, mean 19.3) but a pixel compare gives max abs diff 21.
Two renditions of one image at one size, which is why the summaries were
not trusted.
Still not diagnosed, and said so -- but the search space is two smaller
and the attribution beneath it is now sound.
METHOD: T8aD headers sit in child order, use that not the size; and
identical summary statistics are not identical data.
Continues the previous iteration, where the game was measured calling
VdGetCurrentDisplayGamma at video init. The remaining link -- does it then
WRITE the ramp -- is a GPU register operation (XE_GPU_REG_DC_LUT_RW_INDEX
in CommandProcessor::WriteRegister), unlogged and invisible to kernel
logging. Two facts from the source close it without instrumenting.
1. The swap-path gamma stage is a PURE LUT. apply_gamma_table.xesli is
the whole transform: index by input*255, fetch from a 256-entry ramp
buffer, output. No sRGB encode, no second transfer function.
2. The table DEFAULTS TO IDENTITY. CommandProcessor::Initialize fills it
with value = i * 0x3FF / 0xFF, and its own comment says the linear
default is "what games set when starting with the sRGB (return value 1)
VdGetCurrentDisplayGamma". An unwritten ramp is a no-op.
So the only transform is a LUT, the LUT is identity unless written, the
game queries the display gamma at init, and the capture differs from our
composite by gamma 1.34-1.49 -- which identity cannot produce. The guest
wrote a non-identity ramp.
Labelled an inference, with its weak joint named: it assumes our
composite reproduces the PRE-RAMP framebuffer, which it does not exactly.
What carries it is the shape -- a systematic ~1.4 fitted on flat patches
across three screens is not a compositor bug. The obvious alternative, a
fixed sRGB stage in the presenter, fits neither direction: an encode
(^0.45) brightens and we measured darkening; a decode (^2.2) darkens far
more than 1.4.
Direct observation remains available and cheap, and needs the emulator
only to boot: a GPU trace records gamma ramps as their own command type,
or one log line at the DC_LUT register write would settle it outright.
Not done.
METHOD: a default value is evidence; and name the weak joint of an
inference in the same breath as the conclusion.
Last iteration's corrected experiment, run. Boot with --log_mask=12
--log_level=3 (Kernel logging on, Cpu/Gpu off), which changes nothing
about the output and so cannot perturb the capture harness the way the
gamma-cvar experiment would have.
VdGetCurrentDisplayGamma is called once, at video init:
d> VdGetSystemCommandBuffer(701CF830, 701CF804)
d> VdGetCurrentDisplayGamma(701CE1F8(00000000), 701CE1F0(0))
d> VdSetDisplayMode(40000000)
d> VdGetCurrentDisplayInformation(701CF110)
The control is in the same log: 359 VdRetrainEDRAM and 358
VdGetSystemCommandBuffer lines, so an absent call would have been
visible. Per the export's own comment the returned type is "used in D3D
SetGammaRamp/SetPWLGamma" -- the game asks the question a ramp-builder
asks, at the moment one would ask it.
Still open, and stated: whether it then WRITES the ramp, and whether the
measured gamma 1.34-1.49 is that ramp. The write is a GPU register
operation (DC_LUT), invisible to kernel logging; a GPU trace records
gamma ramps as a command type (TraceWriter::WriteGammaRamp), which is
where to look next.
Worth its own METHOD line: this had been parked behind "needs the
emulator to reach a menu" for several iterations, and it needed the
emulator only to BOOT -- video init happens in the first seconds. A
blocker that stops one experiment does not stop every experiment in the
same area.
I had parked the tone-curve finding behind "this may be the emulator, not
the game: canary applies kernel_display_gamma_type = 2 (BT.709) on
output", with a planned run setting it to 0 and re-fitting. Reading the
source kills both the confound and the experiment.
VdGetCurrentDisplayGamma_entry is a kStub GETTER the guest calls
(xboxkrnl_video.cc). Its own comment: "Used in D3D SetGammaRamp/
SetPWLGamma to adjust the ramp for the display." The cvar is a value
REPORTED TO THE GAME, which then builds its own ramp. Canary's role is
downstream: the guest writes DC_LUT, command_processor.cc reads it into
gamma_ramp_256_entry_table_, and the swap path applies it via
swap_apply_gamma_pipeline_layout with apply_gamma_table.ps /
apply_gamma_pwl.ps compiled in.
So there is no emulator-side BT.709 post-process to subtract, and any
gamma in a captured frame is a ramp the game installed.
What is NOT established, and the reach is stated: that this game installs
a ramp at all, or that the measured 1.34-1.49 is it. The run logs cannot
say -- kernel exports log at Debug and this harness masks Kernel logging
(log_mask = 13, per boot_menu.sh's own comment), so their silence is
guaranteed regardless of what the game did.
The planned experiment was wrong in design: changing the cvar changes
what the GUEST is told and therefore which ramp the GAME builds, so it
could never isolate a stage that does not exist -- and it perturbs the
capture harness, since skip_intro classifies movie-vs-static on an
absolute rmse threshold that a brighter frame biases. The right run
changes nothing about the output: LOG_MASK=12 LOG_LEVEL=3 and look for
the call and the DC_LUT writes.
Also for the port: the ramp depends on the display type the game is told,
and canary hard-codes TV/BT.709 where hardware uses a console setting. So
this is a display profile, not a fixed property of the game.
METHOD: read what a cvar does before building an experiment around it;
and an absence in a log is only evidence if the log would have shown it.
I had parked this as "needs a per-draw capture recording texture base
addresses". It did not. 8AX (1280x720) and ptbase (640x360 at 200%) are
the SAME artwork at two resolutions, which is exactly why comparing
either against a capture is inconclusive -- and why comparing their
DIFFERENCE is not. Compute 8AX - upscale(ptbase), the detail only 8AX
has, and ask whether the capture contains it.
Both candidates are first mapped into the capture's tone domain with the
measured gamma; without that the residual is dominated by the tone
difference and the test is blind.
main menu corr +0.0475 controls +0.0032 shift, -0.0075 flip 68% of ceiling
title corr +0.0634 controls +0.0095 shift, +0.0086 flip 68% of ceiling
Two independent screens, both at 68% of the theoretical ceiling
(sd of the 8AX-only detail over sd of the capture residual), 7-15x their
matched controls. The controls preserve spatial correlation and destroy
only alignment, so they are what "no signal" looks like.
So the recommendation changes: resolve the name and draw 8AX at 1:1.
Upscaling ptbase 2x is wrong, not merely softer. Still do not draw both --
an opaque layer over an identical one costs fill and hides later changes,
and ptbase's element is the one carrying the keyframes, so a consumer
needs its timing with 8AX's pixels.
Also recorded and withdrawn: a cruder pixel-pair test gave 0.00-0.72 for
upscales, 0.98 native and 1.01 for the capture -- apparently decisive.
Additive noise raises both terms of that ratio equally and drives any
value toward 1; fitting a noise term, both "native + noise" and "bilinear
+ noise" reproduce the observed numbers. The conclusion is right, that
test does not establish it, and it is in REFUTED because the number looks
conclusive and is not.
Not shown: whether ptbase is also drawn underneath. 8AX is ~86% opaque
and carries the same art, so it would hide it either way.
A resolve-check on HANDOFF's own rows. Q8 read "SE audio is undecodable
from the disc -- no XACT container exists anywhere". menu-audio-cues.md
retracted exactly that ("### Retracting 'cannot be extracted'") and
locates three cues in Static.slb that decode to PCM: d-pad move 0x1ec0
(4 packets), (B) back 0x0ec0 (2), (A) confirm 0x5d6c0 (6), all mono
48 kHz. The retraction landed in docs/re/ and the page the port reads
kept the superseded text -- the fourth time in this corpus.
Writing the rule down has not worked, so there is a tool now.
handoff_lint.py flags every HANDOFF line making a strong negative claim
that links a doc containing retraction language. First run: found the Q8
row, plus one benign false positive (Q3 links a doc whose retraction is
about a sprite count, not about the tie-break -- checked, and HANDOFF
repeats none of the retracted figures). The lint also caught its own bug
first: it reported existing docs as missing because it joined a guessed
repo root, so it now resolves links relative to the file as markdown does.
Separately, EXTRAS's paint-order risk narrows twice more. Of its 15 tied
pairs only 2 overlap, and of those, ptloop01 x ptloop02 are loop*
animations compose skips by default -- so exactly ONE tie can be drawn:
ptframe3 x ptframe4, overlapping 102x132 px. Against live-extras.png that
contested region correlates +0.9622, better than the whole frame (+0.9440)
and inside the range of regions where order cannot matter (+0.8502 /
+0.9903). Consistent with our order, not proof: correlation cannot see a
swap between locally similar art.
15 -> 2 -> 1 -> consistent is now the whole paint-order risk on the five
screens, and HANDOFF says so.
Q3 was delivered as "decoded: a u16 layer key at +0x0A". The audit last
iteration showed the key does not fully order a screen -- elements
sharing a key are tied, and on the title that tie-break decides two total
occlusions. This searches for what breaks the tie, and closes it as a
negative with reach.
The game paints the five tied ptlogo_back2eff glows in the order
eff1, eff2, eff5, eff3, eff4. Three static structures were searched:
1. The declaration table. Entries 14-18 are byte-identical apart from the
pivot, which is only half the sprite's own size.
2. The T8aD headers. All five carry identical +0x04 (0x8832) and
identical +0x08/+0x0A (32899, the key itself), differing only in
position and tile count. Searched exhaustively -- every offset
0x00-0x7f, u8/u16/u32, ascending and descending:
fields sorting to the MEASURED order: 0
fields sorting to the DECLARATION order (control): 64
The control is the point: 64 fields can be found that reproduce a
known ordering, so the scan finds ordering fields when they exist. It
finds none for the order the game uses.
3. The RATC child order -- a genuinely different permutation on other
screens -- gives eff1..eff5 here, declaration order again.
All three static orderings give eff1..eff5; the game gives eff1,2,5,3,4.
That agrees with ui-screen-runtime's conclusion from the other direction:
the game builds a reordered child list at load time and paints that.
Q3 now reads honestly: the layer key is decoded and orders 4 of the 5
measured bundles exactly; the tie-break within a key is undecodable, and
a consumer must use a measured order or accept declaration index as an
arbitrary stand-in. The port's exposure remains 2 overlapping tied pairs
on EXTRAS.
METHOD: an exhaustive field search needs a positive control, or "found
nothing" is worthless.
`compose` claimed the derived paint order "reproduces both measured
orders up to ties". That sentence was never measured and was stale by
one: there are three measured orders, not two. examples/paint_order_audit.rs
checks it.
main menu (entries 5, 8) derived == measured 0 inverted pairs
developer splash (11, 14) derived == measured 0 inverted pairs
title (entry 4) DIFFERS 8, all same-key ties
So the claim holds and the exception is entirely ties -- but two of those
ties are total occlusions, not near-misses. The tied family is the five
ptlogo_back2eff glows (key 32899); back2eff5 is 1133x280 and FULLY
CONTAINS back2eff3 (82,824 px^2 = 100% of the smaller) and back2eff4
(152,047 px^2 = 100%). Derived paints it on top of two glows it entirely
covers; the game paints it underneath. A tie-break by declaration index
can therefore be wrong by a whole layer. The title itself is unaffected --
it has a measured order.
The port's actual exposure, per screen: title, main menu and developer
splash all use MEASURED orders; the publisher splash is derived but has
ZERO ties, so it is fully determined; EXTRAS is derived with 15 tied
pairs of which only 2 OVERLAP. Two element pairs on one screen is the
whole risk, and that is what HANDOFF now says -- not the raw 15, which
would have overstated it 7x.
Reach stated: this compares the derived order against orders measured
from the game, not an independent derivation, so where no measured order
exists only the tie exposure can be checked. Overlap uses pivot*2 as the
element size at its resting placement.
Stale comment in compose corrected. METHOD: a hedge in a code comment is
an unmeasured claim; and count the cases that can bite, not the ones that
match the pattern.
Closes an observation I left dangling last iteration ("the capture is ~4x
darker than the render") and puts a figure on the ❔ INDEX's texture row
already carried: exact gamma/sRGB fidelity untested because a hue
comparison cannot see it.
Geometry first: cross-correlating the main-menu capture against our
render over +/-6 px puts the best alignment at exactly dy=0 dx=0,
correlation 0.9466. Only the tone differs.
Two methods failed before one worked, and both failures are recorded.
Three dark patches gave "4x darker" -- the whole-frame best linear scale
is 0.914, so three patches from one region are not a transfer curve. A
pixel-wise fit over 854,685 pixels then produced a NON-MONOTONIC transfer
(render 96-127 mapping brighter than render 128-159) with mean abs error
10-14 for every candidate model. That is edge misalignment, not a tone
curve: at correlation 0.947 a bright pixel routinely lands on a dark one.
Flat patches fix it -- 16x16 blocks with std < 8 in BOTH images, a
threshold chosen from the counts (0/83/404/1055/1788 at std<3/5/8/12/20):
main menu 404 patches gamma 1.491 err 0.28 (best linear 0.276, 0.34)
EXTRAS 382 patches gamma 1.493 err 0.22 (best linear 0.273, 0.28)
title 506 patches gamma 1.338 err 1.08 (best linear 0.842, 9.02)
Reach, stated because it is narrow: those patches span only render values
~0-60, where gamma and a plain scale are nearly indistinguishable -- the
two menus decide nothing (0.28 vs 0.34, 0.22 vs 0.28) and only the title
separates them. Nothing constrains midtones or highlights.
The held-out control FAILED TO DISCRIMINATE and is reported as such: the
splash's 2918 flat patches are pure black (render 0-4), so every model
scores ~0.00. That is a test with no power, not corroboration.
Confound left open: this compares our composite to what canary DISPLAYS,
and canary applies kernel_display_gamma_type = 2 (BT.709). The exponent
may be its output stage. The discriminating run -- set it to 0, recapture,
refit -- needs one emulator session reaching the main menu and was not
done.
Classified measured, not decoded; HANDOFF says plainly that a port
applying it is authoring.
Audited what `screen render` silently omits on the port's five screens,
since an element the game draws but we skip is the one defect class the
port agent has actually hit. Everything is accounted for -- kind & 0x4
ghost instances, .prm primitives, loop* animations -- except pteff04.t32
on the title and pteff05.t32 on both menus. Those are kind 0x0, one
keyframe, rest a=255, pivot (640,360): full-screen and opaque.
Cause: the element declares pteff05.t32, but the T8aD behind its `opt `
link is registered under the name 8AX, so build.sprites.get() misses and
compose hits a silent continue. Bytes at 0x0e2035 of GP_TITLE entry 5:
opt ... 70 74 65 66 66 30 35 2e 74 33 32 00 38 41 58 54 38 61 44
p t e f f 0 5 . t 3 2 \0 8 A X T 8 a D
8AX is 1280x720 and present in all six title-family bundles; it is a
sprite in builds 4/5/6 and never an element.
It does not currently show, and that is the useful half. ptbase.t32 is
640x360 drawn at 200% and carries THE SAME ARTWORK: its 2x upscale
differs from 8AX by mean abs diff 2.05 (max 80), and our rendered
background is pixel-identical to 8AX in every patch sampled. So resolving
the name and drawing it in addition would double-draw an opaque
full-screen layer -- invisible as a doubling, which is worse than a
visible bug. Written into HANDOFF as a do-not-do.
The free win, offered and not taken: use 8AX at 1:1 and drop ptbase
instead of upscaling a half-res copy. That is a rendering choice and
ptbase's element carries the keyframes, so it is the port's call.
Not established: which of the two the game actually draws. Both carry the
same art, so pixels cannot separate them; it needs a per-draw capture
recording texture base addresses, since the two differ in size.
Two iterations framed the JP title capture as possibly locale-specific.
It is not. Same flags, same oracle, English locale: 75 samples over 734 s,
every one glyph = 0. The English boot does not present the interactive
title either. Canary was alive throughout, polling
XamInputGetKeystrokeEx (1801 calls); the frame at 734 s has content but
correlates 0.15 with build 4's render and 0.05 with the main menu -- an
attract-movie frame, not title art.
So neither locale reaches the interactive title in ~12 minutes without a
pad press. What is actually untested is the pad: pad.py and
nav_to_flight.sh exist, and title_states_capture.sh reaches title states
with a flag set this probe did not replicate (--log_ui_draws
--ui_draw_capture_frames, plus xdotool window focus). It is a capture
problem, not a locale one. MISSION.md updated.
Also resolved a caveat I had given the port agent without checking it:
"rotation is decoded but not rendered" does NOT affect their five screens
at rest. Title, main menu, EXTRAS and both splash halves have ZERO
top-level elements with a non-zero rotation. The only rotations on any of
them are the title's two nested ptloop records (r = 30 and -45), and at
rest those sit at x = 1521 and x = -839 -- a 399-wide sprite entirely off
both edges of a 1280 screen. The caveat now applies only to animating the
title build-in, where the sweeps cross the screen rotated.
Two METHOD lines: run the control before theorising about the difference,
and log every sample so a failure is a measurement rather than a silence.
Emulator stopped, lock cleared, locale English.
blit() and fill_quad() both opened with
let sx_pct = if kf.scale_x == 0 { 100 } else { kf.scale_x };
so an element whose pose is collapsed to nothing rendered at FULL SIZE.
I first described this as "a 1-pixel sliver", reading the .max(1) in the
size arithmetic two lines below -- the guard above it meant .max(1) never
saw a zero. Read the whole function, not the lines you went looking for.
Control run before the change: if 0 meant "unset", something on the disc
would use it throughout. Nothing does.
elements with a keyframe group 15 493
at least one keyframe at scale 0 2 166
EVERY keyframe at scale 0 0
zero is a transient the element grows out of 1 762
ptlogo_eff3.t32 runs 0% -> 200%. An "unset" marker no element ever uses
throughout is not a marker.
Both functions now return without drawing when either scale is 0.
Reach: 24 of 24 renders byte-identical across GP_TITLE (all 16 builds),
GP_PAUSE_MENU and GP_OPTIONS -- additive on every screen the port needs.
195 elements have a guessed rest pose at scale 0 and 126 of those have a
non-zero alpha, so the old code painted them; all 126 are in
GP_READY_ROOM.pak, which S1 already declared a no-go. They are
tactical-map sprites at sx=0/sy=100, mid-horizontal-wipe, that the
coercion drew full-width.
So: a real correctness fix with no visible effect on the menu port.
Suite green, 122 passed / 0 failed across 3 suites at commit time.
Follows up the defect found last iteration: rest()'s dwell fallback is
guessing whenever it runs. Two things were open -- how big it is, and
whether "rest = the last keyframe" is the fix. Both are now answered, and
the second is answered no.
plateau_census.py walks the placement regions directly instead of going
through `screen info --geometry`, which decodes every texture and cannot
do a disc-wide pass in reasonable time. Its control reproduces GP_TITLE
build 7's three fallback elements and names ptlogo_eff3.t32 among them
before counting anything.
elements with a keyframe group 15 493
no plateau -> rest pose is guessed 3 807 (24.57 %)
... current rule returns invisible 1 711 (44.9 %)
... current rule returns scale=0 195 ( 5.1 %)
the two candidate rules agree 1 911 (50.2 %)
195 elements get a rest pose with scale 0%, which is not a pose. And
disc-wide the choice of rule is not cosmetic: the candidates agree half
the time.
But the port's exposure is one element. Across main menu, EXTRAS, title
and the developer splash, 14 elements are plateau-less and the two rules
agree on 13. The single disagreement is palogo_anima_eff.t32.
And "last keyframe" loses there, on a control that needed no new capture:
the splash carries three sibling glows with identical structure and
identical times --
palogo_gamearts_eff 15:a=0 30:a=255 45:a=255 -:a=0 plateau -> visible
palogo_seta_eff 15:a=0 30:a=255 45:a=255 -:a=0 plateau -> visible
palogo_anima_eff 15:a=0 30:a=255 45:a=212 -:a=0 no plateau
-- differing in one byte. "Last keyframe" makes anima alone invisible
while its two siblings stay lit. The capture agrees weakly: box-mean
ratios capture/render are gamearts 0.717, seta 0.723, anima 0.772, and a
glow we drew that the game does not would put anima below its siblings,
not above.
So the defect is measured and the fix is still undecided. Nothing in the
decoder changed.
Last iteration I reported a 13.1% render change in GP_TITLE build 7 as
evidence AGAINST the keyframe-time shift, arguing that language twins
should match in brightness. Withdrawn. Localising the diff to an element
shows it is not about the time association at all.
The element is ptlogo_eff3.t32, a transient bloom:
46: (98,42) 100%,100% a=0
61: (108,72) 0%,0% a=0
103: (108,72) 200%,200% a=255 r=80
-: (108,72) 0%,0% a=0 r=150
No two adjacent poses are equal, so there is no plateau, and rest() falls
through to its longest-dwell fallback. The longest gap is 61->103, during
which the sprite grows from nothing to 200% at full alpha and then
collapses. The rule returns whichever end of that movement the indexing
lands on: the invisible frame as decoded, the 200% peak shifted. An
896x389 sprite at 200% is larger than the screen, which accounts for the
entire 13.1% and the entire 4.9-unit luminance gap. I was comparing a
heuristic against itself.
The defect generalises, and structurally. A dwell gap is time spent
interpolating FROM pose k TO pose k+1; neither pose is held during it
unless the two are equal -- which is a plateau, and the plateau path has
already returned by then. So the fallback is guaranteed to be guessing
every time it is reached, under any reading of the times. Every element
with no two adjacent identical poses has a guessed rest pose, in our
renderer and in anything built from it.
Consequences: the case FOR the shift (26x on the hold:fade-out ratio) is
no longer opposed by render evidence -- 10 of 11 builds byte-identical,
the 11th differing only through this heuristic. It is still not adopted,
now because it flips this element to the visibly wrong answer, so the
shift and a decision about plateau-less elements must land together, and
neither half has a capture to verify against.
Default-mode suite green (122 passed, 0 failed across 3 suites so far).
Follow-up on last iteration's unadopted candidate (+36 holds the NEXT
pose's time, not its own). Two new results, pointing opposite ways, and
both are reported.
FOR, and calibration-free: the observed full-alpha hold : fade-out ratio
on palogo_gamearts is 83 : 13 frames = 6.38. The shifted reading predicts
8.00. The current reading predicts 0.25 -- off by 26x. With the glow's 2
units/frame fixed and nothing else free, the current reading says the
logo holds full alpha for 2.0 frames; the capture holds it for 83. This
is no longer the shape argument the candidate rested on.
Also for: rest()'s plain max-dwell fallback picks a=0 -- a transparent
pose, for a publisher logo -- under the current reading, and the visible
a=255 hold under the shift. Only the rest_plateau special case rescues
the render today, and that is the case the port agent reported a bug in.
AGAINST: rendering every build of six UI paks under both readings, 10 of
11 compared are byte-identical and one changes -- GP_TITLE build 7, the
Japanese twin of build 4, by 13.1% of pixels. Build 4, the one verified
against a live capture, is unchanged either way, so the single build the
shift moves is the one with no capture to adjudicate it. The proxy goes
against the shift: language twins are the same artwork, and build 7 reads
70.94 mean luminance as decoded against build 4's 71.41, but 76.32
shifted. Correlation does not separate them (0.6206 vs 0.6201).
These constrain different things -- timing versus pose selection -- and
rest() is a heuristic layered on the times, so moving the times moves its
tie-breaks. Adopting the shift means revisiting that heuristic in the
same change, with no build-7 capture to verify against.
Default UNCHANGED. Experiment reachable via SYLPHEED_KF_TIME_SHIFT=1.
Shifted-mode suite: 122 passed, 0 failed across 3 suites at commit time.
Q1's gate asks whether the ramp is linear. It is, and that result stands:
it rests on the splash's _eff glows, which reproduce exactly. This adds
the part that does not.
The test is a calibration, not a fit. Fix the clock on
palogo_gamearts_eff -- declared 15-unit fade-in 0@15 -> 255@30 against
captured alphas 34,68,102,136,170,204,238, a constant step of 34, giving
t = 2f - 171 -- then check that against the glow's own next landmark: its
declared hold ends t=45, predicted frame 108.0, observed last full-alpha
frame 107. Then apply it to palogo_gamearts in the same bundle and the
same frames, with no free parameter left:
declared a=232 at t=206 -> frame 188.5, observed alpha 255
declared a= 32 at t=210 -> frame 190.5, observed alpha 255
The logo is still at full alpha nine frames after it should read 32; its
fade-out runs ~17 frames late; its declared 80-frame fade-in is never
drawn. Not culling -- the same element is submitted down to a=7 on the
way out. Calibration-free version: the declared fade-out spends 12 of 16
units dropping 23/255 of the alpha, and the capture has no such plateau.
Candidate, offered and NOT adopted: if +36 held the NEXT keyframe's time,
the fade-out shape fits (RMS 4.05 vs 12.13, two elements) and the
decoder's "last block's time is unreadable" special case disappears --
the last block would simply have no successor. Rejected for now because
it explains neither the missing fade-in nor the lateness, and because the
_eff elements cannot discriminate between the readings at all (with four
blocks the shift only relabels the phases). Decoder unchanged.
Also withdrawn, mine, within the iteration: "the _eff glows hold a
constant alpha 33". They ramp 34 -> 255 in steps of 34. I printed the
series minimum and read it as its range, with a "14 distinct colours"
column sitting next to it saying otherwise.
Two corrections and one new confirmation, all from finishing the sweep I
left running last iteration.
Refuted, by my own sweep, within the hour: "rotation appears to live only
in nested .rat leaf records". That held for GP_TITLE, GP_BUNK and
GP_CHALLENGE -- the three archives the sweep had reached when I wrote it
-- and fails on GP_DIALOG and GP_DEBRIEFING_PILOTLOG, which rotate
top-level elements. Scoping the claim made it cheap to withdraw, but the
sentence should have waited for the sweep.
Those top-level cases are the best evidence on the disc, and they show up
in `screen info --geometry` without a hex dump. GP_DIALOG build 0:
pceff03/pceff04 ramp r = 90 -> 30 -> 10 -> 3 -> 0 while alpha ramps
0 -> 255 and they slide into place -- a swing-in settling upright. Build
6: pzeff02 ramps 43 -> 61 -> 75 -> 90 while scaling 112% -> 200% and
fading to 0 -- a spin-out. Rows committed as reference data.
New: the pivot-anchored scale term in blit, kf.x - pivot*(scale-100)/100,
was implemented and reasoned about but never measured, because every
element previously examined sits at 100% scale where the term is exactly
zero. The ptloop pair scale 600% and 800%, where it is worth 450 and 630
px. Formula predicts centre y = 360.0 for both; capture measures 359.1
and 360.0. Top-left anchoring predicts 810 and 990. Horizontally it makes
t-from-position agree with t-from-alpha to 0.33 / 0.65 units against ~8
without it.
That agreement does NOT prove linear interpolation -- both fields were
inverted through the same linear map, so a shared easing curve cancels.
It shows position and alpha ride one shared parameter. Recorded as such.
The disc-wide sweep is still running; the count is incomplete, the
existence is settled.
The rotated quads on the title screen come from the keyframe block after
all. The earlier negative -- "every GP_TITLE build 4 element has all three
angle words at zero" -- read the right bytes over too small a region: it
walked the top-level declaration table, and the rotated elements are the
nested leaf records ptloop01.rat / ptloop02.rat.
Confirmed against the framebuffer rather than against our own renderer.
The two records declare +12 = 30 and -45; the GPU capture submits their
quads at +30.26 and -45.28 degrees -- magnitude and sign, two different
values. Corroborated by shape in GP_BUNK 117ca14f, where +12 ramps
0 -> 360 with position, scale and alpha constant: a spin in place.
Identifying which draw it was needed edge lengths, not bounding boxes:
400x1076 and 400x1444 against pteff03/pteff03a 399x180 at the elements'
two different declared scales, 600% (1080) and 800% (1440). The same test
names three known-positives in the capture (ptlogo1, ptcopyright,
ptbtn00), so it passes its own control.
Keyframe gains rotation_deg plus unknown_4/unknown_8, carried rather than
dropped. NOT rendered -- ui_layout::blit is axis-aligned only, so the
reference renderer and the port will both draw these upright until a
rotating blit exists.
The census tool ships with the trap that broke its first version: nested
RATC blobs are not 4-byte aligned, so an aligned scan found 0/3 of its
own control blocks and missed 16 341 blocks. Disc-wide +12 is non-zero in
14.50 % of 83 862 blocks.
sylpheed-formats tests, SYLPHEED_DISC set: 131 passed, 0 failed across the
6 suites finished at commit time; the run had not yet completed.
iterations of work were built on
I flagged last iteration that "draw 2 is the swoosh" was an inference I
had never checked. Checking it took one line, and it is wrong.
Converting the quads from NDC to screen space: quad A spans y -209 to
925, quad B spans y -292 to 1012. Both cover the full screen height and
run well off it. The swoosh, ptlogo_back2, rests at (71,126) and is a
234-pixel band at y 126 to 360. Draw 2 is not it.
A candidate offered as one: the two ptloop sweeps. pteff03a is 399x180
with element scale (100,800), so 399x1440, and pteff03 carries (100,600)
-- two long thin sprites, two quads, and the drawn vertex alphas 0xC3 and
0xB6 sit inside the 0x80 to 0xff ramp those records declare. Not
confirmed; no texture or position match was made.
If that is right it matters, and I have written it conditionally rather
than acting on it: our renderer parks those sweeps at their final
keyframe, both off screen, and draws nothing, while the game draws them
across the screen. That would mean the capture caught them mid-sweep
inside their t=150 to 600 window, and that the "groups hold" reading
needs re-examining for those two elements.
What this cost is worth stating plainly. Five iterations -- the additive
blend test, the pivot analysis, the vertex-colour capture -- were built
on an identification made by elimination on one screen and never checked
against the draw's own coordinates. The eliminations themselves stand,
because each was measured against the capture rather than against the
identification. The chain that pointed them at ptlogo_back2 did not.
METHOD takes the general form.
blit cannot
Ran the route I corrected last iteration, and it answered the question I
had classified as undecodable.
First the ninth candidate died: every vertex colour in the whole capture
is <alpha>FFFFFF, white RGB with only alpha varying. The game passes no
colour, so that hypothesis is refuted from the running game rather than
from the file.
Then the geometry gave it away. Draw 2 submits TWO PARALLELOGRAMS,
neither axis-aligned -- edges (0.54,-0.56) and (0.44,0.79), roughly 45
and 61 degrees, both extending to y=+/-1.81 in NDC, well off screen.
That is the diagonal Z stroke. And ui_layout::blit walks rows and columns
of an axis-aligned rectangle; it has no rotation at all. So we blit the
sprite upright where the game draws it skewed, which is exactly the
signature I measured: right on average at +1.83, right in position with
the correlation peaking at zero shift, wrong in structure at 0.70.
Nine candidates, and the answer was never going to be a field, because
the difference is not in the sprite -- it is in how the quad is built.
Two things left open and written as such. The decoded keyframe carries
fade, scale, tint, x, y and time and NO rotation, so where the rotation
comes from is not decoded. And the pink-versus-white reading I have been
carrying was a visual comparison of two differently-shaped renderings; it
should be re-checked after geometry rather than treated as a separate
defect.
iteration
Two loose ends, both on my own work.
The disc-gated suite finally completed: all six binaries, 131 passed,
0 failed, one pre-existing ignored. So the rest() fix and the T8adImage
flags field are fully verified rather than verified-on-three-binaries.
The reason earlier attempts produced empty logs was that the tool
timeout's SIGTERM reached the whole process group; setsid nohup survives
it, which is now a METHOD line.
And a correction that matters more. Last iteration I closed the swoosh as
undecodable from the disc and named a per-draw GPU capture as the next
route, "because it reads the actual blend state". It does not. Reading
command_processor.cc, each captured draw records primitive type, index
count, index-buffer address, VS and PS ucode hashes, the pixel shader's
texture bindings, and vertex attribute 0 of binding 0. There is no
RB_BLENDCONTROL dump.
So the route splits, and I have said so rather than leaving the wrong
version standing: the capture can test a per-draw VERTEX COLOUR today
with no code change, which would explain white-versus-pink directly, and
getting the blend mode itself needs a Canary change to dump the blend
registers. Either way it is instrumentation rather than another field.
The general lesson goes in METHOD too: validate a recommendation before
leaving it as advice. A named next step is a claim like any other, and I
made it without checking.
the disc
Testing my own caveat instead of leaving it hanging. I had worried the
plate-free title capture at t=4.0s was too early, since elements carry
keyframes out to t=600 and I had judged "settled" from mean luminance,
which cannot see a thin sprite still moving.
The plate sits at y 550-600 and the swoosh band at y 112-225, disjoint,
so a LATE capture works even with the plate present. The band correlates
0.7342 at t=4.0s and 0.7353 at t=21.5s -- identical to a thousandth over
17.5 seconds, with the band mean flat at 127. So the band is settled by
4 seconds, the capture I handed the port agent is sound, and my caveat is
withdrawn. It also corroborates the earlier finding that groups hold:
nothing crosses that band in 22 seconds.
That was the seventh candidate for the swoosh and the last one that was
not a format field. Pivot is inert at scale 100 and there is no
displacement anyway; fade is white-with-alpha; tint is white; the texture
is blue-leaning; additive via +0x04 bit 0x02 makes everything worse; the
capture is settled. The residual is stable and modest -- band mean +1.83,
edge-correlation 0.70 against 0.92 frame-wide.
So I have classified it rather than generating an eighth candidate:
undecodable from the disc, with the reach written out. And I have named
where a next attempt should start, which is not another field -- a
per-draw GPU capture of the running guest reads the actual blend state,
vertex colours and draw order for that band instead of inferring them
from the file. That is where static RE stops here.
Continuing the swoosh. Last iteration ended with "the next step is
finding where a blend mode would be encoded, and I do not know the format
carries one". It does carry a candidate.
The kind field is not it -- the swoosh sprites are kind 0x0, the same as
ordinary ones. But the T8aD header word at +0x04 splits the title's
sprites exactly along effect versus normal: pteff01, pteff03a,
ptlogo_back2eff1..5 and both ptlogoall_eff are 0x8832, while ptlogo1,
ptlogo2, ptlogo_tm, ptbase2, ptlogo_back2 and ptcopyright are 0x8830.
One bit, 0x02.
Disc-wide it behaves like a real flag rather than an artefact: 19216
sprites, 18 distinct values, bit 0x02 set in 27.1 percent, and it toggles
against otherwise identical words -- 0x8830 against 0x8832, 0x0830
against 0x0832, 0x0810 against 0x0812, 0x0030 against 0x0032.
Marked as correlation and not decode, because nothing here shows the bit
MEANS additive. The one thing that makes it more than a guess is
ptlogo_back2eff, which carries 0x8830 despite having eff in its name --
so the split is the field's and not my pattern-matching on names. The
test is to blend bit-0x02 sprites additively and re-correlate the title
against the plate-free capture.
METHOD gets the trap that cost the first attempt: searching for a
sprite's name and taking the next T8aD returns the SAME header for every
sprite, because the names all live together in the declaration table. It
failed its own control at once -- different sprites reporting identical
dimensions -- and the fix was to match on width and height instead of on
proximity.
candidate with the check I named
Last iteration I offered the pivot mismatch as a quantified candidate for
the swoosh rendering too thick, and said explicitly that whether it bites
depends on which pivot the compositor uses and that I had not checked. I
checked.
blit takes the drawn size from the TEXTURE and uses the pivot only as the
scale anchor, kf.x minus pivot times scale-minus-100 over 100. At scale
100 that term is zero. And every one of the seven swoosh elements --
ptlogo_back2, its glow and the five eff segments -- reports a single
scale of (100,100) across all its keyframes. So the mismatch, real as it
is in the data, cannot move or resize the swoosh in our render. Refuted,
under my own name.
It is not harmless everywhere, and I have said where it does bite:
ptlogo1 and ptlogo2 run 100, 101, 103, 112, 150 during the build-in, so
there the wrong pivot really does displace them -- during the animation
rather than at rest.
What that leaves is the blend, by elimination rather than by evidence.
Position and size are the texture's own and right, fade is
white-with-alpha, tint is white, the texture is blue-leaning rather than
pink. Seven overlapping sprites at 5 to 23 percent opacity stacked with
plain alpha-over saturate toward opaque white, which is what we draw and
would read as thicker beside the game's thin coloured stroke. Recorded as
the remaining candidate and explicitly not as a diagnosis -- no blend
mode has been identified in the data.
The scripted HANDOFF edit asserted on text an earlier edit had rewrapped,
so the pivot and colour findings landed in docs/re and not on the page
the port agent reads. Third time this session; METHOD now says the rule
was insufficient and names the mechanical fix.
lands on the known tie-break group
Chasing the residual I left open last iteration, and it turns out I had
attributed the port agent's slab to the wrong thing.
First the refutation. My hypothesis was that our dim is applied over the
whole frame rather than beneath the UI where its layer key puts it. If
that were true the logo would render too dark. It reads +2.36 against a
background of -0.74, so the compositor honours the paint order and the
hypothesis is dead.
What the residual actually is: with the dim in place the error is not
uniform but concentrated in one band, running -38.6 in one tile and +33.8
three tiles to its right. Cropping that band from capture and render
shows it immediately -- the game draws the logo's Z swoosh thin with a
pink edge, and we draw it thick and solid white. That, not the missing
dim, is the washed-out slab over the title logo the port agent reported.
The dim explains a uniform +13; this explains the slab.
The elements are ptlogo_back2, its glow, and the five ptlogo_back2eff1..5
segments -- which are also the group carrying this corpus's known
unsolved paint-order tie-break at key 0x8083, on the same screen. I have
recorded that as a lead and explicitly not as a diagnosis, because a
blend-order swap is a poor explanation for white instead of pink and I
would expect a second cause.
MISSING dim quad
Both halves of what the port agent could not settle, answered against the
plate-free capture rather than against another renderer.
Rendering build 4 and edge-correlating to the capture of the real screen
gives 0.9163 at zero shift, 0.92/0.78/0.93 per band. The geometry of rest
is the title's arrived pose, so the timeline is not needed there.
The slab is the more useful half, and it is inverted from how it looked.
rest alone renders uniformly +13.14 too bright, R +12.35, G +13.58,
B +13.48. Drawing the .prm primitives collapses that to +0.55. The
element is pteff02.prm, the 25 percent dim at rest t=46 with fade 0x40,
and --primitives is OFF BY DEFAULT. So the washed-out cyan slab is not
something being drawn that should not be; it is a dim that should be
drawn and is not, and because the title art is blue-dominant the
shortfall reads as a cyan wash. Any consumer of screen render that omits
--primitives on this screen gets it.
Two residuals recorded rather than tidied. With the dim drawn the mean is
essentially exact but per-pixel agreement gets slightly WORSE --
edge-correlation 0.9163 down to 0.9066 and pixels off by more than 20
rising from 108051 to 162636 -- so the dim's average contribution is
right while its application is not exactly the game's. And separately the
per-tile map shows a +25 to +38 hot spot on the upper-right Z swoosh,
which a capture from the first iteration of this work already showed pink
in the game and white in ours. Same region, still undiagnosed.
port agent
Closing the two things I flagged as unconfirmed when I committed the fix.
The unit gate is green: cargo test -p sylpheed-formats with SYLPHEED_DISC
set gives 131 passed, 0 failed across six binaries including the
disc-gated ones. The earlier background run that produced an empty log
had died with SIGTERM, which is why it looked like nothing happened.
And the disc-wide check the classification requires. Reimplementing both
rules over every RATC bundle on the disc -- 2859 bundles, 13991 elements
with at least two keyframes -- the fix moves rest for 30 elements, which
is 0.21 percent. Four go invisible to visible. Zero go visible to
invisible, which is the safety property I wanted and did not have when I
committed. The four are ptframe1 and ptframe2 in GP_TITLE entries 5 and
8, the same pair once per language.
That surfaces a discrepancy worth handing back rather than smoothing
over. On the English main menu exactly TWO elements satisfy the port
agent's pose-equality condition, not six, so their six must span the
whole twelve-screen export. That fits their own observation that the
timeline and rest differ in exactly one region, the bounding box of
ptframe1 and ptframe2 and nothing else. But if any of their other four
have a TRANSPARENT trailing run, my alpha rule leaves them alone
deliberately -- that exclusion is what protects PAUSE -- so I have asked
which screens they are on and whether a capture shows any of them drawn.
If one is, the alpha rule is incomplete and needs a third discriminator.
VISIBLE, not when its pose repeats
The port agent's report was right about the defect and about which
elements it hits, and its proposed condition does not survive the case
the exclusion was written for.
Their test -- the final untimed keyframe has the same pose as the last
timed one -- is also true of pgptitle.rat, whose trailing run is two
identical transparent frames. Adopting it would erase the word PAUSE
again, which a committed capture disproves. What separates the two is
alpha: an exit fades the element out so its last keyframe is transparent,
while an element with no exit ends on the pose you can see. So
rest_plateau now accepts a trailing run exactly when it is visible.
Verified against a capture rather than against another renderer, which is
the point their own report made: ptframe1's rest moves from (620,108)
t=16 to (440,108) t=62; the changed pixels are 10082 in a bounding box of
x 440-839, y 108-577, which is exactly the 400x470 at (440,108) they
predicted; and correlation against main-menu-oracle.png over that region
improves from 0.9596 to 0.9748. The PAUSE wordmark is unchanged across
all three pause builds.
This also closes a question ui-paint-order-key.md has carried for a
while, that ptframe1 and ptframe2 rest at alpha 0 while the capture shows
the menu frame plainly.
One trap cost most of this iteration and goes in METHOD: CARGO_TARGET_DIR
is redirected in this container, so ./target/debug/sylpheed-cli is hours
stale and every render I made against it was old code. Byte-identical
before and after reads as "no effect" when it actually means "you ran the
old binary".
The full disc-gated test suite was still executing when this was
committed; the verification above is artifact-based.
assumed
Continuing the pulse's cycle length, which I had called a structural
limit of the format. It is, and now I can show it rather than assert it.
Dumping past what I thought was the final keyframe found an EIGHTH block:
fade 0x00ffffff at the same position, so the glow returns to fully
transparent and the pulse is a closed cycle rather than a one-shot ramp.
That is worth having on its own -- the port knows the animation ends
where it starts.
And the eighth block's time slot contains the four bytes "end ", the
record's ASCII terminator. So the corpus's rule that a group's last block
has no time of its own holds here in a second form: not the next group's
element index, but the chunk terminator. The value does not exist. That
goes into ui-rat-layout.md, because it generalises beyond this record.
The measured 2.3 s would need a final step of about 33 units. I have
written that number down explicitly labelled as fitted to the measurement
rather than read from the file, so nobody later re-derives it as a
decode.
One thing I had half-assumed and can now rule out: the word at +0x004 is
not a keyframe count. It reads 60 here with 8 keyframes and 30 in the
loop records with 3. Unknown, and marked so.
Closing the residual I left explicitly unidentified last iteration, and
correcting my own claim twice over in the process.
The cheap test first: is the oscillation global? No -- the bottom-right
corner is flat at sd 0.003 and uncorrelated with the whole frame. So a
per-tile amplitude map over an 8x6 grid, which localises it hard: sd 7.65
in the band x 318..954, y 560..672 at lag 2.3 s, against 0.06 on the
wordmark. That band is the PRESS (A) BUTTON plate's rest position.
Decoding ptbtn00f.rat, the plate's highlight variant, gives the pulse
itself: alpha 0x00 -> 0x06 -> 0x4a -> 0x50, held, then back down through
0x4a to 0x06 across t=6..105. A glow that fades in and out, which is
exactly what a press-start prompt does.
So "the title screen loops at 2.2 s" was wrong in both halves. The title
ART is near-static apart from the two decoded sweeps at 7.5 s and 9.5 s;
what pulses is the PLATE, and the plate is build 2, not build 4. REFUTED
carries it under my own name.
Still amber, and said so rather than rounded off: the cycle LENGTH is not
readable. The keyframe group's last block has no time -- that slot
belongs to the next group -- so the declared span is at least 105 units,
1.75 s, against a measured 2.3 s. Consistent with a final block
extending the tail. Not confirmed.
Second iteration running where a scripted HANDOFF edit failed its
assertion on rewrapped text, leaving the port's page stale while docs/re
had the finding. Patched by reading the file first, and METHOD now says
to check the commit's file count for a silently dropped edit.
The previous commit's handoff edit failed its own assertion -- the text
had been rewrapped since I wrote the pattern -- so the finding landed in
docs/re and REFUTED but not on the page the port agent actually reads.
An answer not reachable from HANDOFF.md has not been delivered.
