b273ee9f48
The refutation used the wrong hash function. A record key is tag_hash of the
record's own name, not the pak-TOC name_hash which lowercases and uses a
different modulus:
tag_hash("Formation_4_Bird") = 0x22a5eeed <- exactly the record key
name_hash("Formation_4_Bird") = 0x6286edad <- the wrong hash, hence
the recorded "0 of 16"
Formation_4_Bird IS a record name in FormationSet_S02.tbl and every record in
that table keys by tag_hash of its name. Across all 28 UnitGroup_S<NN>.tbl the
same holds for field keys: 6960 of 6960 are tag_hash(field name), 0 are
name_hash. So FormationID resolves by a direct hash lookup and the roster
indirection is NOT required for it.
This is exactly the trap idxd-container.md warns about, and it cost this file
a spurious refutation. The original text is kept below the correction.
The squadron half of the claim still stands and is marked so: a squadron
record's key is not tag_hash of the squadron id either -- tag_hash("TCN001")
is 0x760cdeaa against keys running 0x659aff47 -- because the record's NAME is
not the squadron id. That roster indirection is real.
Also closes the file's standing "the key derivation stays open, a second hash
function is unidentified": that function is tag_hash, recovered since.
Found while checking a subagent's claim rather than taking it -- it reported
the hash correction, and verifying it turned up that the FormationID half was
a stronger result than reported.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01PMRJjbxLqZtsb5Vb7KunPE