I wrote that "two distinct resources sharing one decode is itself the bug" when
withdrawing the neighbourhood anchor. Measured, that is wrong.
1043 of 5480 decoded resources (19%) share geometry with another resource, and of
1242 related pairs that share a decode somewhere, 1241 are identical in EVERY
container they co-occur in. That is what legitimate asset reuse looks like, not a
defect. A mirrored pair like bdy_01/bdy_02 is SUPPOSED to share one geometry with
the reflection applied at placement -- which is precisely what apply_twin_mirrors
does.
So the twin-mirror regression was never about sharing. It is about WHICH of two
mirrored buffers is canonical: the disc holds an X+ and an X- version, the engine
treats one as the base, and the neighbourhood anchor moved these resources to the
nearer buffer, which is the other one. The fix is to pin the canonical buffer
with the capture as oracle, not to split the twins apart.
Exactly one pair is provably mis-anchored by this test: e105_bdy_02_l /
e105_brg_m, identical in 7 of the 15 containers holding both and different in the
rest -- two names cannot be the same geometry only sometimes.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude (auto-RE)
f655c90b0c