  vvsandClaude Opus 5
|
485f25f165
|
Why the fun9 well is closed only partly (diagnostics only, method unchanged). The well itself IS closed: reaching the root's side takes 4 evaluations with contra/defect against Chandrupatla's 3 (13 and 33 before). The remaining +20 (75 vs 55) is after it: (1) the exponential flank on the widest brackets - our step moves ~1 per evaluation down exp(x) (f/f' = 1), 10 evaluations where Chandrupatla halves 3 times; the analogy entry comes late because exp is self-similar by TRANSLATION, not scaling - the pair's x-scale does not shrink, so m = ln(f ratio)/ln(x ratio) is undefined or negative; (2) overconfident near-zero steps - on a steep flank the three-point slope is huge, z ~ 0, S ~ 1, the model promises the root at a point that is not it: 8 wasted evaluations on fun9 (27 without the decisions).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
2026-09-21 18:35:07 +01:00 |
|