Files
sim-numerics/results_diag_flat_twice.txt
T
vvsandClaude Opus 5 9884b21204 PREREG_flat_twice outcome: stage 1 passed (twice-in-a-row fires on 27.8% of model steps on the flat families, 8.7% on APS, 4.3% on fun1; flat/APS ratio 3.20 against the single flag's 2.47), stage 2 FAILED: under the projection APS 2806 -> 2803 (W2 holds, the per-problem edge over Chandrupatla kept at 83/28/42) but CHA 3220 -> 3341 and the flat families 1823 -> 1975 (W1, W4 fail); with G2 the same. Under safe/step the twice gate is inert (3390 -> 3388) where the single one gave 3037.
Mechanism: the flat cycle is undershoot, undershoot, crossing, near-empty step. The single flag fires after the first undershoot and replaces the second - a useless step; the twice flag fires after the second and replaces the CROSSING, the one step of the cycle that collapses the bracket. The second undershoot's r is ~0.26, next to the 1/4 threshold, so the pair often does not even form. Again a detectability gain that did not carry to run cost. Next candidate (not pre-registered): the unkept promise AND a creep - the same step moving the same way as the previous one.

Removed a vacuous pin I had written (s2 <= max(s1, s2)). Regression on the branch: 935 pass twice; the only red test is the paper-number check.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-09-21 13:45:20 +01:00

10 lines
414 B
Plaintext

group model steps single twice
APS 1275 21.6% 8.7%
CHA fun1 47 17.0% 4.3%
CHA flat fun3-6 1251 53.6% 27.8%
CHA fun7 0 0.0% 0.0%
CHA other 174 36.2% 20.7%
T1 twice: flat 27.8% > APS 8.7% and > fun1 4.3% -> PASS
T2 flat/APS ratio: twice 3.20 vs single 2.47 -> PASS