vvsandClaude Opus 5 bbb16ec81c PREREG_half_contra outcome: ACCEPTED (server = smoke in every projection cell; 0 violations in the guaranteed family). ...

'half': the step promises the root in the half near x (S >= 1/2) while the bracket line puts it in the far half (smaller |f| at the far end) -> halve.
  half alone                                  APS 2806 -> 2564 (!)  CHA 3220 -> 3202
  G2 + contra + rem + point + exp + half      APS 2773 -> 2559  CHA 2073 -> 2047  both 4606 (all of H1-H4; goal kept)
     per problem vs Chandrupatla: APS 98/17/38 p=2.7e-7, CHA 27/6/7 p=8e-4
  contra + rem + point + exp + half (no G2)   APS 2551  CHA 2044  both 4595 (H2 fails by 24)
  with defect it does not combine (APS 2531 -> 2651): the two refuse overlapping steps.
fun9: 77 -> 68 (Chandrupatla 55); fun9.5 24 -> 16.
Server regression x2: 1204 passed, 1 failed = the paper-number check.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

2026-09-21 19:24:31 +01:00

..

test_analysis.py

baseline: the published sim-numerics artifact as it stands (490 tests, verify_article.py checks all 72 paper numbers against sweep_full.json)

2026-09-20 22:38:17 +01:00

test_anc.py

baseline: the published sim-numerics artifact as it stands (490 tests, verify_article.py checks all 72 paper numbers against sweep_full.json)

2026-09-20 22:38:17 +01:00

test_article_numbers.py

Valeri's decisions (1) competitors from the library, (2) variant a. (1) Chandrupatla is scipy.optimize.elementwise.find_root, Brent is brentq, no more per-problem best_of. Our Chandrupatla stopped on a bracket twice as wide as every other method (the factor the protocol corrects for ITP); fixed (+0.5*xtol) in baselines.py and in the two copies found by grep (stage16_blend, stage19_modern) and the traced mirror, and pinned: ours == library on every problem. Regenerating sweep_full.json changed exactly three rows - chandrupatla APS 2785->2787, CHA 2423->2441, brent CHA 4099->4115 - and nothing else (diff_sweeps.py: 0 unexpected).

2026-09-21 10:53:00 +01:00

test_baselines_library.py

Valeri's decisions (1) competitors from the library, (2) variant a. (1) Chandrupatla is scipy.optimize.elementwise.find_root, Brent is brentq, no more per-problem best_of. Our Chandrupatla stopped on a bracket twice as wide as every other method (the factor the protocol corrects for ITP); fixed (+0.5*xtol) in baselines.py and in the two copies found by grep (stage16_blend, stage19_modern) and the traced mirror, and pinned: ours == library on every problem. Regenerating sweep_full.json changed exactly three rows - chandrupatla APS 2785->2787, CHA 2423->2441, brent CHA 4099->4115 - and nothing else (diff_sweeps.py: 0 unexpected).

2026-09-21 10:53:00 +01:00

test_blend.py

baseline: the published sim-numerics artifact as it stands (490 tests, verify_article.py checks all 72 paper numbers against sweep_full.json)

2026-09-20 22:38:17 +01:00

test_bulletproof.py

baseline: the published sim-numerics artifact as it stands (490 tests, verify_article.py checks all 72 paper numbers against sweep_full.json)

2026-09-20 22:38:17 +01:00

test_credit_guard.py

Valeri's decisions (1) competitors from the library, (2) variant a. (1) Chandrupatla is scipy.optimize.elementwise.find_root, Brent is brentq, no more per-problem best_of. Our Chandrupatla stopped on a bracket twice as wide as every other method (the factor the protocol corrects for ITP); fixed (+0.5*xtol) in baselines.py and in the two copies found by grep (stage16_blend, stage19_modern) and the traced mirror, and pinned: ours == library on every problem. Regenerating sweep_full.json changed exactly three rows - chandrupatla APS 2785->2787, CHA 2423->2441, brent CHA 4099->4115 - and nothing else (diff_sweeps.py: 0 unexpected).

2026-09-21 10:53:00 +01:00

test_decision_place.py

Slot 2, the decision place: Chandrupatla's own acceptance band, put inside our step rule as an instrument, does NOT close the gap - CHA 3066 (project) / 2899 (credit) against his 2423, while APS doubles 2806 -> 5432, and the band is not idle (63.6% refusals). The fifth independent test of one conclusion: the remaining gap is the ORDER of the model the step is built on, not the place the similarity is read in. By the declared stop rule (M1 and M2 both false) the 'where is the similarity read' line is closed: all four places measured.

2026-09-21 06:58:59 +01:00

test_extrapolate.py

Sign tests by product underflowed: FIXED everywhere (branch, not master - the paper is not yet updated). FA * fnew < 0.0 with FA ~ -1e-200, fnew ~ 1e-150 is -0.0 and '-0.0 < 0.0' is False, so on flat functions (x^19) the bracket update moved the wrong end, the root left the bracket and the run still reported convergence - the proposed rule returned 4.9e-9, bisection 3.5e-9, ITP 1.6e-8 with a claimed 1e-12 bracket; the 1e-6 harness scored them solved. Same defect in our bisection, false-position family, Ridders, Brent, ITP and twelve copies in stage scripts, simroot/sim.py and one test; all replaced by _opposite / _same_sign, pinned by test_sign_underflow.

2026-09-21 12:49:01 +01:00

test_flat_gate.py

PREREG_half_contra outcome: ACCEPTED (server = smoke in every projection cell; 0 violations in the guaranteed family).

2026-09-21 19:24:31 +01:00

test_log_space.py

logarithmic space mode: pure_root gains space='x'|'log' (default reproduces the published grid bit-for-bit), u = sign(x-c)*log1p(|x-c|/xtol) with c = the end of smaller |f| and s = xtol fixed by derivation; gates G1/G2' pinned by tests/test_log_space.py (7 green); sweep writes the log grid to its OWN sweep_log.json so the verified sweep_full.json is untouched

2026-09-20 22:52:58 +01:00

test_modern_repairs.py

baseline: the published sim-numerics artifact as it stands (490 tests, verify_article.py checks all 72 paper numbers against sweep_full.json)

2026-09-20 22:38:17 +01:00

test_ode_controllers.py

baseline: the published sim-numerics artifact as it stands (490 tests, verify_article.py checks all 72 paper numbers against sweep_full.json)

2026-09-20 22:38:17 +01:00

test_phase_detector.py

baseline: the published sim-numerics artifact as it stands (490 tests, verify_article.py checks all 72 paper numbers against sweep_full.json)

2026-09-20 22:38:17 +01:00

test_points_direction.py

two more places for similarity: points='shape' (WHICH triple the model uses, argmin |phi-xi| over declared candidates — select, never weight) and direction='dissimilar' (the far end read by |f| rather than by distance); defaults bit-identical, P1-P5 pinned (7 green), inertness counters make an inert mode a failed EXPERIMENT rather than a pass; each grid writes to its own file

2026-09-20 23:39:41 +01:00

test_prestep_gate.py

slope-stability gate: the PROJECT'S OWN target is met for the first time — 5922 < 6026 over both sets at 193/199 with the guarantee intact (slope.ratio.derived3.project: APS 2848 + CHA 3074), CHA improves 4516 -> 2903 (x1.56), repairs 77.5% -> 55.3%. Honest cost: APS 2806 -> 2848, which moves us from 1st to 3rd on the canonical set (chandrupatla 2785, toms748 2820), so my stricter S1 fails while the project target passes — a positioning decision, recorded not resolved. Refusal CURRENCY is what decides: bracket progress 4449 vs model shape 2848, a 1601-evaluation difference for the same 'refuse before the step' idea

2026-09-20 23:27:43 +01:00

test_projection.py

baseline: the published sim-numerics artifact as it stands (490 tests, verify_article.py checks all 72 paper numbers against sweep_full.json)

2026-09-20 22:38:17 +01:00

test_pure.py

baseline: the published sim-numerics artifact as it stands (490 tests, verify_article.py checks all 72 paper numbers against sweep_full.json)

2026-09-20 22:38:17 +01:00

test_regimes.py

baseline: the published sim-numerics artifact as it stands (490 tests, verify_article.py checks all 72 paper numbers against sweep_full.json)

2026-09-20 22:38:17 +01:00

test_registered_prediction.py

baseline: the published sim-numerics artifact as it stands (490 tests, verify_article.py checks all 72 paper numbers against sweep_full.json)

2026-09-20 22:38:17 +01:00

test_relaxation.py

baseline: the published sim-numerics artifact as it stands (490 tests, verify_article.py checks all 72 paper numbers against sweep_full.json)

2026-09-20 22:38:17 +01:00

test_reusability.py

Valeri's decisions (1) competitors from the library, (2) variant a. (1) Chandrupatla is scipy.optimize.elementwise.find_root, Brent is brentq, no more per-problem best_of. Our Chandrupatla stopped on a bracket twice as wide as every other method (the factor the protocol corrects for ITP); fixed (+0.5*xtol) in baselines.py and in the two copies found by grep (stage16_blend, stage19_modern) and the traced mirror, and pinned: ours == library on every problem. Regenerating sweep_full.json changed exactly three rows - chandrupatla APS 2785->2787, CHA 2423->2441, brent CHA 4099->4115 - and nothing else (diff_sweeps.py: 0 unexpected).

2026-09-21 10:53:00 +01:00

test_revision_points.py

Sign tests by product underflowed: FIXED everywhere (branch, not master - the paper is not yet updated). FA * fnew < 0.0 with FA ~ -1e-200, fnew ~ 1e-150 is -0.0 and '-0.0 < 0.0' is False, so on flat functions (x^19) the bracket update moved the wrong end, the root left the bracket and the run still reported convergence - the proposed rule returned 4.9e-9, bisection 3.5e-9, ITP 1.6e-8 with a claimed 1e-12 bracket; the 1e-6 harness scored them solved. Same defect in our bisection, false-position family, Ridders, Brent, ITP and twelve copies in stage scripts, simroot/sim.py and one test; all replaced by _opposite / _same_sign, pinned by test_sign_underflow.

2026-09-21 12:49:01 +01:00

test_sign_underflow.py

Sign tests by product underflowed: FIXED everywhere (branch, not master - the paper is not yet updated). FA * fnew < 0.0 with FA ~ -1e-200, fnew ~ 1e-150 is -0.0 and '-0.0 < 0.0' is False, so on flat functions (x^19) the bracket update moved the wrong end, the root left the bracket and the run still reported convergence - the proposed rule returned 4.9e-9, bisection 3.5e-9, ITP 1.6e-8 with a claimed 1e-12 bracket; the 1e-6 harness scored them solved. Same defect in our bisection, false-position family, Ridders, Brent, ITP and twelve copies in stage scripts, simroot/sim.py and one test; all replaced by _opposite / _same_sign, pinned by test_sign_underflow.

2026-09-21 12:49:01 +01:00

test_similarity_family_anc.py

baseline: the published sim-numerics artifact as it stands (490 tests, verify_article.py checks all 72 paper numbers against sweep_full.json)

2026-09-20 22:38:17 +01:00

test_similarity_per_slot.py

Valeri's second point measured: the similarity function belongs to the PLACE it is read in, not to the method. False position's three-century stall is a similarity read at order one on an approach of order m: with sigma = |f(far)| the residual ratio is (e/E)^m, so raising it to the measured 1/m recovers the distance ratio exactly. Paired inside each cell, the correction is cheaper in 7 of 7 safeguards for S = 1/(1+z) - the one function that makes that place exact inverse interpolation - and in only 29 of 60 cells over all nine functions, i.e. a coin. It does NOT beat Chandrupatla (2884 against 2683 and 2423), it HARMS the slope reading (2806 -> 2854), and it does not cure false position: 127/154 and 10676 become 128/154 and 10043, where Illinois buys 153/154 and 7045 with one constant. Estimator bias measured and stated: a pure cube reads 2.830, not 3

2026-09-21 01:17:25 +01:00

test_simroot.py

baseline: the published sim-numerics artifact as it stands (490 tests, verify_article.py checks all 72 paper numbers against sweep_full.json)

2026-09-20 22:38:17 +01:00

test_slope_gate.py

Slot 2, the decision place: Chandrupatla's own acceptance band, put inside our step rule as an instrument, does NOT close the gap - CHA 3066 (project) / 2899 (credit) against his 2423, while APS doubles 2806 -> 5432, and the band is not idle (63.6% refusals). The fifth independent test of one conclusion: the remaining gap is the ORDER of the model the step is built on, not the place the similarity is read in. By the declared stop rule (M1 and M2 both false) the 'where is the similarity read' line is closed: all four places measured.

2026-09-21 06:58:59 +01:00

test_three_point.py

baseline: the published sim-numerics artifact as it stands (490 tests, verify_article.py checks all 72 paper numbers against sweep_full.json)

2026-09-20 22:38:17 +01:00

test_trace_hook.py

Why the wide-bracket gap remains, taken apart on the SAME evaluations: 'order of the model' explains only a third. Of the 262 evaluations lost on 33 problems, 178 sit on fun3-fun6 - pure powers of order 3, 5, 9, 19 - where no interpolating model works (our step 0.41-0.81 bracket halvings per evaluation, IQI from our own points 0.01-0.17) and Chandrupatla wins by BISECTING 93-100% of his steps; our step is slower than bisection there and our 2x-bisection guarantee licenses it. His band inside our step confirms it per family: fun4/5/6 573/456/456 -> 296/239/235 against his 293/228/228, while +164/+111/+170/+144 on fun1/2/8/9 where it refuses good steps - slot 2's total was two opposite effects summed. Only fun1 (58) is model order: IQI from our three points 10.37 halvings against our 0.62; a convex two-point step cannot carry IQI's negative weight (428/428 non-degenerate states; five underflowed to -0.0).

2026-09-21 07:38:16 +01:00