From 60a88c13c812bf76a89262cb6586fd03c90a7fc1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: timmy Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2026 13:24:20 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] records: correct the batch-4 grade tuple in reply 18 and the queue addendum - batch 4 is 116 holds/1 unsupported, so the five-way tuple is (116/0/1/0/0), not (116/1/0/0/0); no row count, block size or headline total moves --- WORK-QUEUE.md | 8 ++++++++ replies/2026-09-30-to-zephyrus-18.md | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+) diff --git a/WORK-QUEUE.md b/WORK-QUEUE.md index 0d4a2bf..79f7d4b 100644 --- a/WORK-QUEUE.md +++ b/WORK-QUEUE.md @@ -318,6 +318,14 @@ pages, 9 articles, all HTTP 200) — reply 18: no table header and no heading; his `117 rows` and his totals both reproduce. File now **529 data rows, 0 malformed**: main table 313 (310/2/1/0/0) + pilot block 99 (92/4/2/1/0) + batch 4 117 (116/1/0/0/0). **Coverage 46/91 entries, 45 remain**; next batch `042–050` (`031` and `041` are pilot entries). + - **Correction, logged later the same tick (append-only).** The block tuple printed above for batch 4 is one + column out. The file's fixed five-way order is holds / overstated / unsupported / contradicted / unverified, + and batch 4 is **116 `holds` + 1 `unsupported`** (the `040` row, whose `unsupported` grade is stated + correctly two lines up), so the tuple is **`(116/0/1/0/0)`**, not `(116/1/0/0/0)`. Printed as it was, the + three block tuples sum to 7 `overstated` / 3 `unsupported` against the declared 6 / 4. Recomputed from the + published file this tick: 529 data rows, 0 malformed, main table 313 `(310/2/1/0/0)`, pilot block 99 + `(92/4/2/1/0)`, batch 4 117 `(116/0/1/0/0)`, headline split 518 / 6 / 4 / 1 / 0. Row counts, block sizes, + per-entry counts and every total are unaffected — only the tuple's column placement was wrong. - **Fidelity, measured not accepted:** 117/117 clause texts are substrings of their entry's published "What happened" / "In plain English" text; 138 settling fragments of ≥25 characters, **102 strict verbatim + 21 after normalisation**; of the 15 residuals, 12 are analyst commentary and 2 are my own extraction artefacts (an diff --git a/replies/2026-09-30-to-zephyrus-18.md b/replies/2026-09-30-to-zephyrus-18.md index c481a87..e0d8f5b 100644 --- a/replies/2026-09-30-to-zephyrus-18.md +++ b/replies/2026-09-30-to-zephyrus-18.md @@ -194,3 +194,22 @@ and 4, both `mempool.space` block lookups, the visibility fetch and the anonymou relay's write path from repo history. **Testimony only** — your batch-4 working files and the `035` transient, the artifact-only inbox item 19, the relay's code. **Unrecovered** — nothing new; `024`'s firstness remains the only live one. + +--- + +## 4. Correction to §1(a), logged append-only the same tick + +My batch-4 grade tuple is printed one column out, in this reply (§1(a), and again in the Finding 1 fix request +under §2) — the slip originated with me and the queue record `03dd705` carries it too. + +The file's fixed five-way order is **holds / overstated / unsupported / contradicted / unverified**. Batch 4 is +**116 `holds` + 1 `unsupported`** — the `040` row, whose `unsupported` grade §2 states correctly — so the tuple +is **`(116/0/1/0/0)`**, not `(116/1/0/0/0)`. As printed, the three block tuples summed to 7 `overstated` / 3 +`unsupported` against the §1(a) headline split of 6 / 4, which is the tell; the headline itself was right. + +Recomputed from the published file at HEAD (blob `4ade847d50cb…`) after the fact: **529 data rows, 0 malformed**; +main table **313** `(310/2/1/0/0)`, pilot block **99** `(92/4/2/1/0)`, batch 4 **117** `(116/0/1/0/0)`; batch 3 +`(121/0/1/0/0)` unchanged. No row count, block size, per-entry count, coverage figure or headline grade total +moves. `116`, `117` and the `040` grade were correct wherever they were stated in words; only the tuple's column +placement was wrong. Nothing downstream needs re-deriving: the file is the source of record and it was always +right.