gbanyan/pdf_signature_extraction
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Paper A v3.19.1: address codex partner-redpen audit residual ("upper bound" wording)

Browse Source 
Codex GPT-5.5 cross-verified the Gemini partner red-pen audit
(paper/codex_partner_redpen_audit_v3_19_0.md) and downgraded item (j) --
the BIC strict-3-component upper-bound framing -- from RESOLVED to
IMPROVED, because the "upper bound" wording the partner originally
red-circled in v3.17 still survived in two methodology sentences and one
Table VI row label, even though Section IV-D.3 had been retitled
"A Forced Fit" in v3.18.

This commit closes that residual:

- Methodology III-I.2: "the 2-component crossing should be treated as
  an upper bound rather than a definitive cut" -> "we report the
  resulting crossing only as a forced-fit descriptive reference and do
  not use it as an operational threshold".
- Methodology III-I.4: "should be read as an upper bound rather than a
  definitive cut" -> "reported only as a descriptive reference rather
  than as an operational threshold".
- Table VI row "0.973 (signature-level Beta/KDE upper bound)" relabelled
  to "0.973 (signature-level Beta/KDE forced-fit reference)" to match
  the IV-D.3 "Forced Fit" framing.
- reference_verification_v3.md header updated so the [5] entry reads as
  an audit trail of a fix already applied (v3.18 reference list reflects
  every correction) rather than as an active major problem.
- Rebuild Paper_A_IEEE_Access_Draft_v3.docx.

Also commits the codex partner-redpen audit artifact so the disagreement
trail with Gemini is preserved.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
gbanyan
2026-04-27 23:05:39 +08:00
parent dbe2f676bf
commit 623eb4cd4b
5 changed files with 55 additions and 9 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
paper/paper_a_results_v3.md
+1 -1
View File
@@ -163,7 +163,7 @@ We do not report an Equal Error Rate: EER is meaningful only when the positive a
| 0.900 | 0.0250 | [0.0237, 0.0264] |
| 0.945 (calibration-fold P5 rounded) | 0.0008 | [0.0006, 0.0011] |
| 0.950 (whole-sample Firm A P7.5; operational cut) | 0.0005 | [0.0003, 0.0007] |
| 0.973 (signature-level Beta/KDE upper bound) | 0.0002 | [0.0001, 0.0004] |
| 0.973 (signature-level Beta/KDE forced-fit reference) | 0.0002 | [0.0001, 0.0004] |
| 0.979 (signature-level Beta-2 forced-fit crossing) | 0.0001 | [0.0001, 0.0003] |
Table note: We do not include FRR against the byte-identical positive anchor as a column here: the byte-identical subset has cosine $\approx 1$ by construction, so FRR against that subset is trivially $0$ at every threshold below $1$ and carries no biometric information beyond verifying that the threshold does not exceed $1$. The conservative-subset FRR role of the byte-identical anchor is instead discussed qualitatively in Section V-F.