Files
gbanyan d0bf2fe911 Update STATE.md: Phase 1 complete, Phase 2 awaiting user review
Phase 1 (Foundation) all 7 spike + foundation scripts committed.
Phase 2 (Methodology rewrite) §III-G..L draft delivered;
5 open questions flagged for user decision before Phase 3.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-12 15:24:03 +08:00

50 lines
2.9 KiB
Markdown
Raw Permalink Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
# STATE — Current snapshot
**Date**: 2026-05-12
**Active milestone**: Paper A v4.0 — Big-4 reframe
**Active branch**: `paper-a-v4-big4` (12 commits ahead of `yolo-signature-pipeline`)
**Active phase**: Phase 2 — Methodology rewrite, draft delivered, **awaiting user review of 5 open questions in `paper/v4/paper_a_methodology_v4_section_iii.md`** before Phase 3 begins
## Recently completed
**Phase 1 (Foundation, 7 spike + foundation scripts)**:
- Script 32 (`e1d81e3`): non-Firm-A calibration verdict C
- Script 33 (`8ac0988`): reverse-anchor PAPER_C_STRONG (directional ρ=+0.744)
- Script 34 (`55f9f94`): Big-4 K=2 dip-test multimodal p<0.0001, bootstrap CI [0.974, 0.977] / [3.48, 3.97]
- Script 35 (`55f9f94`): firm × cluster — Firm A 0% C1 / 82.5% C3, PwC 23.5% C1
- Script 36 (`ccd9f23`): K=2 LOOO **UNSTABLE** (firm-mass conflation; max Δcos=0.028)
- Script 37 (`92f1db8`): K=3 LOOO **PARTIAL** (component shape stable, membership ±5-13pp)
- Script 38 (`bc36dcc`): convergence **STRONG** — 3 lenses pairwise ρ ≥ 0.879
- Script 39 (`39575ce`): per-signature convergence **MODERATE** — κ=0.87 between per-CPA and per-sig K=3 fits
- Script 40 (`338737d`): pixel-identity FAR = **0%** on n=262 ground-truth replicated
**Phase 2 (Methodology rewrite)**: §III-G..L draft delivered at `paper/v4/paper_a_methodology_v4_section_iii.md` (commit on the same branch). Single coherent rewrite covering 6 sub-sections (G/H/I/J/K/L); cross-references to all 9 spike scripts; 5 open questions flagged at end of draft for user decision.
## Pending — Phase 2 user review (BEFORE Phase 3)
5 decisions needed from user before Phase 3 (Results regeneration) starts:
1. §III-G scope justification — three-point argument enough, or add a fourth?
2. §III-H Firm A phrasing — "case study of templated end" vs an alternative framing?
3. §III-J K=3 vs K=2 selection — lean on LOOO (current draft) or strengthen BIC argument?
4. §III-L hybrid classifier — keep inherited 5-way box rule, or commit to K=3 hard label as primary?
5. Section IV table numbering scheme — confirm before Phase 3 builds tables.
Plus: any prose-level edits the user wants on the §III draft.
## Blockers
None.
## Open questions deferred from spike
- Bootstrap stability of cosine and dHash crossings *jointly* (not just marginally) — addressed in Phase 1 if time permits
- K=2 vs K=3 final choice for §III-J — both reported, but operational classifier needs to commit to one (recommend K=2 for interpretability; K=3 in supplementary)
## Things to remember (per memory)
- Provenance-verify all empirical claims against fresh sqlite/grep ([[feedback-provenance-fabrication]])
- Don't mock the DB or use placeholders — every number must trace to a script + query
- Partner Jimmy already proposed Big-4 direction (this is execution, not pitching a new direction)
- Paper C standalone is shelved — folded into v4.0 §IV-K