← Complete research archive
Evaluation & auditsResult73 lines

R12 Raw-260k Updater Candidate-Likelihood Result

Raw 260k does not prefer the exact correct residual state-and-tail update in any of the six frozen prompts. The correct candidate is the unique winner in 0/6 prompts by normalized candidate likelihood, total candidate likelihood, or candidate-plus-EOS likelihood. EOS is unique to…

R12_UPDATER_CANDIDATE_LIKELIHOOD_RESULT.mdOpen original Markdown ↗

R12 Raw-260k Updater Candidate-Likelihood Result

Status: complete, independently replayed, negative under the frozen candidate set.

Bottom line

Raw 260k does not prefer the exact correct residual state-and-tail update in any of the six frozen prompts. The correct candidate is the unique winner in 0/6 prompts by normalized candidate likelihood, total candidate likelihood, or candidate-plus-EOS likelihood. EOS is unique top-1 immediately after the correct candidate in 0/6 prompts.

This rejects the narrow hypothesis that free decoding merely hides an already preferred updater behind sequence-length or termination pressure. It does not prove that no other rendering or hidden updater representation exists.

Custody

ObjectSHA-256
Result4ca100029806c933ba1d3137044c040b468d380ae9bb9f5efeadcbc949374525
Prompt source4505602994a0e337b99359e580a6f2f04fad4d365b2dac59f4c339fac13a7593
Raw-260k checkpoint91d5288f184fc5230516add9851ac1a8815d3369ffd816cd7d0c03d8bafc741d
Tokenizer87532df5c121753de3b29194e1f9e3de47986d3f5359548fdf93606773a233d4
Candidate manifest0e01fc54abfe63dcfd063fa6d5a1e4ed46b57aef617580d2cc286db839b3ba98
Tokenized manifest13528bacb21d8bca006b434283830d9a0790225dd9a7ddcdcbc8f02e7bac8a99

Canonical local artifact: artifacts/eval_history/raw260k_updater_candidate_likelihood_20260715_mps.json. It is mode 0444.

The executable and preregistration were committed as 2ad9127 before the artifact was created. The v1 result schema does not embed those two source hashes; this is a custody limitation to fix in any successor protocol, not a reason to alter this result.

Exact results

The gap is winner minus correct normalized log likelihood in nats per token.

PromptFrozen winnerCorrect rankGapEOS rank after correct
joint_aarithmetic execution continuation4/50.8794895
joint_barithmetic execution continuation2/50.8322545
joint_carithmetic execution continuation4/50.9418609
packet_aunchanged source packet3/50.51686510
packet_bunchanged source packet3/50.4267246
packet_cunchanged source packet3/50.32496713

Mean winning gap: 0.653693 nats/token. All six row diagnoses are correct_update_not_preferred; the aggregate is correct_update_not_consistently_preferred.

The format split is informative but not causal proof. Natural Work: prompts prefer continuing arithmetic, while explicit packet prompts prefer copying the unchanged packet. Therefore a follow-up should exploit the arithmetic path or measure operation selection directly; it should not train a packet-rewrite mechanism on the assumption that one is already latent.

Independent replay

An independent process replayed all 30 MPS forwards from the bound checkpoint. The maximum candidate-token and EOS log-probability differences were both exactly 0.0. It recomputed every token alignment, total, normalized score, EOS rank/margin, winner, diagnosis, summary count, and ledger field. Focused tests passed 11/11.

The frozen ledger is 12 source rows, six scored prompts, 30 model forwards, 1,080 replayed prompt tokens, 518 candidate tokens, 30 EOS targets, 548 total teacher-forced targets, and 1,598 forward positions. There was no generation, sampling, retry, candidate search, response-derived candidate construction, or cross-candidate KV state.