Drop7 Research
← Experiments

Depth x chance-exactness factorial: the fifth ply at five and at seven strata, with an end-to-end reproduction control

runningtier STANDARDalgorithmicpreviously-evaluated-developmentpublic-policyEX-20260821-depth5-chance-exactness-factorial-a6a604fd
No plain-English explanation has been written for this experiment yet. Add web/content/research/EX-20260821-depth5-chance-exactness-factorial-a6a604fd.mdx and it will appear here. The registered protocol is shown below.

The registered protocol

On the shared 64-game development cohort 0xa51d1000-0xa51d103f, a five-ply fair search beats the same search at four plies at the same stratum count, with a one-sided 95% whole-game bootstrap lower bound above zero at seven strata (where finding-05 measured a +86,172 [+26,468] third-to-fourth ply gradient) and no requirement at five strata (where finding-05 measured none). The fast engine's depth-4 seven-stratum arm must first reproduce the recorded unoptimised arm field-for-field, so that any depth-5 difference is a depth difference and not an engine difference.

Candidate
fast-engine-parameterized-fair-search, depth 5 (arms d5s7 and d5s5)
approaches/lifetime-objective/fast-engine/cohort.cpp
Comparator
the recorded depth-4 arms on the same seeds (d4s7 = runs/RUN-A51D-s7confirm/fresh-s7.json, d4s5 = runs/RUN-A51D-s7confirm/fresh-s5.json), plus a same-cohort fast-engine reproduction of d4s7 as the control
approaches/lifetime-objective/risk-calibration/search.cpp

Primary metric

Paired depth-5 minus depth-4 mean score at a fixed stratum count over whole games, with a one-sided 95% percentile-bootstrap lower bound (20,000 resamples, Mulberry32 domain 0xb0075eed).

Statistical unit: whole-game

Pass criteria, fixed in advance

  • Control: the fast engine's depth-4 seven-stratum arm reproduces runs/RUN-A51D-s7confirm/fresh-s7.json on all 11 recorded per-game fields with 0 mismatches.
  • Audit: every arm reports 0 incomplete decisions and a minimum completed depth equal to its requested depth; an arm with any incomplete decision is void, not negative.
  • Depth-5 at seven strata beats depth-4 at seven strata on the complete 64-game cohort with a one-sided 95% bootstrap lower bound above zero.
  • Depth-5 at five strata is at least not worse than depth-4 at five strata (lower bound above zero is not required at this stratum count).
  • Numbered clears per move, covered reveals per move and mean occupancy all move toward the survival requirement from depth 4 to depth 5 at the same stratum count.
  • 0 censored games and 0 score-decomposition identity failures in every arm.

On pass: Preregister a fresh-seed replication of the winning depth-5 configuration on an unread development block before any promotion, and re-price the cost model with measured rather than worst-case work.

On fail: Record a valid negative for the exact depths, stratum counts, work bounds and cache capacities tested. Do not run depth 6. The named next question becomes the terminal-utility sweep at depth 5, which separates the death-penalty-flattening mechanism from the leaf-calibration mechanism.

Data and reuse

The 64 evaluation seeds 0xa51d1000-0xa51d103f were opened by finding-05's fresh-seed confirmation and are permanently development data. They are reused here as a paired diagnostic against arms recorded on exactly those seeds. This cohort can never serve as confirmation evidence and no protected or final seed is read. No machine-readable seed-lease record exists for the 0xa5 family; the authoritative allocation is the table in docs/exploratory/lease-map.md.

seed leases: SEEDLEASE-A51D confirm (0xa51d1000-0xa51d103f; docs/exploratory/lease-map.md)

What happened

partial run · outcome: failnot-supported-as-testedpublic-developmentRS-20260821T181917Z-9a34ba02

The fifth ply buys nothing at either chance resolution, and the earlier interim reading that it was actively harmful is withdrawn. Complete leg, 64 of 64 games: depth 5 at five strata scores 288,704 against depth 4 at five strata's 297,327, a paired -8,624 with a one-sided 95% whole-game bootstrap lower bound of -55,134 and W-T-L 33-0-31, for 23.29x the logical work per move. That is a wash, not a reversal. Partial leg, 16 of 64 games and still running: depth 5 at seven strata is -1,581 against the depth-4 seven-stratum control (95% lower bound -173,154, W-T-L 7-0-9) at 34.32x the work, and +16,622 against depth 3 at seven strata (95% lower bound -130,027, W-T-L 8-0-8) at 1,084.78x the work. At a fixed stratum count, depth 3 -> 4 -> 5 does not separate. READ THIS BEFORE QUOTING THE MEANS: the eye-catching gap between the 398,498 of d4s7 and the 288,704 of d5s5 is a chance-samples effect and not a depth effect, because those two arms differ in both factors; the correct paired depth contrasts at fixed chance resolution are d5s5 - d4s5 = -8,624 and d5s7 - d4s7 = -1,581, both indistinguishable from zero, and the correct paired stratum contrast at fixed depth is finding-05's d4s7 - d4s5 = +101,171. The interim slice reported in finding-15 section 2.2 (-268,611 over 8 paired games) was completion-order biased against depth 5 exactly as that section warned; at 16 games the bias is gone and the delta is -1,581. The engine control is clean and is the other retained result here: the fast engine's depth-4 seven-stratum arm reproduces the recorded unoptimised arm over 64 paired games x 11 fields with 0 mismatches, and the depth-5 five-stratum arm reproduces the recorded 32-game unoptimised arm over 32 paired games x 11 fields with 0 mismatches across two binaries and two different cache capacities. Every arm audited 0 incomplete decisions at its requested depth, 0 censored games and 0 score-decomposition identity failures. Flow rates fall with depth at five strata (1.9387 clears and 1.0651 reveals per move against depth 4's 1.9489 and 1.0697, and against the 2.400 and 1.400 indefinite survival needs), so nothing here moves toward the target.

What it had to pass
  • Control: the fast engine's depth-4 seven-stratum arm reproduces the recorded unoptimised arm on all 11 per-game fields — observed: 64 paired games x 11 fields = 704 comparisons, 0 mismatches; a second, unplanned reproduction fell out of d5s5 against the recorded 32-game arm (352 comparisons, 0 mismatches) across two binaries and cache capacities 60,000 vs 200,000
  • Audit: 0 incomplete decisions and minimum completed depth equal to the requested depth in every arm — observed: d4s7 7,338 decisions minCompletedDepth 4; d5s5 5,420 decisions minCompletedDepth 5; d5s7 (partial) 1,760 decisions minCompletedDepth 5; 0 incomplete decisions everywhere, busiest decision at 76% (d5s7), 72% (d5s5) and 89% (d4s7) of its declared bound
  • Depth 5 beats depth 4 at seven strata with a one-sided 95% bootstrap lower bound above zero, on 64 complete games — observed: undecidable as run: the arm holds 16 of 64 games and is still executing. On the 16 paired games the delta is -1,581 with a 95% lower bound of -173,154 and W-T-L 7-0-9 - no gradient is visible, but 16 games cannot decide this criterion and no claim is made that they do
  • Depth 5 is at least not worse than depth 4 at five strata, on 64 complete games — observed: -8,624 with a 95% lower bound of -55,134, W-T-L 33-0-31, median paired delta +349, at 23.29x the logical work per move; a wash that costs 23x
  • Clears per move, reveals per move and occupancy all move toward the survival requirement from depth 4 to depth 5 at the same stratum count — observed: at five strata clears/move 1.9387 vs 1.9489, reveals/move 1.0651 vs 1.0697 and occupancy 24.1886 vs 24.2880 - two of three move away from the 2.400/1.400 requirement
  • 0 censored games and 0 score-decomposition identity failures in every arm — observed: 0 and 0 in all three arms
Recorded metrics
cohort
0xa51d1000-0xa51d103f, 2,000-move cap, corrected 17,000-point Hardcore scoring
d4s7ControlGames
64
d4s7ControlMeanScore
398498.2344
d4s7ControlMeanMoves
114.6563
d4s7ControlWorkPerMove
4956614.2652
d5s5Games
64
d5s5MeanScore
288703.6719
d5s5MeanMoves
84.6875
d5s5WorkPerMove
30,183,227
d5s5ClearsPerMove
1.9387
d5s5RevealsPerMove
1.0651
d5s7Games
16
d5s7GamesPlanned
64
d5s7MeanScoreOn16
383691.1875
d5s7MeanMovesOn16
110
d5s7WorkPerMove
170,131,134
pairedD5s5MinusD4s5
n
64
meanScoreDelta
-8623.7000
lowerBound95
-55133.7000
meanMoveDelta
-2.4700
winTieLoss
33-0-31
medianDelta
349
workRatio
23.2900
pairedD5s7MinusD4s7
n
16
meanScoreDelta
-1581.1000
lowerBound95
-173154.2000
meanMoveDelta
-0.8800
winTieLoss
7-0-9
medianDelta
-39660.5000
workRatio
34.3200
pairedD5s7MinusD3s7
n
16
meanScoreDelta
16622.4000
lowerBound95
-130026.9000
meanMoveDelta
3.2500
winTieLoss
8-0-8
medianDelta
-8,539
workRatio
1084.7800
pairedD5s7MinusD5s5
n
16
meanScoreDelta
114640.3000
lowerBound95
-7279.5000
meanMoveDelta
30.5600
winTieLoss
8-0-8
medianDelta
14,763
workRatio
5.6400
pairedD4s7MinusD4s5
n
64
meanScoreDelta
101170.8000
lowerBound95
47446.8000
meanMoveDelta
27.5000
winTieLoss
41-0-23
medianDelta
55416.5000
workRatio
3.8200
note
the stratum contrast at fixed depth 4 - this is the significant effect the 398,498-vs-288,704 gap is actually made of, not depth
reproductionD4s7
pairedGames
64
fields
11
comparisons
704
mismatches
0
reproductionD5s5
pairedGames
32
fields
11
comparisons
352
mismatches
0
auditD4s7
decisions
7,338
incompleteDecisions
0
minimumCompletedDepth
4
maxWorkPerDecision
10,639,860
declaredBound
11,892,399
declaredCacheEntries
60,000
auditD5s5
decisions
5,420
incompleteDecisions
0
minimumCompletedDepth
5
maxWorkPerDecision
78,537,460
declaredBound
109,723,461
declaredCacheEntries
200,000
auditD5s7Partial
decisions
1,760
incompleteDecisions
0
minimumCompletedDepth
5
maxWorkPerDecision
441,657,335
declaredBound
582,727,797
declaredCacheEntries
200,000
censoredGamesAllArms
0
scoreIdentityFailuresAllArms
0
bootstrap
one-sided 95% percentile bootstrap over whole paired games, 20,000 resamples, Mulberry32 domain 0xb0075eed (analyze.py)
twoSidedContext
the same estimator's one-sided 95% upper bounds are +39,052 for d5s5-d4s5 and +166,299 for d5s7-d4s7, so neither delta is distinguishable from zero in either direction
Limitations
  • PARTIAL ARM: the depth-5 seven-stratum arm holds 16 of 64 games and was still executing (process 127323) when this result was written. Every seven-stratum number here is over those 16 paired games and none of them can decide the primary gate. The frozen snapshot assessed is runs/RUN-20260821T060358Z-895d0a79/d5s7-partial-16games.json; the live artifact will be rewritten to 32 games and beyond and will no longer match this record's hash.
  • The 16 finished games are the cohort's first 16 seeds (0xa51d1000-0xa51d100f) because the runner completes whole 16-game chunks, so they are a fixed block rather than a random subset; they are paired seed-for-seed against comparators recorded on exactly those seeds, which is what makes the paired delta fair even though the 16-game mean is not an estimate of the arm's 64-game mean.
  • 64 paired games with a score standard deviation of 38-64% of the mean; at this sample size a true depth effect smaller than roughly 55,000 points cannot be resolved, so 'no gradient' means 'no gradient this cohort can see', not 'exactly zero'.
  • The cohort 0xa51d1000-0xa51d103f was opened by finding-05 and is permanently development data. This is a diagnostic comparison at STANDARD tier; it is not a freeze gate and can never become confirmation evidence.
  • The depth-5 arms declare a 200,000-entry transposition cache and the depth-4 comparators 60,000. Capacity provably cannot change play (verified three ways in finding-15 section 3, including whole-game agreement across two binaries) but work per move is not comparable across capacities and each figure must be read with its capacity.
  • The experiment record was written after the runs, by a different agent than the one that executed them. The comparison rule predates the arms and is implemented in analyze.py, but this is retroactive registration and not a preregistration; the amendment on the experiment record says so.
  • Wall-clock figures are not timing-grade: the machine carried a one-minute load average of 12-63 from other agents' jobs throughout. Scores, moves and logical work are deterministic and unaffected.
  • This rejects the exact configurations tested - depth 5 at five and seven strata, this leaf, this terminal utility, these work bounds. It does not show that no five-ply search can help. finding-15 section 5 names two mechanisms that would predict exactly this outcome (the terminal utility has no death-depth shaping, and the leaf is an uncalibrated potential); neither was tested here.
  • Cost model correction, recorded because it changes what is affordable rather than what is true: the 78-wall-hour projection that once cancelled this experiment used worst-case iterative-deepening work. Measured work at depth 5 with seven strata is about 10x below that bound, and the arms ran in hours.
partial run · outcome: inconclusivemixedpublic-developmentRS-20260821T205102Z-d89df4b5

SUPERSEDES RS-20260821T181917Z-9a34ba02, which assessed this experiment when the depth-5 seven-stratum arm held 16 games. The arm was stopped by the repository owner's decision at the 32-game chunk boundary and will not be resumed, so its analysis is now FINAL even though the cohort is partial: 32 of 64 planned games, every one of them a whole game, 0 censored, 0 score-decomposition identity failures, 0 incomplete decisions, minimum completed depth 5. The old record remains committed history and is not edited. THE HEADLINE IS A CORRECTION, NOT AN UPDATE. The previous record read the fifth ply as 'does not separate'. That reading was a NON-MEASUREMENT REPORTED AS A NULL. Doubling the sample from 16 to 32 games moved the depth-5-minus-depth-4 seven-stratum contrast from -1,581 to +23,367 and its median from -39,660 to +18,820 - THE SIGN FLIPPED - which is what a quantity being estimated far below its detection floor looks like. By chunk the paired mean is -1,581 on the first 16 seeds and +48,315 on the second 16. Do NOT replace the old reading with 'depth 5 helps': +23,367 is equally unsupported. The one-sided 95% bootstrap lower bound is -83,046 and the contrast's detection floor at n=32 is 107,988, so the estimate sits at 22% of the smallest effect this cohort could have resolved. The correct statement is that THE FOURTH-TO-FIFTH PLY CONTRAST AT SEVEN STRATA WAS NEVER MEASURED, in either record. THE POWER ANALYSIS IS THE MOST USEFUL THING THIS EXPERIMENT PRODUCED. Detection floor, taken as 1.645 x sd / sqrt(n), the smallest true effect whose one-sided 95% bound would clear zero: d4s7-d4s5 +101,171 against a floor of 55,192 (n=64); d4s7-d3s7 +86,172 against 61,457 (n=64); d5s5-d4s5 -8,624 against 47,052 (n=64); d5s7-d4s7 +23,367 against 107,988 (n=32). EVERY SIGNIFICANT RESULT IN THIS FACTORIAL IS ABOVE ITS FLOOR AND EVERY NULL IS BELOW IT - the factorial separated the contrasts it had the power to separate and nothing else. Resolving the observed +23,367 needs about 684 paired games; finishing to the planned 64 would have left a standard error near 46,400 against a 23,367 estimate, still a non-measurement. That is the justification for the stop: the contrast is not answerable at any affordable cohort size, so the marginal machine-day buys no information. The variance is structural, not fixable by tidier running: the five largest single-seed paired deltas are -1,002,862, +958,985, -678,455, +592,546 and -577,069, so individual games swing by more than twice the cohort mean. WHAT IS ACTUALLY MEASURED HERE, and it is the same lesson from the other side: at depth 5, going from five to seven strata is worth +123,613 with a lower bound of +32,575, W-T-L 19-0-13 - SIGNIFICANT, and comfortably above its 95,207 floor - for 5.85x the work. The chance-exactness axis pays at depth 5 exactly as it pays at depth 4 (+101,171 [+47,447] there). The previous record's warning therefore survives and is strengthened: the eye-catching gap between d4s7's 398,498 and d5s5's 288,704 is a CHANCE-SAMPLES effect, not a depth effect, and both stratum contrasts are now significant while no depth contrast is. The engine controls are unchanged and clean: the fast engine's depth-4 arm reproduces the recorded unoptimised arm over 704 field comparisons with 0 mismatches, and the depth-5 five-stratum arm reproduces its recorded 32-game predecessor over 352 comparisons with 0 mismatches across two binaries and two cache capacities.

What it had to pass
  • Control: the fast engine's depth-4 seven-stratum arm reproduces the recorded unoptimised arm on all 11 per-game fields — observed: 704 comparisons, 0 mismatches; plus d5s5 against its recorded 32-game predecessor, 352 comparisons, 0 mismatches, across two binaries and cache capacities 60,000 vs 200,000
  • Audit: 0 incomplete decisions and minimum completed depth equal to the requested depth in every arm — observed: d4s7 7,338 decisions minCompletedDepth 4; d5s5 5,420 decisions minCompletedDepth 5; d5s7 3,775 decisions minCompletedDepth 5; 0 incomplete everywhere, busiest decision at 80% of bound in d5s7
  • Depth 5 beats depth 4 at seven strata with a one-sided 95% bootstrap lower bound above zero, on 64 complete games — observed: NOT MEASURABLE AS RUN, and not measurable at 64 games either. On 32 games: +23,367, lower bound -83,046, W-T-L 17-0-15, median +18,820. The paired sd is 371,351, giving a detection floor of 107,988 at n=32 and 76,359 at n=64; the estimate is 22% and 31% of those. Resolving it needs about 684 paired games. The criterion is neither passed nor failed - it was never tested with the power to answer it
  • Depth 5 is at least not worse than depth 4 at five strata, on 64 complete games — observed: -8,624 [-55,134], W-T-L 33-0-31, at 23.29x work, on a complete 64-game cohort. This is a bounded null and the strongest depth statement the factorial supports: any true d4->d5 effect at five strata is smaller than about 47,000 points
  • Clears per move, reveals per move and occupancy all move toward the survival requirement from depth 4 to depth 5 at the same stratum count — observed: at seven strata on 32 games, clears/move 2.0575 vs 2.0571 (+0.0004), reveals/move 1.1481 vs 1.1549 (-0.0069), occupancy 23.62 vs 23.15 (worse); at five strata all three move away. Nothing approaches the 2.400/1.400 requirement
  • 0 censored games and 0 score-decomposition identity failures in every arm — observed: 0 and 0 in all three arms, including the arm that was stopped
Recorded metrics
cohort
0xa51d1000-0xa51d103f, 2,000-move cap, corrected 17,000-point Hardcore scoring; the depth-5 seven-stratum arm covers the first 32 seeds 0xa51d1000-0xa51d101f
supersedes
RS-20260821T181917Z-9a34ba02
supersededFieldsFromPartialRecord
d5s7Games 16 -> 32 (final; cohort stopped by decision, not resumed); d5s7MeanScoreOn16 383,691 -> d5s7MeanScore 411,874; d5s7MeanMoves 110.00 -> 117.97; d5s7WorkPerMove 170,131,134 -> 176,536,117; d5s7 decisions 1,760 -> 3,775; pairedD5s7MinusD4s7 -1,581 [-173,154] median -39,660 W-T-L 7-0-9 -> +23,367 [-83,046] median +18,820 W-T-L 17-0-15 (SIGN FLIP); pairedD5s7MinusD5s5 +114,640 [-7,280] not significant -> +123,613 [+32,575] SIGNIFICANT W-T-L 19-0-13; pairedD5s7MinusD3s7 +16,622 [-130,027] -> +86,397 [-6,303] W-T-L 20-0-12; scientificOutcome fail -> inconclusive; assessment not-supported-as-tested -> mixed. Unchanged: every depth-4 and depth-5 five-stratum figure, both reproduction controls, and pairedD5s5MinusD4s5 at -8,624 [-55,134] W-T-L 33-0-31 on 64 games.
d5s7Games
32
d5s7GamesPlanned
64
d5s7StopKind
deliberate resource decision at a clean chunk boundary; not resumed
d5s7MeanScore
411873.6563
d5s7MedianScore
344436.5000
d5s7ScoreSd
282631.6400
d5s7MeanMoves
117.9688
d5s7ClearsPerMove
2.0575
d5s7RevealsPerMove
1.1481
d5s7Occupied
23.6169
d5s7WorkPerMove
176,536,117
pairedD5s7MinusD4s7
n
32
meanScoreDelta
23366.8000
lowerBound95
-83046.2000
meanMoveDelta
6.0300
winTieLoss
17-0-15
medianDelta
18,820
workRatio
35.6200
chunk1MeanDelta
-1,581
chunk2MeanDelta
48,315
note
sign flipped from the n=16 record; sits at 22% of its 107,988 detection floor
pairedD5s7MinusD5s5
n
32
meanScoreDelta
123612.7000
lowerBound95
32575.2000
meanMoveDelta
33.5300
winTieLoss
19-0-13
medianDelta
119,724
workRatio
5.8500
significant
true
detectionFloor
95,207
pairedD5s7MinusD3s7
n
32
meanScoreDelta
86396.8000
lowerBound95
-6302.9000
meanMoveDelta
22.2800
winTieLoss
20-0-12
workRatio
1125.6200
detectionFloor
97,211
pairedD5s5MinusD4s5
n
64
meanScoreDelta
-8623.7000
lowerBound95
-55133.7000
winTieLoss
33-0-31
workRatio
23.2900
detectionFloor
47,052
pairedD4s7MinusD4s5
n
64
meanScoreDelta
101170.8000
lowerBound95
47446.8000
winTieLoss
41-0-23
workRatio
3.8200
significant
true
detectionFloor
55,192
powerTable
  1. contrast
    d4s7 - d4s5
    n
    64
    mean
    101,171
    pairedSd
    268,413
    standardError
    33,552
    detectionFloor
    55,192
    aboveFloor
    true
  2. contrast
    d4s7 - d3s7
    n
    64
    mean
    86,172
    pairedSd
    298,877
    standardError
    37,360
    detectionFloor
    61,457
    aboveFloor
    true
  3. contrast
    d5s7 - d5s5
    n
    32
    mean
    123,613
    pairedSd
    327,399
    standardError
    57,876
    detectionFloor
    95,207
    aboveFloor
    true
  4. contrast
    d5s7 - d3s7
    n
    32
    mean
    86,397
    pairedSd
    334,291
    standardError
    59,095
    detectionFloor
    97,211
    aboveFloor
    false
  5. contrast
    d5s5 - d4s5
    n
    64
    mean
    -8,624
    pairedSd
    228,827
    standardError
    28,603
    detectionFloor
    47,052
    aboveFloor
    false
  6. contrast
    d5s7 - d4s7
    n
    32
    mean
    23,367
    pairedSd
    371,351
    standardError
    65,646
    detectionFloor
    107,988
    aboveFloor
    false
detectionFloorDefinition
1.645 * sd(paired deltas) / sqrt(n): the smallest true mean difference whose one-sided 95% bound would clear zero. Sample sd uses the n-1 denominator.
gamesNeededToResolveD5s7MinusD4s7
684
standardErrorHadTheArmFinishedAt64
46,419
detectionFloorHadTheArmFinishedAt64
76,359
largestSingleSeedPairedDeltasD5s7MinusD4s7
  1. -1,002,862
  2. 958,985
  3. -678,455
  4. 592,546
  5. -577,069
costToResolve
684 games at the run's own observed 1,647 s per game at 14 threads is 1,126,562 s = 13.0 wall-days (about 182 thread-days). The two chunks differed 2.3x in throughput under other agents' load (2,306 and 989 s per game), so the honest range is roughly 8-18 wall-days.
bootstrapVersusNormalApproximation
The tooling reports a one-sided percentile bootstrap (20,000 resamples, Mulberry32 domain 0xb0075eed) and the floors above are the normal approximation 1.645*sd/sqrt(n). They agree on the significance call for all six contrasts. The bootstrap bound is systematically 0.5k-4.5k HIGHER (less conservative) than mean minus 1.645*SE, i.e. 1-5% of the half-width: d4s7-d4s5 +47,447 vs +45,979; d4s7-d3s7 +26,468 vs +24,715; d5s5-d4s5 -55,134 vs -55,676; d5s7-d4s7 -83,046 vs -84,621; d5s7-d5s5 +32,575 vs +28,406; d5s7-d3s7 -6,303 vs -10,814. Paired-delta skewness is +0.55 to +0.92 on four of the six contrasts and -0.30 on d5s7-d4s7, so the two methods are close but not interchangeable at the third digit; no conclusion in this record depends on which is used.
auditD5s7Final
decisions
3,775
incompleteDecisions
0
minimumCompletedDepth
5
maxWorkPerDecision
467,827,983
declaredBound
582,727,797
declaredCacheEntries
200,000
reproductionD4s7
pairedGames
64
fields
11
comparisons
704
mismatches
0
reproductionD5s5
pairedGames
32
fields
11
comparisons
352
mismatches
0
censoredGamesAllArms
0
scoreIdentityFailuresAllArms
0
Limitations
  • SUPERSESSION: this record replaces RS-20260821T181917Z-9a34ba02 for the same experiment. That record was written and committed when the depth-5 seven-stratum arm held 16 games, and its central depth claim reversed sign when the sample doubled. It is left byte-unchanged, because this repository has no precedent for annotating a committed result in place; the relationship is carried here and by the theory record's evidenceRefs. Quote this record, not its predecessor.
  • PARTIAL BUT FINAL: 32 of 64 planned games. The run validity stays partial because the planned cohort was not completed; the analysis is nevertheless final, because the stop was a decision and the arm will not be resumed. These are different things and the record keeps them apart deliberately.
  • THE PRIMARY CONTRAST IS UNMEASURED, not null. Neither -1,581 at n=16 nor +23,367 at n=32 is evidence about the fifth ply at seven strata. Anyone quoting either number as a finding is quoting noise.
  • The 32 games are the cohort's first two 16-seed blocks, a fixed prefix rather than a random subset, because the runner completes whole chunks. They are paired seed-for-seed against comparators recorded on exactly those seeds, which is what keeps the paired delta fair; the arm's 32-game mean is not an estimate of a 64-game mean.
  • The detection floors are a normal approximation (1.645*sd/sqrt(n)) applied to heavy-tailed paired deltas with sample skewness between -0.30 and +0.92. They are planning quantities, accurate to roughly the 1-5% by which they differ from the percentile bootstrap the tooling reports, not exact power guarantees.
  • The 684-game and 13-wall-day figures assume the observed effect size is the true one and that throughput matches this run's 1,647 s per game at 14 threads. Throughput varied 2.3x between the two chunks under other agents' load, so the wall estimate spans roughly 8-18 days. If the true effect is smaller than +23,367 the required cohort grows quadratically.
  • The one significant new result, d5s7 - d5s5 at +123,613 [+32,575], rests on 32 games rather than 64 and on an arm that was stopped; it is a stratum contrast at fixed depth 5 and should be replicated on a fresh block before it is leaned on.
  • The cohort 0xa51d1000-0xa51d103f was opened by finding-05 and is permanently development data. STANDARD tier, diagnostic only, never a freeze gate and never confirmation evidence.
  • The depth-5 arms declare a 200,000-entry transposition cache and the depth-4 comparators 60,000. Capacity provably cannot change play but work per move is not comparable across capacities.
  • The experiment record was written after the runs, by a different agent than the one that executed them; its amendment says so. The comparison rule predates the arms.
  • This still rejects nothing about five-ply search in general - only these depths, this leaf, this terminal utility, these work bounds. The two mechanisms named in finding-15 section 5 remain untested, and a flat-and-unmeasurable depth axis is consistent with both.
  • Nothing here moves the ceiling. The best arm on this cohort is 411,874 on 32 games against the 1,050,000 the frozen qualification protocol requires, and every game ended.