r/place A fruit fly for organization science

out/notes-C1.md

Saved at C1.C1a-11: pass. This reading copy substitutes participant identifiers in saved text; it is not a new interview response. Reading Markdown.

Participant handles in these reading copies use the pixel stream's identifiers: base64(SHA1(username)), case preserved, without a salt. These are linkable pseudonyms. Profile links are removed; missing-author markers remain. Original research files are unchanged. Quote offsets refer to original text. Source and reading-copy hashes are listed separately.

Source commit: 315e68161b66, 2026-10-14T02:56:24+02:00. Saved-state date: 2026-10-14T00:56:11Z. Catalogue close receipt Commit date and saved-state date are distinct.

Original GitHub file. Original SHA-256: d12d14e9832eab9ba715605d6fb60907a5f3b9efba956bd8d8dcfcd6aaf4222f. Reading-copy SHA-256: d12d14e9832eab9ba715605d6fb60907a5f3b9efba956bd8d8dcfcd6aaf4222f.

Notes, stage C1: structuring

Opened at C1a-01, 2026-10-13. Stage B is closed and frozen. The scheme readers held is scheme_final.jsonl (197 themes); the settled line is assign_final.jsonl at sha256 d3506a88…. Nothing in stage B's files is edited here. Every change lands in this stage's own files: assignments_final.jsonl with its overlay, then scheme_v2, tier_history.jsonl and the rest.

J's rulings for stage C1 (20:16 Berlin, through the PI's message of 18:17Z)

J read my B4c interview answers and said "go ahead" on three proposals:

  1. Class 2. The readers' list stands as the placement. The B1 themes no reader placed are kept as a flagged record beside it, not as placements. Where a flagged theme's concepts support it, I may promote it in C1 as one of my re-placements, logged as such.
  2. The re-reads. In this first pass, re-read the five class 4 items where six readers converge against a re-rule resting on the earlier reading (chicago t01, armok t04, dmt t03, germany t08, smashbros t01), then the class 4 unresolved rulings that rest on that same sentence.
  3. No fleet re-read of class 2 now. Fresh readers test the revised scheme after C1.

My B4 defect list, the G14 proposals from the interview, and the questions on bare event titles and on whose act a visitor's words count for are mine to work through in C1. J's other rulings stand.

What the interview held (the PI's note of 18:17Z; the interview ran in a copy of the leg, so its answers reached this conversation only through that note):

The passes

Pass 1 (C1a-01) does four things and changes no gate and no theme:

The later passes hold the rest of the stage:

How scheme_edits.jsonl is read

The file has 306 lines. Each line carries the whole field twice, as it was and as it is now. out/_analysis/c1_edits_render.py prints each line once: its number, round, leg, theme, field, kind and the items that caused it; the sentence added or the field as it now reads; and its reason. Every line is read. Only the duplicated "was" copy is left out, and the render says where a line has no added part.

Class 2: J's ruling applied, declared before the write

out/_analysis/c1_assignments_init.py writes assignments_final.jsonl from assign_final.jsonl. Every line is carried through verbatim except the 1,990 class 2 lines (source: "b1_grouping_kept"). For each of those:

The re-reads, declared before the first

The stopping criterion, declared before the first recut

I stop recutting the third-order tier when two conditions hold:

I would prefer a later cut to this one only on two grounds:

A cut is never preferred for moving the arithmetic of any figure, which rule 7 keeps shut.

Pass 1 (C1a-01): the record

The sources read

Class 2, applied

out/_analysis/c1_assignments_init.py --write wrote assignments_final.jsonl (7,844 lines) from assign_final.jsonl.

The re-reads (J's ruling 2)

All 30 class 4 rulings resting on "the earlier reading" were read again (out/_analysis/c1_reread/, the decisions in out/_analysis/c1_reread-01.jsonl).

What I doubt

Slips

validate.py C1, at pass 1's close:

stage C1:
  assignments_final 7844 lines = assignment_items_expected
  revised lines 2000 of 7844 (moved placements 2000)
  empties 175 of 7844
  a pass closed; the full set (scheme v2, assignments, the fourth-order themes, the form pass) is owed at the last pass, with the handback

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 0 warnings

Pass 2 (C1a-02)

Declared before counting or amending

How a recheck is read (written at gate:2, after gate:1's rechecks)

A recheck asks one question: does the amended sentence move this placement? I place the item under the scheme with the amended sentence and again with the old one. The item moves when the two answers differ and the current line follows the old answer. An item whose line differs from both answers is not moved by the recheck. Such a line is a reader's or a ruling's choice that the amendment did not touch. I list it for later review (the revision rate, or the promotion of flagged class 2 records). Without this rule, the moved share would count disagreements the amendment did not cause, and section 4's one-in-ten escalation would answer a question the amendment did not ask. Gate:1's two moves meet this rule: in both items the T3-095 concepts fail only the new April Fools condition.

The gate amendments

The held re-reads, decided under the amended gates

These are re-reads of B4 rulings, so J's 13 October rulings apply: choose among the readers' placements and my B1, and a lone B1 theme needs three concepts.

J's guard on QC1-001, counted (out/_analysis/c1_guard_report.py, c1_guard.json)

J (21:12 Berlin, through the PI) confirmed that C1 rechecks place by the amended gates over the whole scheme. He set a guard: every re-placement names its concepts and the amended clause, and each pass reports the moves to a theme that neither the readers nor my B1 placed.

What I doubt (pass 2)

Slips (pass 2)

Next pass

  1. Transmission row 4's four "under rule 0" sentences: alberta t04, finland t06, korea t15 and mit t01.
  2. Row 2's mariokart t04. My B1 placed T3-084; the readers placed T3-002 and T3-005; the line now places T3-084.
  3. The G14 proposals, weighed against section 1's warning.
  4. The visitor rule's sweep and the "help received" question.
  5. The lone-B1 floor's review.
  6. The themes placed nowhere or in one room.
  7. The promotions of flagged class 2 records, among them europe t14 and kingdomhearts t03 (T3-095).
  8. Then the revision rate, the pair test, the empties and arguables, the form pass, the fourth-order themes and scheme_v2.md. The visitor rule goes into scheme_v2.md's gate block as a reading rule of every gate.

validate.py C1 at pass 2's close (before done.sh)

stage C1:
  scheme_v2: 197 themes (14 rare), frozen 197, retired 0, new 0
  assignments_final 7844 lines = assignment_items_expected
  revised lines 2022 of 7844 (moved placements 2019)
  empties 175 of 7844
  a pass closed; the full set (scheme v2, assignments, the fourth-order themes, the form pass) is owed at the last pass, with the handback

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 0 warnings

Pass 3 (C1a-03)

QC1-001 revisited, and the views after pass 2

Transmission's rows 2 and 4, and the pairing sentences (gates 8 to 14)

QC1-002, asked and answered

The G14 proposals, and the T3-010 | T3-149 line (gates 15 to 21)

J's guard, counted (out/_analysis/c1_guard_C1a-03.json)

What I doubt (pass 3)

Slips (pass 3)

Next pass

  1. The 20 lines listed at gates 15 to 21, and canada t09 and tf2 t05, reviewed under J's floor.
  2. The visitor sweep (23 items in c1_guard.json, and gate:5's reach as in placestart t04) and the "help received" question.
  3. The lone-B1 floor's review in the six items where it keeps a fitting theme out.
  4. The themes placed nowhere (T3-140, T3-144, T3-161) and the eleven in one room.
  5. The promotions of flagged class 2 records, europe t14 and kingdomhearts t03 (T3-095) among them; pass 2's six listed lines.
  6. The revision rate (200 placements by seed), then the pair test, the empties and arguables, the form pass, the fourth-order themes and scheme_v2.md with the visitor rule and the floor in its gate block.

validate.py C1 at pass 3's close (before done.sh)

stage C1:
  scheme_v2: 197 themes (14 rare), frozen 197, retired 0, new 0
  assignments_final 7844 lines = assignment_items_expected
  revised lines 2039 of 7844 (moved placements 2030)
  empties 175 of 7844
  a pass closed; the full set (scheme v2, assignments, the fourth-order themes, the form pass) is owed at the last pass, with the handback

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 0 warnings

Pass 4 (C1a-04)

Opening

The 22 lines held at pass 3

J's floor on my pass 2 re-placements

Gates 6 and 7 had added T3-084 as a second or third theme on one or two concepts in 20 lines, under rule 0's old "a theme alone at its level is kept". The floor replaced that rule (c1_floor_scan.py, c1_floor_drop.py).

The visitor sweep, and help received (gate:27)

The lone-B1 floor, revised

Themes placed nowhere or in one room, flagged records, pass 2's listed lines

J's guard, counted (out/_analysis/c1_guard_C1a-04.json)

What I doubt (pass 4)

Slips (pass 4)

Next pass

  1. The revision rate: 200 placements drawn by seed from assign_final.jsonl, re-decided under scheme_v2 and J's floor.
  2. The B4 defect list (adjudication_report.md) and the remaining watch items, each with a recorded decision, for the stopping criterion.
  3. The pair test, the empties and arguables, the form pass, the fourth-order themes, and scheme_v2.md with the visitor rule, J's floor and the named words in its gate block. Then the handback and the interview.

validate.py C1 at pass 4's close (before done.sh)

stage C1:
  scheme_v2: 197 themes (15 rare), frozen 197, retired 0, new 0
  assignments_final 7844 lines = assignment_items_expected
  revised lines 2053 of 7844 (moved placements 2037)
  empties 169 of 7844
  a pass closed; the full set (scheme v2, assignments, the fourth-order themes, the form pass) is owed at the last pass, with the handback

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 0 warnings

Pass 5 (C1a-05)

Opening

The revision rate (section 3)

The files are in out/_analysis/c1_revision/. The draw is sample.json (written by c1_revision_pack.py --draw). Eight packets are pack-*.md, my decisions dec-*.json, and the corrections made after a comparison corrections.json. c1_revision_compare.py writes result.json; c1_revision_classify.py writes classes.json and moves.json.

The next table gives the rate before any move, against each line, for my final decisions and for my first answers. The first answers put back the ten readings I corrected after comparing.

decisions line placed differently mean Jaccard primary agreement
final settled (assign_final.jsonl) 99 of 200 (49.5%) 0.731 0.845
final current (assignments_final.jsonl) 73 of 200 (36.5%) 0.786 0.845
first answers settled 104 of 200 (52.0%) 0.705 0.805
first answers current 80 of 200 (40.0%) 0.749 0.805

The source lines: the B4 defect list and the watch items

out/_analysis/c1_source_lines_pass5.json gives each of 28 source lines one decision with its reason.

J's guard, counted (out/_analysis/c1_guard_C1a-05.json)

What I doubt (pass 5)

Slips (pass 5)

Next pass

  1. The five revise lines, as seven gates with their rechecks, and mem.py gates on each theme amended.
  2. The pair test, with the homeland flag, T3-005 | T3-073 and the call, offer and build cluster.
  3. The empties and the arguables, with the carried unresolved items, harrypotter t11 and tampabaylightning t08, and saturation by kind.
  4. The form pass, the fourth-order themes, and scheme_v2.md. Its gate block holds the visitor rule, J's floor, the named words, help between rooms and "the work" as the room's own. Then the handback and the interview.

validate.py C1 at pass 5's close (before done.sh)

stage C1:
  scheme_v2: 197 themes (15 rare), frozen 197, retired 0, new 0
  assignments_final 7844 lines = assignment_items_expected
  revised lines 2077 of 7844 (moved placements 2055)
  empties 167 of 7844
  a pass closed; the full set (scheme v2, assignments, the fourth-order themes, the form pass) is owed at the last pass, with the handback

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 0 warnings

Pass 6 (C1a-06)

Opening

The five revise lines, as eight gates (gates 28 to 35)

The T3-043 line took three gates, not the two planned, because its gloss also gave a member's own part to T3-043. The next table lists each gate, what it now says, and its rechecks.

gate theme, field the amended sentence says rechecks moved
gate:28 T3-017, question against T3-031 the joke is T3-031's when played around the canvas work 30 0
gate:29 T3-001, question against T3-031 the same, from T3-001's side ("on any day" removed) 30 1
gate:30 T3-043, gloss thanks or credit to others, or a dispute over who made it 183 (all) 23
gate:31 T3-043, must_show "Credit given for the work to others" 30 1
gate:32 T3-043, question against T3-003 a member's own part, during the work or after, is T3-003 30 0
gate:33 T3-149, question against T3-025 a pact named (T3-149), or rival marks side by side with no pact named (T3-025) 30 0
gate:34 T3-025, question against T3-149 the same 30 0
gate:35 T3-050, question against T3-086 taunts at a rival lead (T3-050), or the marks of a quarrel or rivalry from the community's own life (T3-086) 30 0

The pair test (section 5)

The method was declared in the diary before computing (c1_pair_test.py, c1_pair_test.json).

J's guard, counted (out/_analysis/c1_guard_C1a-06.json)

What I doubt (pass 6)

Slips (pass 6)

Next pass

  1. The 76 pairs, read as declared and called joint, lump or unresolved, with T3-005 | T3-021 (121), T3-009 | T3-043 (78), the homeland flag, T3-005 | T3-073 and the call cluster among them; any merge or split under rule 10's arithmetic.
  2. The empties and the arguables, with saturation by kind.
  3. The form pass, the fourth-order themes, scheme_v2.md, the handback and the interview.

validate.py C1 at pass 6's close (before done.sh)

stage C1:
  scheme_v2: 197 themes (15 rare), frozen 197, retired 0, new 0
  assignments_final 7844 lines = assignment_items_expected
  revised lines 2101 of 7844 (moved placements 2078)
  empties 167 of 7844
  a pass closed; the full set (scheme v2, assignments, the fourth-order themes, the form pass) is owed at the last pass, with the handback

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 0 warnings

Pass 7 (C1a-07)

Opening

The pair test, read (section 5)

The reading followed the rule declared at C1a-06. Every item was read when twelve or fewer lines carry the pair. Otherwise twelve items were drawn by random.Random(20261014).sample from the sorted items.

What the reading found. Every pair has pure concepts on both sides in its sample. The arguable rate could not show this. Reading the items did. The edges between paired themes are of three kinds. The next table lists each kind of edge with an example pair.

kind of edge example pair what sits on the edge
one act does both functions T3-006 | T3-061 an invasion of a named flag erases the flag and takes its space
one exchange is cut in two T3-010 | T3-035 the request for space sits in T3-035, the host's answer in T3-010
the placements follow the label's words, while the written line names a fact T3-002 | T3-005; T3-033 | T3-041 calls to defend placed by whether they name the attack; further marks placed by whether the label says "next" or "another"

The stopping criterion at pass 7

Every source line has had a decision since pass 5. Pass 7 amended no gate, so the second clause holds. It holds trivially, because pass 7 tested no gate. Recutting stops here. If the empties and arguables pass needs a gate amended, that gate owes its rechecks and the criterion is read again.

J's guard, counted (out/_analysis/c1_guard_C1a-07.json)

What I doubt (pass 7)

Slips (pass 7)

Next pass

  1. The empties and the arguables (section 6), with saturation by kind. These carry over:
    • T3-052's four unresolved items;
    • the unresolved single failures of B4's packet 7;
    • harrypotter t11 and tampabaylightning t08;
    • the 20 placements in c1_pair_carried.json.
  2. The form pass, the fourth-order themes, scheme_v2.md, the handback and the interview.

validate.py C1 at pass 7's close (before done.sh)

stage C1:
  scheme_v2: 197 themes (15 rare), frozen 197, retired 0, new 0
  assignments_final 7844 lines = assignment_items_expected
  revised lines 2101 of 7844 (moved placements 2078)
  empties 167 of 7844
  a pass closed; the full set (scheme v2, assignments, the fourth-order themes, the form pass) is owed at the last pass, with the handback

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 0 warnings

Pass 8 (C1a-08)

Opening

The empties (section 6)

The reading rule was declared in the diary before any decision. Every empty line was read whole, in B1's reading order, as a re-read of its B4 ruling under scheme_v2's gates and reading rules. J's rulings of 13 October bound the re-read: a placement chooses among the readers' themes and my B1's. The lone-B1 floor applies only where the readers' theme takes concepts (pass 4).

The next table lists the 18 kinds of empty material. For each kind it gives the items, the rooms, the items placed this pass, the first position in B1's reading order, and whether the scheme is too narrow or the material too varied.

kind what it is items rooms placed first in B1 order verdict
K01 a bare trace: only a title, link, test line or the event's name survives 37 34 0 20 material too thin; the bare-mention rule gives it its outcome
K02 a short reply whose object is lost 17 16 0 77 material too thin
K03 a picture remarked on, its owner or place unsaid 17 17 0 8 mostly a fact the words omit; too narrow where the picture is another room's away from the mark
K04 an April Fools joke whose maker is unsaid 8 8 0 44 a fact the words omit
K05 another sub's April Fools change seen from this room 8 8 0 178 scheme too narrow
K06 April Fools play or talk that stages no fake 17 15 0 147 scheme too narrow
K07 the day marked or awaited, with no joke 4 4 0 37 scheme too narrow, and thin
K08 a dispute over the room's own jokes 4 4 2 318 scheme too narrow
K09 side talk and jokes with no canvas 9 9 4 27 not the scheme since gate:28; empty only where no placement held T3-017
K10 the sub's own moderation outside the canvas 8 7 0 166 scheme too narrow by design (T3-063 takes canvas posts only)
K11 talk about the canvas as a whole 3 3 0 227 scheme too narrow at the edge
K12 meaning or attachment given to the room's own mark 2 2 0 494 material too varied
K13 the room's work shown in other subs, with no joke and no call 2 2 0 239 scheme too narrow at the edge
K14 two tests met, and no field decides 4 4 0 131 bundled material; no tiebreak sentence
K15 another deciding fact absent 6 5 0 292 a fact the words omit
K16 a singular act no theme names 8 6 0 196 material too varied: each below B1's floor
K17 material a theme fits, kept out by the lone-B1 floor alone 10 10 10 37 neither; placed under pass 4's revision
K18 lateness: arriving after the work, or told it is done 3 3 0 125 scheme too narrow at the edge

The arguables (section 6)

The next table lists B1's 19 predicted pairs, with their crossing lines, their added-theme lines, and their rank among 922 confused pairs with both forms counted.

# predicted pair crossings added theme rank, both forms
1 T3-005 / T3-021 18 98 1
2 T3-010 / T3-149 19 32 3
3 T3-001 / T3-023 18 9 9
4 T3-028 / T3-070 0 9 65
5 T3-004 / T3-020 2 16 23
6 T3-002 / T3-033 12 26 4
7 T3-015 / T3-075 2 10 45
8 T3-004 / T3-070 12 13 13
9 T3-009 / T3-073 19 18 5
10 T3-004 / T3-038 7 15 14
11 T3-010 / T3-151 10 26 6
12 T3-010 / T3-150 4 16 19
13 T3-010 / T3-024 12 15 10
14 T3-009 / T3-043 5 54 2
15 T3-001 / T3-095 10 11 16
16 T3-087 / T3-188 1 3 158
17 T3-044 / T3-082 0 0 none
18 T3-014 / T3-152 0 25 12
19 T3-015 / T3-063 5 6 49

The placements the pair test carried

The 20 placements of c1_pair_carried.json were each read whole (c1_carried_pack.md). None was moved (c1_pair_carried_decisions.json). Correcting only the lines the pair samples happened to find would treat them unlike the unsampled lines the same reading covers.

The stopping criterion at pass 8

Pass 8 amended no gate, so the criterion holds, as at pass 7. The 16 placements applied amended gates and pass 4's floor revision. They changed no sentence.

J's guard, counted (out/_analysis/c1_guard_C1a-08.json)

What I doubt (pass 8)

Slips (pass 8)

Next pass

  1. The form pass (section 7): three sweeps, written to form_pass-C1.md.
  2. The fourth-order themes (section 8).
  3. scheme_v2.md with the gate block, the reading rules and the watch items (osugame t04's overlap among them). Then handback-C1.md, listing c1_unapplied.jsonl, c1_pair_carried_decisions.json and the four kinds the scheme lacks. Then the interview.

validate.py C1 at pass 8's close (before done.sh)

stage C1:
  scheme_v2: 197 themes (15 rare), frozen 197, retired 0, new 0
  assignments_final 7844 lines = assignment_items_expected
  revised lines 2117 of 7844 (moved placements 2094)
  empties 151 of 7844
  a pass closed; the full set (scheme v2, assignments, the fourth-order themes, the form pass) is owed at the last pass, with the handback

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 0 warnings

Pass 9 (C1a-09)

Opening

The form pass (section 7)

The pass is written in form_pass-C1.md, with its searches, limits, pattern tables and findings. The helper is out/_analysis/c1_form_pass.py, and the patterns are in out/_analysis/c1_form_patterns.json. Every count went through mem.py codes --grep, one logged read per pattern, and was then kept to the participants' quoted words. Quotes were grounded with cite.py --grep.

The next table lists the eight form-pass findings by id, with the communities and lines each covers. form_pass-C1.md holds the statement and exemplars of each.

id finding communities lines
FP-01 the one-line reply is the cheapest act 337 590
FP-02 the edited post carries a running record 418 1,124
FP-03 rooms time the work by who is awake 219 362
FP-04 the vocabulary of state and war is the common speech of canvas work 571 4,759
FP-05 the post speaks as "we", the reply as "I" 694 and 684 33,472 and 30,890
FP-06 the canvas's large collectives are named as known actors 453 3,605
FP-07 a room's question to itself, posted as a submission, is answered least 559 (submission questions) 5,072
FP-08 who leads is neither asked nor named 14 asked, 61 named 15 asked, 86 named

These findings were never counted and never clustered. None has a line in assignments_final.jsonl or a share in any later arithmetic, and no gate was written for them. Stage C2 takes them from form_pass-C1.md, the only place they exist.

What the form pass could not reach

This list is the same as in form_pass-C1.md, kept here for stage E1 and the write-up's account of what the study cannot say.

  1. Stance. A register or a stance is a property of a whole utterance. String matching finds the words, and it cannot tell play from earnest. "Canadian reinforcements, reporting in sir!" [ripcity/c0192] may be a joke or a pledge. FP-04 counts the vocabulary of war, not the stance of war.
  2. Acts named by topic. No route through second-order themes reaches an act whose themes name what it was about rather than what it was. The one-line reply sits on the theme of the call it answers. FP-01's 88 line themes are topics, not the act of joining. The same holds for the edited post and the talk of sleep.
  3. Dropped items. The coders dropped items with no code and no coded descendant. Short replies and many answers are among them. FP-01 is a floor, and FP-07's unanswered share is an upper bound.
  4. Timing. The hour is the item's posting time, in hours since the canvas opened. The pass did not measure reply latency, the time of an edit, or each room's local time.
  5. Case. mem.py's grep ignores case, so shouting in capitals, itself a register, was not counted.
  6. Language. The patterns are English. Rooms that wrote in Portuguese, German, French, Czech and other languages are undercounted in every sweep.
  7. Links and images. A turn that is a template link or a screenshot has a URL for its words, and its register is invisible.
  8. Who answers whom. The pass read the line theme of a coded parent item. It did not follow authors across turns, so it cannot say whether the caller answers the joiner.
  9. The week before. The pass did not compare any register with the rooms' pre-event week, so it cannot say whether the event changed the register.

The stopping criterion at pass 9

Pass 9 amended no gate and moved no placement. The criterion holds, as at passes 7 and 8.

J's guard, counted (out/_analysis/c1_guard_C1a-09.json)

What I doubt (pass 9)

Slips (pass 9)

Next pass

  1. The fourth-order themes (section 8). Each cut is a tier_history line, a move line in the diary and a snap.
  2. scheme_v2.md, with the gate block, the reading rules and the watch items: osugame t04's overlap, and FP-04's caution on the named words.
  3. handback-C1.md, listing c1_unapplied.jsonl, c1_pair_carried_decisions.json, the four kinds the scheme lacks and FP-04's caution. Then the interview.

validate.py C1 at pass 9's close (before done.sh)

stage C1:
  scheme_v2: 197 themes (15 rare), frozen 197, retired 0, new 0
  assignments_final 7844 lines = assignment_items_expected
  revised lines 2117 of 7844 (moved placements 2094)
  empties 151 of 7844
  a pass closed; the full set (scheme v2, assignments, the fourth-order themes, the form pass) is owed at the last pass, with the handback


0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 0 warnings

Pass 10 (C1a-10)

Opening

The fourth-order themes (section 8)

I read the third-order tier whole, by family, with each theme's placements, rooms and the themes most often placed beside it (c1_t4_table.py, written to out/_analysis/c1_t4_table-C1a-10.txt). I then wrote a story for each bundle before cutting it. The specs are in out/_analysis/c1_t4_specs.json. c1_t4_cut.py cut each one in turn. It appended the line to fourth/fourth.jsonl and the event to tier_history.jsonl, logged the move through mem.py log --kind move, and took the snap: C1-move-relating-2 to C1-move-merging-29. fourth/fourth.md was written from the ledger by c1_fourth_md.py.

The next table lists the fourth-order themes with their declaration and the number of third-order themes each holds. fourth/fourth.md holds the prose, the sources and the members.

id name declared third-order themes
T4-001 Keying adapted 10
T4-002 Boundary work adapted 8
T4-003 Sensemaking borrowed 3
T4-004 Frame bridging adapted 4
T4-005 Mobilization adapted 5
T4-006 Collective representation adapted 10
T4-007 Stigmergy borrowed 3
T4-008 Standardization of output borrowed 5
T4-009 Workarounds adapted 8
T4-010 Backstage decision-making adapted 7
T4-011 Decided order borrowed 8
T4-012 Collective efficacy borrowed 5
T4-013 Repair work adapted 6
T4-014 Territoriality borrowed 7
T4-015 Live and let live borrowed 11
T4-016 Negotiated order borrowed 11
T4-017 Reciprocity borrowed 7
T4-018 Meta-organization borrowed 9
T4-019 Attribution adapted 4
T4-020 Repertoire of contention adapted 7
T4-021 Rivalry borrowed 5
T4-022 Flagging the nation adapted 12
T4-023 Neo-tribes borrowed 6
T4-024 Symbolic boundaries adapted 5
T4-025 Visibility returns coined 9
T4-026 Completion ritual adapted 8
T4-027 Collective memory borrowed 6
T4-028 Transition adapted 6

Partitions tried and set aside.

  1. The 21 families as fourth-order themes. They are topic headings in the material's words, and several hold distinct mechanisms: G14 mixes territorial claims, help and host relations; G21 mixes ritual, memory and transition.
  2. Puranam, Alexy and Reitzig's four universal problems as the cut. About 40 themes speak to them. Inter-room order, identity and play would be left unpicked.
  3. One construct for all order between rooms. Tacit restraint, explicit agreement and the exchange of help are different mechanisms, and the pair test called T3-010's pairs with T3-149 and T3-151 joints.
  4. Stigmergy absorbing the emblem themes. Choosing what a mark says is a decision about meaning; stigmergy is coordination through the trace.

Third-order themes no fourth-order theme picks up. They are listed, not gathered.

Placements the partition forced

A partition puts each third-order theme in one fourth-order theme. These themes could sit in two, and the next list says where each went. They are stage C2's first candidates for recutting.

The stopping criterion at pass 10

Pass 10 amended no gate and moved no placement. The criterion holds, as at passes 7 to 9.

J's guard, counted (out/_analysis/c1_guard_C1a-10.json)

What I doubt (pass 10)

Slips (pass 10)

Next pass

  1. scheme_v2.md: the whole scheme with every field, the gate block with the reading rules, every change declared with what changed, why and which placements it moved, and the watch items (osugame t04; FP-04's caution on the named words).
  2. handback-C1.md: c1_unapplied.jsonl, c1_pair_carried_decisions.json, the four kinds the scheme lacks, FP-04's caution, the recalled sources for stage C3 and the forced placements above.
  3. The interview brief, and done.sh C1 --cut interview.

validate.py C1 at pass 10's close (before done.sh)

stage C1:
  scheme_v2: 197 themes (15 rare), frozen 197, retired 0, new 0
  assignments_final 7844 lines = assignment_items_expected
  revised lines 2117 of 7844 (moved placements 2094)
  empties 151 of 7844
  a pass closed; the full set (scheme v2, assignments, the fourth-order themes, the form pass) is owed at the last pass, with the handback


0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 0 warnings

The last-pass checks on the fourth-order themes and the form pass, run now with c1_check_fourth_now.py:

  scheme_v2: 197 themes (15 rare), frozen 197, retired 0, new 0
  fourth-order themes 28 over 195 third-order themes, 2 unpicked
  form pass: 8 FP ids
errors 0
warnings 0

Pass 11 (C1a-11), the last pass

Opening

scheme_v2.md (section 9)

out/_analysis/c1_scheme_v2_md.py wrote it from scheme_v2.jsonl and the C1 ledgers. It is the whole scheme, not a diff.

The recurring pairs (section 1), and the modifier candidates

c1_recurring_pairs.py (output in out/_analysis/c1_recurring_pairs-C1a-11.txt) gives what each row of stage B3's pair table became. The table has 20 rows and 19 distinct pairs, since T3-005 | T3-021 appears both ways.

Stage B4's figure, and which figure the write-up should use (section 2)

Stage B4 measured transmission after revision. Fresh readers held only the frozen scheme, and each reading was scored by its mean Jaccard against the settled set, over readings with a resolved settled line, in two arms never pooled. Arm 1 (DeepSeek) scored 0.657 on the uniform stratum and 0.544 on the adjudicated one; arm 2 (OpenAI) scored 0.622 and 0.554. Each figure bounds whether the written instrument decides, not whether it is right, and none is reliability.

The revision changed the scheme and the line enough that this figure no longer describes them. It was measured with scheme_final.jsonl against assign_final.jsonl. C1 amended 35 sentences in 18 themes, which no blind reader has seen, and replaced the line in 2,117 of 7,844 lines. 1,990 of those came by the class 2 ruling, which removed the B1 themes that stage B4 found depressing the uniform figure.

The write-up should report stage B4's figure as the transmission of the frozen scheme against stage B's line, measured at stage B4, and should say that scheme v2 and assignments_final.jsonl have no transmission figure until fresh readers test the revised scheme, which J ruled for after C1. I did not recompute stage B4's figure against the new line. The revision rate is my agreement with the line, not transmission.

handback-C1.md

It holds:

J's guard, over the whole stage

The guard (c1_guard_moves.py) counts each pass's moves to a theme neither reader nor my B1 placed. The next table gives the moves and that count by pass.

pass moves adding a theme to a theme neither reader nor my B1 placed
1 2,000 10 0
2 38 35 33
3 32 16 11
4 34 17 8
5 31 16 6
6 24 8 4
7 0 0 0
8 16 16 0
9 0 0 0
10 0 0 0
11 0 0 0

The 62 such moves came from rechecks under amended gates, which QC1-001 places over the whole scheme. At pass 2, 32 of the 33 went onto T3-084. Under gate:6 and the visitor rule, another room's request for help arriving in this room's threads is a request, not this room's help, and no reader had placed T3-084 there. Pass 2's listing is in out/_analysis/c1_guard_C1a-02-listing.txt.

The stopping criterion at pass 11

Pass 11 amended no gate and moved no placement. The criterion holds, as at passes 7 to 10. Recutting stopped at pass 6.

What I doubt (pass 11)

Slips (pass 11)

validate.py C1 at the last pass (the full set, with the handback; before done.sh C1 --cut interview)

stage C1:
  scheme_v2: 197 themes (15 rare), frozen 197, retired 0, new 0
  assignments_final 7844 lines = assignment_items_expected
  revised lines 2117 of 7844 (moved placements 2094)
  empties 151 of 7844
  fourth-order themes 28 over 195 third-order themes, 2 unpicked
  form pass: 8 FP ids


0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 0 warnings

J's guard at pass 11 (out/_analysis/c1_guard_C1a-11.json): 0 moves.