Notes, stage D4

D4a-01: the statistic, the sensitivity check, the first pass (one element), and the held proposals

Leg D4a-01, 24 October 2026 (UTC). The tree itself, its rules and its accounting are in tree-D4.md; the branches are in branches.jsonl, forms/ and crosslinks.jsonl. This file records what was done and why. J stops the run after this leg (QD4-001), so this pass is the last one the run makes.

J's message after the D3c interview, and what was done with each part

1. D3 stays frozen at 46384686, with no further re-check. Done. No labeler or reader was used.
2. The amendments to P05 and A11. They were made as recorded amendments under rule 11 (move 198 on P05, move 199 on A11; history lines 173 to 180), each marked not re-checked with the frozen version beside it. F-024 and F-017 were re-examined in the same act. P05 took the bound, not the widened revision. The reason: the bound keeps the words the 705 rooms were re-checked against and narrows where they hold, while the widened revision adds a route and a holder that no room was served and no re-check can test. A11 was withdrawn: it never beat its null; template first (98 rooms) is nearly as common as the transition (111) of the 228 rooms with both ends; the failure clause stands alone in 117 rooms (talk only 31, layout only 86); and 261 accepted restrict lines say that a template does not settle the design for good.
3. Mark each amendment as not re-checked, beside the frozen version. Done in the records. Since the revert, they appear as held proposals in tree-D4.md, here and in the head.
4. If the close-check refuses the amendments, ask. It did ('model/ and its tiers moved after D3 froze them'; _analysis/d4a01_validate_D4_01.txt). I asked (QD4-001) and did not work around it. J chose option (b) (24 October, 15:05 Berlin). Move 203 reverted both amendments: P05 and A11 are restored byte for byte from the snap of move 197 (_analysis/d4_revert.py, history lines 181 and 182). The model hash is 46384686 again. Both amendments are held proposals, stated in full with their rooms, lines and moves in tree-D4.md ("The held proposals"). F-024's and F-017's D4a-01 lines stay as written. Each finding has one later line that restores its earlier statement and records the held proposal (findings, now 42 lines).
5. Do not rely on the kind of add-condition, add-step and restrict lines; run the distance once with kind collapsed for them. Done (_analysis/d4a01_kind_collapsed.py). The combined distance hardly moves: Pearson 0.9965, mean absolute difference 0.0024, delta 0.4223 against 0.4227. The average-linkage trees agree with ARI 1.00 at 2 and 3 clusters, 0.886 at 5, 0.922 at 8 and 0.779 at 12. No branch takes its members from a per-kind view for those ops, and each branch's kind field is reported, not relied on. Local validation is reported as not established: prior.md section 3's measure was not computed.

Section 1, read before any cut

The delta score is 0.4227 (Monte Carlo SE 0.0020). The average-linkage dendrogram is a chain with no partition: at 12 clusters one group holds 663 rooms. Every room holds a key, and none returned none. Shared corrections reach 5 rooms only at the bare target. The detail is in tree-D4.md.

The pass

• Candidates (_analysis/d4a01_candidates.py, .txt). 274 change keys at level 3 are held by 5 rooms or more. The largest are restrict lines on arrows, which cannot key a branch. Keys that co-occur beyond chance mostly share one third-order node.
• The cut rules were logged and written into tree-D4.md before the first cut. The minimum group size is 5.
• Cut 1, F01 (move 200, merging): the play administered, at the fourth order, key add-step:K01:T4-001, 103 rooms. Its 164 lines were read whole (_analysis/d4a01_lines_K01_addstep.txt).
• Cuts 2 to 6, F01's subforms (moves 201, 202, 204, 205 and 206, splitting), at the third order: F02, the takeover run as a temporary regime (33 rooms); F03, the joke tested (18); F04, the licence policed (13); F05, the styling ended (12); F06, the joke kept (8). Two level-3 groups were set aside, since their lines state several different steps.
• Cross-links (move 207, relating): 18 lines over 6 pairs of subforms.
• The accounting. 103 rooms in a branch, 0 unadapted, 602 adapted but in no branch, 0 unreturned: 705, the analysed set. tree-D4.md names each of the 602 rooms, with the number of shared change keys a later pass would read.

What this pass shows, and what it does not

• The ledger's form signals are weak. The D3 revisions absorbed the shared corrections, and the dendrogram shows no partition. The groups that remain are elaborations of single elements.
• The one element cut, K01, gives a branch about the sub's own April Fools play, not about canvas work. It says that members organized the play itself: they tested it, policed it, ended it and kept parts of it.
• The pass reached one element. 31 element change keys at level 4, held by 20 rooms or more, were not read (tree-D4.md, "Where the pass stopped"). So the tree is a first pass, not a taxonomy of the rooms' forms.
• Not built. The comparison (section 5) and the projections (section 6). They come after the final branch cut, and this is not the final cut of the stage's design. The close-check warns about them at a leg that made a cut. No verdict, canvas field or branch entered any computation of this leg.

For the operator

• validate.py --open D4 reads the startup packet's pattern name rooms-x-adaptations.<level>.<kind>.tsv literally and reports it missing; the sixteen matrices are present.
• stage_D4.py resolves a branch key's target against the elements only, so no branch can be keyed on an arrow, though the largest change keys in this ledger are on arrows.
• stage_D4.py refuses any model move after the D3 freeze, while J's instruction asked for amendments at D4. The two did not meet, and QD4-001 settled it for this run.

Slips

• A tool interruption. The session ended during the command that logged and snapped move 202 and dry-ran F04. The log line and the snap were written. F04's dry-run file was empty, so the dry run was repeated before F04 was written.
• The forms' list of unchanged elements counts arrows. d4_cut.py reads instantiate keys at the bare target, and those include arrows, so F06's list names A12 among "elements". The forms are written once and are not regenerated. Read that line as elements and arrows.
• The amendments were made, then reverted. The two model moves of this leg (198, 199) were undone by move 203 at J's ruling. Each stays on record.

Close-check, D4a-01

validate.py D4 reports 0 errors and 1 warning (_analysis/d4a01_validate_D4_03.txt). The warning: the comparison and the projections are not built; at a leg that made a cut they are built after the last cut. Section 4: 103 in a branch, 0 unadapted, 602 adapted in no branch, 0 unreturned; 705, the analysed set. The first run (d4a01_validate_D4_01.txt) gave the model:moved error, now gone with the revert. The second (d4a01_validate_D4_02.txt) gave the missing notes and the unnamed rooms, now written.

• Written at D4a-01: branches.jsonl (6 branches), forms/ (6 files), crosslinks.jsonl (18 lines), tier_history.jsonl (now 573 lines; 12 stage-D4 lines: 6 cuts and 6 cross-linked pairs), tree-D4.md, this file; model history (now 182 lines: 8 amendment lines and 2 revert lines); findings (now 42 lines: 2 re-examination lines and 2 lines after the revert); the moves 198 to 207, each logged and snapped; QD4-001. Helpers in _analysis/: d4a01_key_freq.py, d4a01_kind_collapsed.py, d4a01_candidates.py, d4_key_lines.py, d4a01_a11_classes.py and d4a01_amend_specs.py (read or write their own outputs only); d4_amend.py, d4_revert.py, d4a01_findings.py, d4a01_findings_revert.py, d4_cut.py, d4a01_specs_K01.py, d4_crosslinks.py and d4a01_tree_append.py (write the files named in their docstrings).
• Unchanged: the model, at 46384686… (elements 45, arrows 21, the tiers), the ledgers and their rulings, the verdicts and every view.
• Questions. QD4-001 is answered. None is open.

D4a-02: the second pass, the comparison, the projections

Leg D4a-02, 25 October 2026 (UTC). The harness opened this leg after QD4-001 had said the run would stop at D4a-01, so the run goes on, and this leg does the stage's remaining work.

The comparison, declared before its script runs (stage D4 section 5)

The final branch cut of the stage is cut 29 of this leg (F35, move 236), and every cut is snapped. No branch is recut after the comparison is seen. The comparison is the chunk-share comparison, run as the stage file gives it: python3 tools/chunk_compare.py --out out --store package/store, the versioned engine (chunk-comparison-v1), with its defaults. Its method, as the stage file and the engine state it:

• Features. One row per room. Columns are the fourth-tier themes, and the counts are unique concept ids by their theme links. A theme placed on several fourth-tier themes splits its weight equally among them. Unplaced concepts are counted apart. Empty compositions are excluded by name. Rooms with fewer than five placed themes are flagged as low-information and kept, and the pipeline is run again without them.
• Smoothing. P = (x + a m) / (n + a), with a = 1.0, since prior.md holds no chunk_concentration line. It is a fractional pseudo-count heuristic. The run reports the median own-data weight and the sensitivity to a/10 and 10a.
• Distances and clusters. Ward on Euclidean CLR vectors. Jaccard presence and Hellinger shares with average linkage, as sensitivities, with adjusted Rand indices at each eligible k.
• Null and resampling. Theme-allocation patterns are permuted among themes. There are 200 accepted bootstrap draws and 100 permuted copies under each of two seeds (0 and 1). Eligible k runs from 2 to min(12, floor(n/2)). A k clears only when both stability margins are positive under both seeds. The k carried maximizes the worst margin, with the smaller k on a tie. If none clears, the result is no-supported-partition.
• What it reads. The concept store, the placements, the tiers, the dropped cases and the prior. It reads no adaptation, branch, verdict or outcome, so it is a non-adaptation baseline that shares the inductive coding structure, not theory-free evidence.
• What I read from it. The empties, a and the median weight; the Rand indices among the three distances; the third tier's sparsity; the tier verdict with its index; the volume verdict with its percentile; the k carried, with and without the low-information rows. Best-match Jaccard against the branches is descriptive. ARI against the branches is undefined, since the branches overlap (759 cross-link lines) and no exclusive cut is named.

The comparison did not run (QD4-002)

python3 -I -B tools/chunk_compare.py --out out --store package/store stopped on its first room: "ValueError: Placement lacks fourth-tier parent: ('2007scape', 't02')" (_analysis/d4a02_chunk_compare_run.txt). The cause is the run's residue. 335 second-order themes in 213 rooms are placed on the two third-order themes that no fourth-order theme gathers: T3-017 (carrying on ordinary sub talk, 334) and T3-133 (recovering a hacked sub, 1). data_structure-C5.md keeps both as residue, and the tiers are closed after C5 (rule 11). The stage file counts unplaced concepts apart; the engine raises on these placements instead. The run wrote no file. I did not edit the engine or the tiers, and I asked J (QD4-002). The projections follow the comparison and are not built.

The pass (cut rules R0 to R7, with the amendment R1a to R1c, logged before it was used)

• Read. The 31 element change keys at level 4 left at D4a-01, each held by 20 rooms or more. Each key's lines were read whole, by level-3 node, in _analysis/d4a02_keys/ (d4_key_lines_bynode.py, run by d4a02_dump_keys.py).
• Cut. 29 cuts, moves 208 to 236: 24 branches and 5 subforms (F12 to F14 under F11; F18 and F19 under F17), from the specs _analysis/d4a02_cut_F07.json to F35.json (d4a02_specs.py). They were written by d4_cut_batch.py, which logs each move only after d4_cut.py reports the write, and then snaps it. The list, with names and what each changes, is in tree-D4.md.
• Set aside. 8 keys, each with its reason in tree-D4.md.
• Cross-links. Move 237: 741 new lines, 759 in all, over 348 pairs of branches that do not nest.
• The accounting. 476 rooms in a branch, 0 unadapted, 229 adapted but in no branch, 0 unreturned; 705, the analysed set. tree-D4.md names each of the 229 rooms with its count of smaller keys.

What the pass shows

• The branches are facets, not exclusive forms. 200 of the 476 rooms are in one branch, and the rest are in two to six or more (subforms counted). A room makes several element-level changes at once, and the keys do not group rooms into a few types. This fits the chained dendrogram and the delta score of section 1.
• Families. One change appears at several nodes, so it appears as several branches. The largest family is P05's added clause holding only in part (F07, F26, F27), beside F-024's held branch. Also: keeping the shared instruction current (F15, F33 and F08), help conditional (F22, F28), carrying on (F11 to F14, F23, F25), and the chat (F16, F29, F30).
• Two links the model lacks. The move leads back to building (F09, 54 rooms), and the marking leads back to keeping (F32, 21 rooms). Neither is an arrow; the next stage reads them for order.
• Many restrict branches are limits of the record. They show what the record does not hold: machine hands not shown placing (F24), the chat seen only from outside (F30), hosting only as one-off permission (F31), carrying on only in talk (F25). They are kept because the element's statement holds only in part there, and they are reported as limits, not as forms of doing.
• Local validation remains not established.

For the operator

• The comparison engine and the residue. tools/chunk_compare.py raises on a placement whose third-order theme no fourth-order theme gathers, but the stage file counts unplaced concepts apart, and this run keeps two residue themes by design (QD4-002).
• The member-name check is a substring check. stage_D4.py refuses a branch name that contains any member's name as a substring, so the room 'de' forbids words such as 'decisions' and 'outside'. Two spec names were changed before writing (F16, F30).

Slips

None in the writes of this leg. Two spec files (F16, F30) were edited after their generator ran, to change a name the check refused; the edits are the names only.

Close-check, D4a-02

validate.py D4 reports 0 errors and 1 warning (_analysis/d4a02_validate_D4_02.txt). The warning is that the comparison and the projections are not built. At a leg that made a cut this is a warning; the stage does not close without them (QD4-002). Section 4: 476 in a branch, 0 unadapted, 229 adapted in no branch, 0 unreturned; 705.

• Written at D4a-02: 29 branches (branches.jsonl, now 35); 29 forms (forms/, now 35); 741 cross-link lines (now 759); 371 stage-D4 tier_history lines (29 cuts and 342 cross-linked pairs; the file now 944 lines); the moves 208 to 237, each logged and snapped; this section and the tree-D4.md sections; QD4-002. Helpers in _analysis/: d4_key_lines_bynode.py and d4a02_dump_keys.py (read the ledger and write the key files), d4a02_specs.py (writes the specs), d4_cut_batch.py (runs d4_cut.py, mem.py log and snap.py), d4a02_tree_append.py (appends to tree-D4.md).
• Unchanged: the model, at 46384686… (history 182 lines, findings 42), the ledgers and their rulings, the verdicts and every view.
• Questions. QD4-002 is open.

D4a-03: the comparison, the projections, the handback

Leg D4a-03, 25 October 2026 (UTC).

A departure: the comparison engine is chunk-comparison-v1.1 (QD4-002), declared before it runs

J answered QD4-002 with option (a) (25 October, 19:48 and 19:54 Berlin). The harness owner patched tools/chunk_compare.py and its trusted copy identically to chunk-comparison-v1.1 (sha256 c8d2eb8c7c309c02de9bb04e10efeaa91071ee2a469823f569a9ab64a42c059f). A second-order theme placed only on third-order residue that no fourth-order theme gathers (T3-017, T3-133) is now counted with the unplaced concepts and reported apart, in the fields residue_themes and residue_concepts. A theme also placed on a gathered node keeps that node. The stage file names chunk-comparison-v1, so this is a departure, declared in departures.jsonl (line 10) before the run. The method declared at D4a-02 stands otherwise: the stage file's command and defaults (a = 1.0; seeds 0 and 1; 200 bootstrap draws and 100 permuted copies per seed; k from 2 to 12). The cuts are final (F35, move 236), and no branch is recut after the comparison is seen. Beside the comparison I report each room's residue share, as J asked: the share of its placed and residue concepts that sit on residue.

The comparison read (detail in tree-D4.md)

• The two verdicts by number. The tier verdict: at the carried k 4, dimension ARI 0.110 and third-tier ARI 0.170. The volume verdict: the cluster labels explain 0.255 of the variance in log concepts, at the 100th percentile of the permutation null (null maximum 0.026).
• The k carried. 4 over all 705 rooms (worst margin +0.052, silhouette 0.024). 2 over the 626 rooms without the 79 low-information rows (worst margin +0.099, silhouette 0.097). Every k from 3 to 12 clears over all rooms, but no silhouette exceeds 0.051. So the null is beaten while the clusters barely separate.
• The sensitivities. Against the Ward/CLR labels at k 4, the Jaccard and Hellinger partitions give ARI -0.007 and -0.008, and a/10 and 10a give 0.145 and 0.164. The partition does not survive a change of distance or of smoothing. The median own-data weight is 0.990, so the smoothing touches the profiles little.
• The empties. None. a = 1.0. The third tier is sparse: 13.52 nonzero of 195 columns per room.
• The clusters. VA 176, IT 292, TX 155, CH 82. They differ mostly by their Keying share (T4-001) and by size: IT holds 137 of the 176 rooms of the smallest quartile. Best-match Jaccard with a branch is 0.096 to 0.187. The coding-structure clusters and the adaptation branches do not match.
• The residue. 199 rooms hold residue concepts. The share per room has a median of 0, and 39 rooms are at 0.10 or more and 7 at 0.30 or more. In these rooms the composition leaves out the room's own ordinary business.

The projections read

The single does-not-compose room (picturegame) lies in F21 and F25. The canvas percentiles follow room size: 11 of 35 branches have a median room size at or above the 95th percentile, and the large-room clusters have the large areas. No difference in what rooms kept on the canvas is read as independent of size. No cut rests on the projections; every cut was snapped before them.

What D4 shows, for D5

• The adaptation tree is a set of facets. The 35 branches overlap (759 cross-links). The comparison's partition, built without the ledger, is weak, unstable across distances, and largely a size partition. Neither gives exclusive forms.
• What the branches say. Rooms add work the model does not state: the play administered (F01), deals carried out (F10), machine targets and plans kept current (F08, F15, F33), chats kept open (F16), help made conditional (F22, F28), and carrying on renewed elsewhere (F11). They limit P05's added clause where informed members reject a planned change (F07, F26, F27). And they show two links the model lacks (F09, F32).
• Local validation remains not established. prior.md section 3's measure was not computed.

Slips

• Three Edits to the handback's script (_analysis/d4a03_handback.py) ran in one turn, and later three Edits to the head ran in one turn, against the rule. Each landed on a separate string.
• One figure in the handback's script was typed (102 rooms for F07, F26 and F27). It was replaced by the computed figure (108) before the handback was written.

Close-check, D4a-03

validate.py D4 reports 0 errors and 0 warnings (_analysis/d4a03_validate_D4_01.txt), including the trusted replay of the comparison engine. Section 4: 476 in a branch, 0 unadapted, 229 adapted in no branch, 0 unreturned; 705.

• Written at D4a-03: departures.jsonl line 10; chunk-share-D4.result.json, .jsonl, .md and .py (by the engine); projections-D4.jsonl (by tools/projections.py); the D4a-03 sections of tree-D4.md and of this file; handback-D4.md; interview/D4a-03.md; the head. Helpers in _analysis/: d4a03_departure.py (writes the departure), d4a03_read_comparison.py and d4a03_volume.py (read only), d4a03_tree_append.py (appends to tree-D4.md) and d4a03_handback.py (writes the handback).
• Unchanged: the branches (35), cross-links (759), tier history (944), the model at 46384686… (history 182, findings 42), the ledgers, the verdicts and every view.
• Questions. QD4-002 is answered. None is open. The stage closes at its interview cut.

D4a-04: can the 25 top-level branches be joined into fewer parents?

Leg D4a-04, 25 October 2026 (UTC), an extra leg on J's instruction (25 October, 21:39 Berlin, through the handler). J finds 35 branches a lot and asked whether the 25 top-level branches can be joined into a smaller set of parents, on grounds the stage and the contract allow, decided from the record. If not, the reasons go here, nothing changes, and D5 runs one leg per branch. J will not be asked again.

The test, written before any computation

A parent is a branch, so it must meet what the stage asks of a branch:

1. Keys. Every member holds every key of the parent at its level (section 2). Members' material can stand beside the keys as a declared ground, never alone.
2. Nesting. A subform nests by adding keys. stage_D4.py accepts a child only if each parent key has the same op and the same target as a child key, and the child's node lifts to the parent's node. So one parent can hold only branches of one element and one op.
3. The level. A group that meets only at the dimension or the bare target is a grouping, not a branch, since the aggregation does the work (section 2; cut rule R4).
4. The source. No list of rooms that belong together may come from anywhere but the ledger (section 2's Forbidden). Rooms that happen to share branches therefore ground no parent.
5. The shared change. A parent, like any branch, needs lines that state one shared change (cut rule R2). Rooms that the parent brings in, beyond its children, must have lines read for that change.

What the record shows (_analysis/d4a04_joins.py, d4a04_joins.txt)

• The handler's facts, checked. 25 top-level branches on 14 elements: yes. By the elements' own dimension field they fall in six dimensions, D02 9, D07 5, D03 4, D04 4, D06 2 and D01 1, as the handler says. But the ladder joins a branch by the node its key lifts to, not by the element's field, and by that lift the count is D02 9, D04 6, D07 6, D06 2, D01 1 and D03 1. F07 lifts to D02, F26 to D04 and F32 to D07, although P05's own field is D03. The Jaccard distance between member sets has median 0.977 and minimum 0.870 (F10 and F26): yes. Average linkage first merges at 0.870 (F10 with F26), not above 0.89. At 0.95 it gives 13 groups, six of which join branches of different elements: yes.
• Joins under rule 2, one element and one op. Only three sets of top-level branches share both.
  • P04 add-step (F15, F33). Their nodes, T4-008 and T4-006, meet first at the dimension: add-step:P04:D02, 85 rooms, 20 of them in neither child.
  • P16 add-condition (F22, F28). T4-017 and T4-016 meet at the dimension: add-condition:P16:D04, 65 rooms, 13 in neither child.
  • P05 restrict (F07, F26, F27). T4-006, T4-016 and T4-013 lie in three dimensions, so they meet only at the bare target: restrict:P05:*, 214 rooms, 106 in none of them. Each parent would sit at the dimension or the bare target, a grouping under rule 3. Each would also take in rooms (20, 13 and 106) whose lines were never read for the shared change, so rule 5 fails too. Reading them would not cure rule 3.
• Families across elements or ops. These are the families named at D4a-02: P05's clause and the marking (F07, F26, F27, F32); the shared instruction kept current (F08, F15, F33); carrying on (F11, F23, F25); the chat (F16, F29, F30); machine hands (F08, F24); the frame (F01, F21); help (F22, F28). None has a key common to its branches, and the rooms in all of a family's branches number 0 to 5. No parent can be grounded on keys under rule 1, and the check refuses the nesting under rule 2. Co-membership alone cannot ground one under rule 4.
• The membership distances. These say the same thing from the other side: the branches hold almost disjoint sets of rooms, and the groups that average linkage forms at 0.95 join different elements with no shared change.

Decision

No join is defensible on grounds the stage and the contract allow. Nothing changes: 35 branches, 25 top-level and 10 subforms, 759 cross-links. D5 runs as the stage says, one leg per branch. The subforms already nest inside their parents (F02 to F06 in F01, F12 to F14 in F11, F18 and F19 in F17), so a parent's leg can hold its subforms' accounts. The families named at D4a-02 are a reading aid for D5's accounts: they state one change across elements or nodes, and each D5 account can cite its family. They are not parents, since nothing in the ledger joins them.

What would have made a join defensible. Either a key held by every member of the branches to be joined, at the third or fourth order (none exists), or a stage rule that accepts parents at the dimension or the bare target (the stage forbids them). Neither holds, so 35 is the number the keys support.

Close-check, D4a-04

validate.py D4 reports 0 errors and 0 warnings (_analysis/d4a04_validate_D4_01.txt), including the trusted replay of the comparison engine. Section 4: 476 in a branch, 0 unadapted, 229 adapted in no branch, 0 unreturned; 705.

• Written at D4a-04: this section; the head; one read-only helper, _analysis/d4a04_joins.py, with its output.
• Slip: two Edits to the head ran in one turn, against the rule; each landed on a separate string.
• Unchanged: the branches (35), cross-links (759), tier history (944), forms, the comparison and the projections, the handback, the model at 46384686…, the ledgers and every view.
• Questions. None is open.

D4a-05: room forms, the top cut (an addition after D5)

Leg D4a-05, 26 October 2026, on J's instruction through the handler, after D5 closed. J, 17:27 Berlin: "I need to tell it to make something with 4 to 8 big forms and then continue clustering down to 700." J, 18:35 Berlin: "I mean as a leg that happened after not instead." J, 18:36 Berlin: the cut is to be gone over with J before the split down to the rooms. The dated amendment is in departures.jsonl (lines 11 and 12). The report is room-forms-D4a05.md; the forms and their members are in room-forms-D4a05.jsonl, and the room table in room-forms-D4a05.tsv.

• What was compared. The rooms' selected changes (accepted restrict, add-step, add-condition, link and contradict lines, on elements and arrows; 6,637 lines in 684 rooms; 21 rooms with none, the core). Shares at the third-order, fourth-order and dimension levels, the levels counting equally; third-order themes changed by one room dropped; Hellinger distance; Ward's method. The rule was logged before the run.
• The cut. Eight forms, A 152, B 119, C 103, D 88, E 83, F 69, G 42, H 28, and the core (21). The logged rule took k = 8, the most stable count (no count from 4 to 8 reached a stability of 0.5). The size ratio is 5.43, because of H; k = 6 would give 2.2.
• Kinds or continuum. A continuum: silhouette 0.030, clusterwise Jaccard 0.25 to 0.36, 296 of 684 rooms fit two forms equally.
• Against the codes. The forms differ there too, weakly (6.7 per cent of the variation in code shares), and they differ in room size.
• The 35 branches spread across the forms; none nests in one.
• Moves. 238 to 245 named the forms (merging). 246 to 277 declared 32 sub-forms before J's message of 18:36 was read; move 278 (dropping) withdrew them as declarations, and they are held as working material in _analysis/d4a05_tree3.json. Each move was logged and snapped.
• Unchanged, checked against the D5b close snap (_analysis/d4a05_unchanged.py, 78 files): branches.jsonl, crosslinks.jsonl, tree-D4.md, the forms, and every D5 file. The model is 46384686….
• Slips. A command with a shell assignment beginning 'for_' that did nothing; a cut after a helper, refused by the guard; the sub-form moves made before J's message was read. All logged.
• Questions. None open. For the talk with J: eight forms or six; whether the three levels should count equally; whether a room should carry weights in several forms; how D6 should relate branches that cut across the forms.

D4a-06: room forms, the top cut redone (an addition after D5)

Leg D4a-06, 26 October 2026. J read my interview answers to his four questions and said (19:50 Berlin, through the handler): "Go ahead this sounds good." The interview ran in a fork and is not in this folder; the fixes were taken from the handler's list. The amendment is dated in departures.jsonl (line 13). The report is room-forms-D4a06.md, with room-forms-D4a06.jsonl and .tsv.

• The fixes. A floor of 5 selected changes before a room helps define the forms (558 rooms define them; 126 thin rooms are placed afterwards; the core of 21 stays). J's placement rule taken literally: each room to the form whose signature holds most of its selected changes, ties listed and broken by the nearest centre. The count chosen by the merge-height gap and by stability on matched subsamples against a shuffled null. The rule was logged before the run.
• The count. The measures disagree: the gap carries 5, stability 8. At 5 the largest group (164 rooms) has no signature; it is three of the eight forms merged. By the logged rule the stability cut is carried and the gap cut given in full.
• The cut. Eight forms, by Ward 151 to 40 rooms (ratio 3.78), placed 135 to 50 (ratio 2.70). 239 rooms move against their whole mix; 181 placements are ties. The count rule draws rooms to forms whose signature themes are common (G grows from 43 to 124).
• Read as rooms. A, C, D and E are one kind each; F mostly; B and H are mixtures (H with a raiding core); G is one kind as cut and a mixture as placed. The misfits are rich rooms whose changes spread over several forms.
• Named sets. Raiding rooms gather in H where raiding is a large part of their changes (19 of 27). Takeover rooms spread over all eight forms; no signature holds the frame. r/startrek is the core's one rich room, fit by the model without change.
• Still a continuum; against the codes the forms differ weakly (7.9 per cent of the variation).
• Moves 279 to 286 named the forms, each logged and snapped.
• Unchanged, checked against the D4a-05 close snap (_analysis/d4a06_unchanged.py, 81 files): branches.jsonl, crosslinks.jsonl, tree-D4.md, the forms, room-forms-D4a05.* and every D5 file.
• Questions. None open. For the talk with J: five forms or eight; weighting the count by how common a theme is, or one theme to one form; weights in several forms for rich rooms; r/startrek apart from the thin core.

D4a-07: room forms with the arrow at every level (an addition after the accounts)

Leg D4a-07, 26 October 2026. J asked (20:35 to 20:37 Berlin, through the handler): "How come arrows are not used?" "The arrow can work at any level. Just as the T3 are T4 and Ds." "Add the arrow and give your ideas as proposals but not mandated." The amendment is dated in departures.jsonl (line 14). The report is room-forms-D4a07.md, with room-forms-D4a07.jsonl and .tsv.

• The arrow at every level. An arrow is lifted as a link from its source element to its target element at each level, through the elements' anchors; at the third-order level an end takes the room's evidence theme when that theme lies under it, and is otherwise held at its fourth-order node; P15, outside the ladder, is held at its element. An arrow line gives half its weight to its evidence node and half to its link. The mapping was logged before the run.
• The proposals. Placement by the whole mix (J's literal rule reported: it would move 307 rooms). B not dissolved by hand; it is the middle of the continuum. The raiding core holds as a group beyond chance (silhouette 0.098, p 0.001) but sits inside B and H. The count kept, and both measures now carry k = 8. The floor of 5 kept. Restricts reported as a check (the cut without them agrees at 0.149), not weighted apart. Link ops lifted as links, my own proposal (without them 0.208).
• The cut. Eight forms, placed 148, 159, 87, 64, 60, 56, 59 and 51 (ratio 3.12, B the middle the largest). Signatures now include links: the design to the template (A11), keeping to scripts (A06), judging hands too few to the move (A10), the move to building, borders to sparing (A05), keeping to borders (A04).
• A differing account. Yes for C, D, F and H's frame; in part for A, E and G; no for B.
• Still a continuum; against the codes the forms differ weakly (7.4 per cent of the variation). Against D4a-06's forms the adjusted Rand index is 0.191.
• Moves 287 to 294 named the forms, each logged and snapped.
• Unchanged, checked against the D4a-06 close snap (_analysis/d4a07_unchanged.py, 84 files): branches.jsonl, crosslinks.jsonl, tree-D4.md, the forms, room-forms-D4a05.*, room-forms-D4a06.* and every D5 file.
• Questions. None open. For the talk with J: which choice of what counts should be the basis, since the cut moves with each; B split below or read as the middle; the raiding core as a sub-form; the whole mix or the literal rule; a wider range than 4 to 8.

D4a-08: room forms on the changes and the codes (an addition after the accounts; open)

Leg D4a-08, 26 October 2026. J, through the handler: 21:05 Berlin, "How about using the code counts, dimensions for example, as well?"; 21:06, "Yes. Please also tell it not to close but write us so we can iterate."; 21:09, "Tell it to use the code counts as deviations from a mean normalized use. Same as the changes, 0 should be the global model." The amendment is dated in departures.jsonl (line 15). The report is room-forms-D4a08.md, with .jsonl and .tsv. The leg is open: J and the handler answer in the conversation, and done.sh waits.

• The blocks. The D4a-07 change block, unchanged (0 the global model), and a code block of deviations from the mean share at each level (0 the average room); no z-scores; levels and blocks equal by total variance over the defining rooms. A first run with Hellinger code shares, made before the 21:09 message, is kept as superseded working material.
• Two amendments while running, logged before their reruns. The shuffled null was redone (code deviations permuted node by node) because raw-count shuffling mixed room sizes; it still came out more stable than the real data, because a node's skewed values make tight groups in every copy. So the stability test cannot choose the count here, and the merge-height gap carries it (k = 5); the stability rule's k = 8 is given in full.
• The cut. Five forms placed 182, 174, 133, 113 and 82 (ratio 2.22): the middle with a raiding core, keeping, the terms between neighbours, the sub's April Fools play, the design and its marking. The cut follows the codes: between-form shares 0.271 for codes, 0.051 for changes.
• Checks. The held-out half of the codes reproduces the forms' code structure (pseudo-F 39.2 against 1.41); the half cuts agree at 0.191; against D4a-07, 0.072.
• Moves 295 to 299 named the five forms, each logged and snapped.
• Unchanged, checked against the D4a-07 close snap (_analysis/d4a08_unchanged.py, 87 files).
• For J: the weight of the codes against the changes; five forms or eight; the April Fools play as a form or as the frame apart; the count without a working null; the core placed by its codes or kept together.

D4a-08, the cut I stand behind (J, 21:24 Berlin: "We need them to stand behind the cut.")

• The cut: changes two thirds, codes one third, eight forms (room-forms-D4a08b.*; moves 300 to 307). It keeps 82 per cent of the change structure the changes alone show and 77 per cent of the code structure the codes alone show; equal weight keeps under half of the change structure. Eight is a judgement on substance: every form has a change signature, and raiding stands apart.
• Sure: the terms between neighbours, the design and its marking, the spot, keeping. A pole, but the frame: the sub's April Fools play. A pattern of uncertain reach: raiding. Not sure: the chat and the scripts, the plan made and announced.
• Still to change: the frame apart; the chat and the scripts split below; a working null for the count; r/startrek placed by its codes; the split-half check on this cut.

D4a-08c, fewer forms and the core placed (J, 22:00 Berlin)

• The core is placed by its codes (the code part of each centre): r/startrek and r/n64 go to the April Fools play; the other 19 spread, on 1 to 8 coded concepts each.
• The merges: raiding into the chat and scripts (eight to seven); the plan announced into the terms between neighbours (seven to six); the chat, scripts and raiding into the design (six to five); the spot into keeping (five to four).
• Six forms (room-forms-D4a08c.*, moves 308 to 313): the terms between neighbours with the plan announced (166), the work behind the thread, a mixture (141), the design and its marking (125), keeping (119), the April Fools play (98), the spot (56); ratio 2.96. Recommended for the appendix. Four is the clearest by the gap but loses the design's signature (98 to 73 per cent) and the spot's own account; I would use it only as a summary.

J's ruling, the allocation and the tree to the leaves (J, 22:18 Berlin: "6 it is.")

• The cut: the six forms of D4a-08c are the room forms (departures.jsonl line 16). The earlier cuts stay as written, superseded and not withdrawn. No new move: the six forms were named by moves 308 to 313.
• The allocation is written out in room-forms-allocation.md: the nine steps by which a room reaches its form, how to reproduce them, and the earlier allocations from D4a-05 to D4a-08c in order. A correction of record is stated there: room-forms-D4a05.md says an arrow counted through the theme of its source, but its script counted every line at its own lift.
• The tree to the leaves (room-forms-tree.nwk, room-forms-tree-linkage.tsv, room-forms-tree-rooms.tsv; script _analysis/d4a08d_room_tree.py): the same Ward tree, with every room's label at k = 2 to 30 and its address to its leaf. Placed rooms keep their form and descend by the rule that placed them. Their drawn heights are capped in 117 of 147 cases, and 130 of the 147 meet a near-equal split below their form. The splits below the forms are a view, not named and not moves. The first split separates the April Fools play from the other five forms.