r/place A fruit fly for organization science

out/expectations-E1.md

Saved at E1.E1d: reconstruction check. 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: 389da7bc241d, 2026-10-28T00:29:14+01:00. Saved-state date: 2026-10-27T23:28:05Z. Committed checkpoint close receipt Commit date and saved-state date are distinct.

Original GitHub file. Original SHA-256: f7851595adc8a0b41b546aee99d641c312de4c0c1af1678f342736fcdb2a24c9. Reading-copy SHA-256: f7851595adc8a0b41b546aee99d641c312de4c0c1af1678f342736fcdb2a24c9.

Expectations against the ledger and the verdicts (stage E1)

Written at E1b-07, 27 October 2026, from audit-E1/expectations.py and its output, expectations.json. sealed/EXPECTATIONS.jsonl holds one line per analysed room (705). Each line names the elements and arrows the room was expected to instantiate and those expected to be absent, with the source of each expectation (the implications of C5, the propositions and the placements).

A room's evidence on an element is its accepted return lines on that element, from the first return and the re-check, with the last ruling of each line:

The score is in-sample throughout: the expectations were written from the same rooms whose return scores them, and the uncited concept ids are computed by script, not held out.

The replication score

outcome expectations
met 8,034
failed: absent where it was expected 575
failed: taken up where absence was expected 87
untested: no line 944

The replication score is 0.924 (8,034 met of 8,696 met or failed).

By verdict, the first return's (both readers agreeing, else split):

verdict score met failed
composes 0.933 1,443 104
composes with residue 0.917 4,703 425
split 0.933 1,846 133
cannot tell 1.0 40 0
does not compose 1.0 2 0

By branch, the score runs from 0.887 (F16) to 0.964 (F04). The 229 rooms in no branch score 0.919. Every branch's score is in expectations.json.

The two failures, by element.

Stage D5's survival figures per branch, from the record and never from the canvas, are in survival-D5.md and branches-D5.jsonl (work_remained re-read for the 476 rooms in a branch, agreeing with the field in 248). They stand beside these scores. D5's reading of work_remained is an open defect (line 100), so no score here is set against survival.

The field's entries

The field model handed over three entries at C4a (sealed/FIELD.jsonl). Over the 705 rooms:

entry taken up contradicted absent no line D3's ruling
P21 (members say an agreement cannot bind every placer) 166 0 490 49 standing (D3a-26, rule 11): shown in the rooms' own lines
P22 (rooms contest which version of the work is kept) 223 0 463 19 standing (D3a-06, rule 11): shown in the rooms' own lines
A21 (an agreement, or the making of terms, brings the disclaimer) 112 0 567 26 standing with a bound (D3a-27, rule 11): counted in the rooms' own lines
the model's other 48 standing elements and arrows, mean per element 382.6 0.1 235.3 87.0

The tentative mark drew answers, but fewer than the model's other elements. All three were taken up in 112 to 223 rooms, and none was contradicted. Each is absent in more rooms than the mean element, so the return speaks of them less often.

The onset contrast

contrast.md (A1, recomputed at A1b-20) sets two sides: 131 early rooms and 61 late, with a held-size comparison of 41 early and 12 late. Stage C2 recorded each arrow's early_late counts.

Rule 6, the denominators before any gap:

A1's expectations: