The tier report is regenerated against a52c104, which carries the harness
that produced it, and now names the schema the product actually ran on: the
copy arrives at v9, the product migrates it on open, every arm ran on v10.
Every recall cell is identical across three runs on three different machine
loads (0.847 / 0.863 / 0.873 / 0.860 / 0.873 / 0.817 / 0.848), which is the
regression proof p2-3 needs: the tier code adds state and rules, not a
ranker, and this corpus holds no conflicts and no archived rows. Latency is
not comparable across those runs (p50 101.6 / 87.5 / 122.5 ms at load 27.4 /
21.4 / 17.2) and the report says so.
The memory subset is now measured whole — all 150 answerable conversation
queries instead of 15 sampled probes — because a 15-probe sample leaves one
to three queries per LongMemEval question type. It gives the two categories
the contract asks for: knowledge-update 1.000 and temporal-reasoning 0.879
as shipped, 0.950 with the dense leg. The newest-first column is the sharper
question beside them: 0.52 / 0.48 / 0.37 as shipped, so a perfect recall can
still lead with a value the speaker has since replaced.
CHECKLIST p2-3 is marked with the measured cells, the two real defects the
tests caught (a consolidation watermark that double-counted under a lagging
clock, and typer calling a variadic command callback by keyword), and the
deviation that decay is not a stored field because an unmeasured decay
formula would be a story.
Both reports were produced by a harness that had just changed, so their
stamps named a commit without that code in it. Re-running them on an idle
machine puts the stamp and the source back in sync.
Recall did not move: all seven leg configurations reproduce to the third
decimal, which is the part of the number anyone should act on. Latency moved
within its usual load band, and the encoder probe came in slower this time,
so the picture index's build cost is now quoted as a band rather than a
single remembered figure.
Every number in CHECKLIST p2-1 and p0-3.7 came out of a scratch script: the
kind of artifact a reader cannot re-run, and the kind that quietly drifts
away from the code it describes. These reports are generated by committed
harnesses and each one stamps the commit that carries the code it measures.
DENSE.md 165,973 atoms / 153,857 vectors: build 1421.0s, search p50 75.6ms
p95 93.0ms, 0.998 agreement with a brute-force scan, one write into
a full index p50 518ms, 1,729 bytes per stored vector.
QUANT.md twelve encodings measured on the same vectors: int8 keeps 0.977 of
the ranking for a quarter of the bytes and no speed, bit is 14x
faster and keeps 0.728, so bit is a coarse filter and nothing more.
TERMS.md the stop-word bound swept, not guessed: 0.05 is the measured peak
(recall@10 0.803 at p50 69.5ms) and also the fastest of the rows
that keep recall.
SCALE.md the product's own search at 165,973 atoms: p50 71.7ms against the
frozen baseline's 20.16s.
LEGS.md what each retrieval leg is worth, per modality, with the page size
the product actually asks for in the table.
The acceptance bar the operator set is recall@10 >= 0.90 at n>=300. It is
not met. The best measured row is 0.858 (dense leg on, page widened to 30,
p50 414ms); the shipped configuration gives 0.848 at p50 72.5ms; the
in-repo counterpart at holder scope gives 0.866. The shortfall is
concentrated in picture golds (video 0.583-0.708, ui_screenshot 0.500-0.583,
image 0.750) while the word-shaped ones already pass (code 0.953, pdf 0.919).
Latency passes by three hundred fold; recall does not, and the gap is four
points of cross-modal retrieval, not index scale.
ZacharyZhang-NY