One run, n200-2024 + r761-2025, rc 0 in 453 s for 557 345 tokens (~NOK 4, list
price assumed and stated). Both bases finished with stop_reason "" and ZERO parse
failures -- round 3's dominant finding (rounds in 5 of 5) did not repeat, which is
one data point and not a contradiction of P19 F3/F4.
Five of six proposals fell on P7's stage 0b, exactly as the FREE drill predicted:
0 cost lines in either base, so every code the proposer invents is refused. The
sixth is the finding: the falsification arm a4 was VALIDATED on the code 1.10.4 --
an R761 process number -- so P19 F1 is now reproduced on a second base and with a
second identifier form. The named remedy is measured here too, free:
--require-cost-baseline gives rc 1 in 2.1 s with zero model calls.
Cross-base learning was NOT exercised: no --decision/--rationale, so F2 means no
verdict was minted and the store stayed empty. Said plainly rather than implied,
with the offline arm that does prove the seam named.
Also records what one run over two bases bought against two single runs -- one
commission, one ledger, one shared store -- and that it bought no tokens.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
