j163: RESULT - the firing floor is a clean negative, and the offline energy corpus missed the live game by 200x

450 runs/arm x 2 arms (15 opponents x 30 runs x 3 rounds, conc=6, 0 failed,
0 never started, 0 env mis-set), frozen binary d9a39c3b8472, TR_MOVEMENT=tfil.
Round-win 40.30% -> 39.70% (-0.59 pp, CI -3.90..+2.72, sign-flip exact-2^15
p=0.7676, MDE 4.73 pp); wins/run 0.200 -> 0.182 (MDE 0.1420); damage/run
113.65 -> 112.70 (p=0.5298, MDE 4.19). Deviation disclosed: 30 runs/opponent
instead of 42 (throughput 14-22 runs/min vs 22.7-23.2 assumed); full 15-opponent
panel and both arms kept, runs reduced.

Headline is the mechanism failure: firing was suppressed on 0.04% of ticks,
not the 9.6% the offline ruler predicted (~200x smaller); only 4.8% of shots
happen in the low-energy zone and the floor removed 14% of those; rounds ending
at self energy <=0 were 40.6% live vs 61.2% implied by the offline corpus;
median self energy at death 14.1 -> 15.5. The pre-registered 'we cannot measure
the damage cost directly' call was correct.

DO NOT ADOPT. TR_RAM_FLOOR_ENERGY stays 0.0, do not re-test. The null does not
prove the knob inert - the mechanism barely fired.

docs/ram_floor_exhaustion_ab.md

@@ -260,3 +260,107 @@ subsetting, no dropping opponents, no re-running to chase a p-value, no
 reinterpreting the bar after seeing the data. **A clean null is a fully
 acceptable result** — and a null here licenses only "no effect >= MDE is
 detectable at this design", never "the knob is harmless".
+
+---
+
+## MEASURED
+
+*(appended after the battles — everything above was committed first, at
+`6cfb169`)*
+
+### MEASURED — the live A/B, 450 runs/arm, 2700 rounds (j163)
+
+* **Provenance.** Frozen 15-opponent movement panel
+  (`tools/ab/panel_movement.txt`), 15 x 2 x **30 runs** x 3 rounds =
+  **450 runs/arm, 2700 rounds**, `conc=6`, **0 failed, 0 never started**.
+  Frozen binary `d9a39c3b8472…`, `TR_MOVEMENT=tfil` in both arms; the only
+  difference is `TR_RAM_FLOOR_ENERGY` `0` (`A_floor0`, reference) vs `5`
+  (`B_floor5`).
+* **Env verification — 0 mis-set.** Every run's `[env]` boot block was checked
+  against its arm as the session progressed, live at **24 / 193 / 410 / 826 /
+  900** runs completed: no disagreement at any checkpoint. Per-arm
+  `TR_ENV_FILE` in the session's own directory, botdir without a `.env`, loader
+  does not walk up parents. This is contamination control #2 from the
+  pre-registration, satisfied.
+* **DEVIATION FROM THE PRE-REGISTRATION, DISCLOSED.** The design asked for
+  **42 runs/opponent** (1890 battles, MDE ~0.10 wins/run). Measured throughput
+  was **14-22 runs/min**, not the assumed 22.7-23.2, so the wall-clock cost of
+  the pre-registered n was not affordable. As the pre-registration required,
+  the **panel and the arms were NOT shrunk**: the full 15 opponents and both
+  arms were kept and the **runs per opponent were reduced to 30**. The MDE
+  actually reached is reported below and is the honest resolution limit of this
+  run. No opponent was dropped, no arm was re-run to chase a p-value.
+
+**Pooled dashboard (descriptive, NOT the verdict):**
+
+| arm | runs | dmg/run | wins/run | round wins | round win rate |
+|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|
+| `A_floor0` | 450 | 113.65 | 0.200 | — | **40.30%** |
+| `B_floor5` | 450 | 112.70 | 0.182 | — | **39.70%** |
+
+**Verdict layer** (per-opponent paired deltas, arm − reference; the sign-flip
+is the exact 2^15 permutation the pre-registration names as the decision test):
+
+| metric | mean Δ | 95% CI | p(sign-flip) | sign test | Wilcoxon p | **MDE reached** |
+|---|---:|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|
+| **round-win rate** | **-0.59 pp** | [-3.90, +2.72] | **0.7676** | 1.00 | 0.84 | **4.73 pp** |
+| wins/run | -0.0178 | [-0.117, +0.082] | 0.7676 | 1.00 | 0.84 | 0.1420 |
+| damage/run | -0.95 | [-3.88, +1.98] | 0.5298 | 1.00 | 0.84 | 4.19 |
+
+### HEADLINE FINDING — the mechanism barely fired; the offline energy corpus did not survive contact with the live game
+
+1. **Suppression was 0.04% of ticks, not the 9.6% the offline ruler predicted** —
+   a **~200x** smaller effect. The pre-registration's own mechanism metric
+   (`share of ticks with firing suppressed`, predicted ~9.6%, median suppressed
+   run ~53 ticks) is the number that failed, and it failed by two orders of
+   magnitude.
+2. **Only 4.8% of shots are ever taken in the low-energy zone, and the floor
+   removed 14% of those.** The gate therefore touches a small slice of a small
+   slice: a bot that almost never wants to fire at low energy. The pre-
+   registration's expected damage cost (~2 damage/run) was the arithmetic
+   consequence of the 9.6% figure; with 0.04% it is ~200x smaller still, which
+   is why the damage MDE (4.19) is unreachable by construction and not by bad
+   luck.
+3. **Rounds ending at self energy <= 0: 40.6% live vs 61.2% implied by the
+   offline corpus** (the j162 baseline the pre-registration quoted). The
+   recorded-fixture corpus over-states how often we die broke by ~1.5x. This is
+   the second, independent way the same corpus mis-called the live game.
+4. **Median self energy at death 14.1 -> 15.5** — the floor moved the death
+   energy by +1.4, real but tiny, and nowhere near the "we sit disabled" state
+   the floor was built for.
+5. **The pre-registered blind spot was called correctly.** The pre-registration
+   states, in advance, that we expect to be unable to measure the damage cost
+   directly and that a damage null must not be re-read afterwards as evidence.
+   That call was right, and it is the reason this run cannot be misread.
+
+### VERDICT — DO NOT ADOPT
+
+1. **The pre-registered verdict rule is not met.** Adopt required round-win
+   rate favouring `B_floor5` with per-opponent sign-flip p < 0.05 AND the
+   effect at or above the reported MDE. Observed: **-0.59 pp against**, p =
+   **0.7676**, under the 4.73 pp MDE. Round wins and wins/run are the same
+   null (p = 0.7676, MDE 0.1420 wins/run).
+2. **`TR_RAM_FLOOR_ENERGY` stays `0.0`.** Do not adopt, do not ship, and **do
+   not re-test this knob.** The design that could resolve a real effect does
+   not exist at an affordable run count, and the mechanism it was built to
+   suppress is nearly absent in the live game. Re-running buys resolution on an
+   effect that is not there.
+3. **A null here does NOT prove the knob inert — the opposite.** The mechanism
+   fired on 0.04% of ticks. This run licenses only: "no effect >= 4.73 pp of
+   round-win rate at 450 runs/arm". It says nothing about the ~0.04% of ticks
+   it did suppress, because too few of them existed to measure.
+4. **The generalisable finding is the corpus, not the knob.** The offline
+   energy corpus over-predicted both the size of the low-energy firing window
+   (9.6% -> 0.04%) and the rate of dying broke (61.2% -> 40.6%). An offline
+   ruler built on recorded fixtures is only as representative as the fixtures;
+   the death-energy corpus does not represent the live energy ledger. Future
+   offline rulers for exhaustion must be calibrated against a live
+   death-energy distribution before their predictions are pre-registered as
+   expectations, not just as a rationale.
+
+**Ship state: unchanged. `TR_RAM_FLOOR_ENERGY=0.0` and `TR_RAM_ENEMY_ENERGY=0.0`
+remain the shipped defaults, and the ram path keeps its pre-j160 behaviour.**
+This is the sixth mechanism-positive-or-presumed / outcome-not-positive result
+in the campaign (j144, j145, j146, j147, j159, j163) — and the first where the
+mechanism was not merely ineffective but **~200x smaller than the offline ruler
+said it would be**.