4 arms x 7 runs vs real DrussGT. mix alternates the two guns 476 times/7 runs
(liveness OK) but our bullets are no more varied (power sd / aim-offset sd flat)
and DrussGT's dodge quality is unchanged (miss/tick mix-pat +0.03, p=0.66; MDE
3.8%). mix wins 24/49 = the 49% baseline; the user's 6/10 has P=0.353 at 49%.
New tools/ab/ab_dodge_analyze.py splits the validated per-shot dodge instrument
by arm and adds gun-switch/power/bearing liveness; fixtures committed.
Measure, for every shot ModularBot fires at the real DrussGT, the lead we
actually applied vs the lead the enemy's motion required, from the recorded
live battles (/tmp/tfil_ab2, 70 battles / 490 rounds / 54926 shots, plus a
35-battle powtest replication of a different binary).
- requiredLead from an AIM-INDEPENDENT interception solve (bullet speed vs
enemy truth), appliedLead from the server-recorded bullet bearing.
- capture = applied/required, guarded at 2px lateral lead (1.6% excluded);
headline metric is the robust proportional slope.
- validation: hits 11.6px mean miss / 80.8% inside 18px, misses 134px,
11.6x separation; 496/496 death + 70/70 owner attributions correct.
Direct answer: capture falls with RANGE (capSlp 0.401 -> 0.135, and
|err|/tolerance 1.27 -> 7.54) but is FLAT across fired POWER within a band
(450+, enemy alive: 0.154 / 0.127 / 0.127). The sub-0.5 long-range shots
(1.18% hit) are finishKill endgame shots at a near-dead DrussGT, not a
lead-capture failure. A naive linear predictor captures 0.29-0.60; we reach
46-67% of that, so the under-lead is real but capture=1.0 is unattainable
against a dodger (oracle required lead).
Answers the user's hypothesis that DrussGT dodges low-power shots better.
Measured on 70 live battles / 490 rounds / 54939 real shots vs real DrussGT
(/tmp/tfil_ab2) and replicated on 35 more battles / 24280 shots (/tmp/powtest).
Power is not randomly assigned - our policy caps it by RANGE
(TR_POWER_FAR_DIST=200 -> 1.0) and by OUR OWN ENERGY (the slope), so inside a
range band power is almost a deterministic function of our energy and a naive
low-vs-high comparison is secretly a losing-vs-healthy comparison. Everything
is stratified by range band and backed by a within-band shuffled-label null
(arrival re-derived, so the null keeps the kinematic channel), a round-cluster
bootstrap, and a within-shot CONTROL window 40 ticks later when the bullet is
long gone.
RESULT: no behavioural response. In band 450+ the raw miss distance at arrival
is +8.25 px [+5.39,+11.25] for HIGH power - but per flight tick it is 4.52 vs
4.51 px/tick (delta -0.01 [-0.12,+0.10]), i.e. entirely the 2.13-tick longer
flight window of the slower bullet. Fixed-12-tick lateral displacement is flat
(55.63 vs 55.47, -0.15 [-1.15,+0.84]) and turn rate / speed are flat. The whole
difference is already present 5 ticks after the trigger pull (+4.2 px) and is
just as large in the bullet-free control window (+5.6 px), so it is a property
of the low-energy situation, not of the shot. Hit rate is flat (0.10 vs 0.09).
Corpus/attribution notes: e*=DrussGT (subject), s*=ModularBot, per
TrBattleCapture.java; the Tank-Royale owner id is NOT stable across runs and is
recovered per battle from fire geometry + the energy decrement, cross-checked on
496/496 death events. Geometry validated on the server's own hits (mean miss
11.6 px, 80.6% inside the 18 px radius).
Runs the five-arm commitment A/B that 19bf461 only implemented. One frozen
binary (git archive 19bf461, sha256 46e7ce19...) vs the real DrussGT through
tools/robocode_shim/run_bridge_battle.sh: 7 runs x 7 rounds per arm against
real DrussGT in the pre-registered block, plus an independent replication
block (runs 8-14) - 70 battles, 490 rounds, 5 arms in parallel.
A control (shipped) B TR_TFIL_TILE_REPLAN=off
C B + TR_TFIL_NO_REV=1 D TR_TFIL_TILE_REPLAN=enemy
E B + TR_TFIL_COMMIT_TICKS=30 (TR_TFIL_COMMIT_LOG=1 on every arm)
RESULT: no arm improves damage/run or round wins vs the shipped mover. Pooled
(14 runs/arm, exact two-sided permutation test over all C(28,14) relabellings):
arm damage/run (delta, p) round wins (delta, p)
A 274.44 2.79 (39/98)
B 274.07 (-0.37, p=0.97) 3.07 (+0.29, p=0.66)
C 257.34 (-17.10, p=0.16) 2.43 (-0.36, p=0.47)
D 286.61 (+12.17, p=0.36) 3.29 (+0.50, p=0.35)
E 265.29 (-9.15, p=0.56) 2.93 (+0.14, p=0.89)
The replication is what settles it: block 1 alone showed D at +20.99 damage
(p=0.26); block 2 put D at +3.36. Nothing replicates.
The PREMISE fails. Honouring the commitment does not reduce reversals - it
raises the reversal-pick rate from 33.9% (control) to 50.9% (B) / 57.0% (E);
the no-reversal arm C only claws part of it back (42.4%). The post-reversal
speed dip (~4.9 -> ~4.0 px/tick at +1..+2 calls) is identical in every arm, so
it is a property of turning around, not of the tile replan, and arm A - the
arm carrying the bug - has the LOWEST mean abs(speed) of all five.
Both premise premises are also caught by the metric the report is careful
about: arm C takes significantly FEWER hits (87.2 vs 96.5/run, p=0.0022) while
dealing the least damage and winning the fewest rounds - a movement change
alters hits taken, shots fired and round length at once, which is exactly why
damage and round wins are the primary metrics and hit rate is not.
Treatment verified per arm from the per-tick TR_TFIL_COMMIT_LOG: the pick
interval moves off ~5 calls only where the arm says it should (A 5.05 with
96.6% tile_self replans; B 14.77 with 0%; C 14.79; D 5.29 with 95.7%
tile_enemy; E 26.62), matching the offline fixture replay (5.07 / 14.65 /
14.65 / 4.94 / 27.57). Every arm ran.
Round wins are the final RESULTS firstPlaces, cross-checked against each
round's BotDeathEvent (35/35 and 35/35 runs agree). Damage is the server's
BulletHitBotEvent damage, attributed by numeric owner/victim id and verified
against the capture's own event counters.
measure_tfil_commit_ab.nim reads the raw run artifacts (JSONL states, events
sidecar, capture stdout, commit log) and prints the whole deliverable:
arm table, per-run values, the exact per-run permutation test, the exact
round-level hypergeometric test (flagged anti-conservative - rounds cluster
within a run), the treatment diagnostics, and the direct answer. It reproduces
either report offline from the committed summary:
nim c -r --path:common_libs common_libs/tests/measure_tfil_commit_ab.nim \
--from-summary common_libs/tests/fixtures/tfil_commit_ab_results_runs14.json
The raw ~200 MB of battle artifacts are not committed; the committed summary
holds every per-run value plus the arm-level diagnostics.
The tile-change replan cancels the 15-tick movement commitment whenever OUR
tile changes. With GridSize=36 and speed up to 8 px/tick that is every ~5
ticks, so the commitment is cancelled by the motion it commands (measured:
96.9% of picks were tile-change replans, 33.8% of picks reversed direction).
Adds four env knobs, every default reproducing the shipped mover
byte-for-byte:
TR_TFIL_TILE_REPLAN self (default) | off | enemy
TR_TFIL_COMMIT_TICKS 15 (default)
TR_TFIL_NO_REV 0 (default)
TR_TFIL_COMMIT_LOG off (default, JSONL per-tick diagnostics)
- `off` honours the commitment; the danger replan stays the safety valve.
- `enemy` keys the cancel to the TARGET's tile displacement (the intent the
original comment claimed).
- `TR_TFIL_NO_REV` down-weights (never filters) tiles >90 deg from the travel
direction; the pool can never be emptied.
Default-path parity is guarded by test_tfil_commit_env.nim, which replays
tools/fixtures/tr_drussgt_vs_modularbot.jsonl and diffs every move command
against a golden generated from the pre-change build (git archive f842ac0).
env_report known-name list updated for the four new names.
SirStone