56/60 opponent-level win deltas are non-negative and no opponent family
regresses reproducibly (the one WallAvoider loss reverses in Batch 2).
corr(dwins, d_hit_rate) = -0.09, corr(dwins, d_damage) = +0.38: the aggregate
win is a survival effect, but a per-opponent hit-rate gain does not predict a
per-opponent win gain - so hit rate stays an explanation, never a proxy.
- tfil is 4th of five on round wins, not last (ring is nominally 0.04 lower,
ns) - the Batch-1 commit message overstates one word; the correction is
recorded in the ledger rather than rewritten.
- the Batch-2 direct answer quoted three of four CIs excluding 0; it is four of
four ([+0.04,+0.63], [+0.16,+0.60], [+0.27,+0.89], [+0.22,+0.72]).
- added the cleanest aggression isolation of Batch 1 (ring - ring_notemp, same
engine and heat field, range weighting alone): +41.9 dmg/run, -0.11 wins/run,
+12.8 pp incoming hit rate at 236 vs 395 px.
Same frozen panel, same 3x3 design, new session on commit 8efa627 (no source file
changed since 1984a78, so the same code), 225 battles, 0 invalid runs. Arms:
tfil, strafe_notilt, strafe_325 + the tilt re-armed at 600px and 250px.
Paired vs tfil: strafe_325 +0.58 wins/run [CI +0.27,+0.89] 11/12 p=0.0063;
strafe_notilt +0.47 [+0.22,+0.72] 10/11 p=0.0117; tilt_600 +0.40 [+0.04,+0.76]
(sign test 8/11 p=0.23, sign-flip p=0.049); tilt_250 +0.38 [+0.07,+0.69] 10/12
p=0.039. Incoming hit rate -5.2..-6.9 pp with 0/15 opponents favouring tfil.
The range TARGET is not the lever: re-arming the tilt moved the achieved
distance from 459px (no steering) to 478px and 415px, and none of the three is
separable on wins. This overturns Batch 1's reading that the tilt costs wins -
the honest statement is that the tilt's win effect is below this design's
resolution. tfil reproduced to within 1.4 pp (40.7% -> 39.3% of rounds), so the
baseline itself is stable across sessions.
Ledger: Batch 2 section, the verbatim analyzer report, a data-driven
what-to-try-next, and the session log.
225 battles, one frozen binary, five env-only arms, the frozen panel, 0 invalid
runs. Paired per opponent vs the shipped tfil:
strafe_notilt wins/run +0.38 [CI +0.16,+0.60] 9/9 opponents p=0.0039
dmg/run -10.2 [CI -25.8,+5.5] p=0.61, MDE 20.4 (not detectable)
incoming hit rate 12.24% vs 18.17%, dmg taken 150 vs 200
strafe_325 wins/run +0.33 [CI +0.04,+0.63] 10/12 p=0.0386
ring dmg/run +31.2 [CI +11.5,+50.9] 13/15 p=0.0074, wins/run -0.04 (ns)
but hit rate 29.4% at 236 px: a damage/survival trade, not a win
ring_notemp indistinguishable from tfil on both primaries
Round wins in this harness are survival wins (in 216/219 attributable runs the
win count equals the rounds the opponent died in), and the winner takes ~1/3
fewer hits while fighting ~74 px farther out. The shipped tfil is last of five
on wins: the DrussGT-only picture did not generalize.
Also: tournament_analyze.py now prints BOTH readings of the pre-registered
'while the other does not go down' clause (strict: nothing is better;
substantive: the two strafe arms and ring are better on one metric each).
The repo's first multi-opponent gun measurement. Adds tools/ab/gauntlet_run.sh
(per-opponent A/B over the legacy roster, subject = frozen ModularBot),
tools/ab/gauntlet_analyze.py (paired per-opponent deltas, cross-opponent sign
test, style split, MDE) and the arm/opponent fixtures.
Result: BitBrain does NOT generalize beyond DrussGT. 32 opponents x 2 arms x
3 runs x 5 rounds = 192 battles / 960 rounds, 0 failed, 0 retries: damage/run
214.5 (pattern) vs 210.9 (bb), sign-flip p=0.53; round wins 237/480 vs 239/480,
p=0.91. Sign test: bb better on 13/32 opponents (damage). The DrussGT-only
penalty does not carry. The owner's 'killer vs regular movers' sub-claim is not
supported: regular bucket +1.3 dmg/run vs dodgers -0.2 (MW p=0.85), and the
measured movement predictability does not correlate with the delta.
SirStone