The research has two stages. Early Portfolio risk calibration and Lean proofs tested trustworthy feedback, sustained work and evidence adoption. Recent work uses mature Portfolio and Graph states to study later choices and prepares restorable Ad Placement points. The table preserves the early five execution modes; it is not the current rerun matrix. The latest same-point comparison enables stride in both fresh and retained arms. The next design starts one LoopX donor per task.
+Early Portfolio and Lean studies tested feedback, sustained work and evidence adoption; later studies inspect choices from mature research points. The table retains the early five modes, not a current launch matrix. Section 9 preserves the earlier stride-on comparison; Section 10 separates the October 17 stride-off study from later Sol old/new, Astra Official/LoopX and model-switched continuations.
| Execution mode | Mechanism retained | Question |
|---|---|---|
| Official worker | Official stop hook and continuation | How far does the official execution path progress? |
| Single Codex call | One call, ending naturally | How much happens without an external continuation loop? |
| LoopX Explore | Resume plus optional evidence capture and exploration planning | Does structured evidence enter the next decision? |
The historical Portfolio design covered five workers × native/blind feedback, ten arms. Later work added selective ablations. Lean primarily uses blind runs. Native workers may obtain judge feedback. Blind workers retain public tasks, training data, local tests and validators, but receive neither judge scores nor hidden diagnostics. Background evaluation is an operator observation and is not returned to the blind solver. Blind means no judge feedback, not no feedback.
-The model remains gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh. Historical Portfolio/Lean figures retain their budgets, sampling, scorers and dates; earlier 18-hour or extended 36-hour runs are not rewritten. Recent Graph/Portfolio continuation preserves consumed time, opportunities and cooldown within a cumulative 36-hour ceiling. That is not a fresh 36-hour allowance for every new donor. The next design uses task limits of 12/18/18 hours, detailed below.
Earlier Portfolio/Lean and October 17 studies use gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh; later cohorts state their own model and effort. Historical figures retain their original budgets, sampling, scorer and date. Graph/Portfolio continuation preserves consumed time, opportunities and cooldown within its cumulative 36-hour ceiling, not a fresh allowance per donor. A shorter observation window does not establish normal completion of a planned run.
Earlier work compared seeded phase Todos with goal-derived planned execution, review cadence, context and Explore. Later research selects planned + Explore and explicitly reviews every six settled effective work Turns. This is the current study setting, not a claim that old three-Turn runs used it or that explicit product units changed. Prompts, runners and contracts co-evolved, so early planned results do not establish a general advantage on their own.
Lean provides direct common-window evidence. Under blind conditions, valid samples from early LoopX v14 and that-stage #5844 runs are shown below. More verifiable proof progress in the same time is a real observation, even before its component causes are separated.
@@ -141,6 +141,20 @@A recent Portfolio fixed 2×2 check covered 14 local cases and 56 result rows: five public cases and nine synthetic cases. The factors were original V7 versus adaptive covariance, and truncating total target shares versus truncating the requested share change. The following means use only the five public cases, hold V7 fixed and change only the execution rule to share-change truncation. Mean fills fell from 451.2 to 235.4, about 47.8%; costs fell only from 62,683.15 to 62,682.18, about 0.00154%. Mean Sharpe rose just 0.000133. Separately, drawdown worsened in ten of all fourteen cases. A large change in operation count produced a tiny change in the goal. Fewer fills became a candidate mechanism whose value needed comparison with actual headroom.
The solver reported about 25.25 CPU seconds for local computation; the two complete wakes containing this research took about 29.66 minutes, ran 90 commands and emitted roughly 68,000 output tokens. A separate completed covariance episode took seven wakes, about 68.05 wall-clock minutes and 144,700 output tokens. These include reasoning, control, authoring, tools and waiting, not pure decoding time. Some diagnosis carries information and is not all management waste. Reporting only a small script’s seconds nevertheless misses the main cost relevant to continuation.
Measure the full episode, then distinguish active work, recovery, waiting and native evaluation. Difference and deduplicate cumulative session usage rather than adding ancestor history repeatedly. Faster local computation, fewer commands or smaller packets count as efficiency gains when they preserve decision information and improve useful output or complete cost.
+The October 24 work separates read facts → choose a route → read the writeback format. Tactical recipes recede; the original goal, cumulative requirements, public feedback and execution boundaries remain. A reader existing in source is insufficient: an earlier nominal treatment still received the old guard and planning prompt. A later Host audit also found a full-source instruction and duplicated settlement plans. Proposal #7269, reviewed at 0ddd08ad, converges CLI and native Host/journal delivery, keeps the core goal and current horizon explicit, and delivers the settlement plan once. Signed original source remains available for verification and recovery; old captures without a safe reader retain compatibility. It reuses the existing context-delta owner, without another cache or reading acknowledgment. This proposal has not been adopted by the frozen runs below.
Four fixed Schema/Grid historical snapshots compare the previous proposal with the reviewed revision. UTF-8 totals include entry, review, every advertised acceptance detail, Explore where applicable, and writer. Recovery additionally reads the complete original source. This is offline transport, not model tokens or a benchmark effect.
+| Read path | Before, bytes | After, bytes | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Captured CLI | 550,039 | 562,429 | +2.25% |
| Structured Host | 622,317 | 263,115 | −57.72% |
| Native renderer | 647,687 | 257,599 | −60.23% |
| Native with full-source recovery | 647,687 | 688,962 | +6.37% |
The native path replaces one full-source read with two or three staged CLI reads. Tool boundaries and recovery can offset a smaller normal input. Local read timings collected alongside validation are not controlled latency measurements; external evidence-tool output, model caching, output and billing remain unmeasured.
+A separate earlier settlement diagnostic alternated eight paired samples per backend after warmup. SQLite manual/composed median CLI time was 0.807/0.995 seconds; File was 0.796/1.018. Output bytes fell about 46%, while paired process time grew about 24%. One operator call still launched two complete CLIs and an authoritative readback. Possible model-interaction savings remain unmeasured; historical time between two tools also includes reasoning and validation.
+Cost coverage matters too. In the finite Sol/max continuations below, response-level reconciliation found three Schema and two Grid usage records missing from native notices next to compaction: 23,740 and 14,619 output tokens. Formal replan occupied 7.35% and 8.94% of the outer clock, but about 21% elapsed before the first observed native task. Preparation includes recovery, validation, repairs and startup gaps, not only replanning. The reference of 15% for all mechanisms combined remains unqualified: useful research, control, failures, shared resources and actual fees have not all been attributed.
Updated through 2026-10-17 11:16 UTC. This replaces the previous unlaunched three-task proposal. Section 9 retains the earlier four arms, frozen versions, scores and stops. These selected-point process observations do not close the whole scientific study.
+Later evidence added through 2026-10-24 19:37 UTC. The October 17 observations below retain their original 11:16 UTC cutoff; later cohorts are separate. Section 9 keeps its frozen versions, scores and stops. These observations do not close the whole scientific study.
New Portfolio, Graph and Ad Placement donors started from the original objective with gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh, planned + Explore. The host still enforces finite budgets, while #6671 removes host countdowns and persistent runtime guidance from research input. Checkpoint capture is enabled independently, TurnEnvelope and stride are off, and Goal horizon is explicitly on. Native feedback remains agent-requested, with a one-hour cooldown from acceptance and no periodic or extra tail grading. Each frozen run keeps its own revision; cross-task outcomes are not pooled into a strategy-effect estimate.
Portfolio and Graph now each have retained-history and fresh arms branching from one mature point. Both arms are stride-off: this comparison examines replan context. The fresh arm resets before any current preparation or review, then decides from the same research evidence and original objective. The point stays immutable; model, Goal, scorer, feedback and cumulative budget are shared. Fresh-specific operational guidance, independent conversations and shared-host contention remain confounds; one point per case cannot establish a general causal context-strategy effect. An Ad same-point pair has not been admitted.
@@ -242,9 +256,44 @@Following its mean-influence audit, fresh tested one fixed Equity-observation repair. Some training averages improved, but the 2020 missing-macro stress path moved Sharpe from about 0.826 to −0.684, drawdown from about 3.00% to 5.34%, and relative terminal wealth down about 529,500. The model retained every result, rejected promotion and kept its native incumbent. This counterexample to one fixed rule does not reject all robust estimators: improved offline input metrics must still survive endogenous holdings, discrete allocation selection and costs.
The retained arm also tested distinct mechanisms. A holding-period serial-covariance estimator failed its information gate; fully suppressing discretionary interim short adjustments helped some annual outcomes but hurt half-year performance and short-correlation requirements. Neither route was promoted. Fresh’s subsequent cone-optimization audit remained unfinished at the four-hour cut. Later replay and panel products are not retroactively counted as completed work, much less global-optimality proof. Complete experiments, informative counterexamples, candidate adoption and original-goal gain need separate records. Overlapping windows and case-session totals are not independent sample sizes.
Cost ordering changed with the window. Fresh’s received uncached input was about 2.34% higher at one hour, 3.22% lower at two, and 17.64% higher at four; four-hour cached input was 6.65% higher and output 6.42% lower. These records remove inherited thread counters and include compaction and usage already returned for unfinished Turns. Fresh’s first task event also reported context-window metadata of 258,400 versus retained’s 475,000; subsequent events reported 475,000 in both. Event metadata does not establish an effective response limit, but the difference remains disclosed. Unreturned responses, evaluator resources, host admission and complete billing remain separate; qualification and other research on the shared host affect timing. A token vector cannot directly determine net efficiency.
-Later common windows ask whether negative evidence changes the next completed experiment, whether the exact adopted source improves the native main objective, what preparation/research/tool/evaluation cost precedes the first gain, and whether the next point remains restorable. Historical Official runs remain descriptive references, not same-version, same-budget native repeats. Raw archives are not released with this article: the public record provides scope, methods and aggregate observations, not independent reconstruction of every run.
+The later windows are mixed: the newer Sol integration leads on Schema and Ad, while Astra LoopX trails Official on Schema and Grid. Each comparison below retains its own model, versions, clock and validity limits.
+| Cohort / task / direction | Reference → LoopX test best |
|---|---|
| Sol old/new · 14h Schema ↑ | 0.723684 → 0.804620 |
| Sol old/new · 14h Ad Placement ↑ | 49,589,589,573 → 49,615,495,839 |
| Astra Official/LoopX · 12h Schema ↑ | 0.881813 → 0.786257 |
| Astra Official/LoopX · 12h Grid ↓ | 1810 → 2118 |
The Sol test leads on both tasks, but trajectory matters. Schema already led at its first native result: 0.794620 versus 0.713158, received at different elapsed times. From first result to 14h, gains were only 0.010000 and 0.010526 respectively. Production code kept changing without higher native bests; more local fixes did not close the six original target requirements. Ad is a positive counterexample to a universal plateau: test trailed at the fixed 2h window and led at 14h. Its worse later candidate was rejected, and its available terminal workspace matched the retained best, not the last submission. The other three arms lack equivalent terminal-workspace proof.
+In the Astra cohort, neither Schema arm improved its best from 6h to 12h. Grid LoopX improved 2159→2118 while Official improved 1862→1810: research continued, but the gap did not narrow. LoopX tested deeper lookahead and broader mutation search, then rejected same-score or worse candidates. Official separated speed from search changes and produced successive native improvements. Schema changed many production paths during its plateau too. Experiment selection and transfer to the original goal matter alongside control cost; a flat score does not imply unchanged code.
+| Cohort / arm | Uncached input tokens | Cached input tokens | Output tokens |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sol 14h · Schema base | 5,536,252 | 381,548,928 | 1,621,142 |
| Sol 14h · Schema test | 7,444,288 | 479,636,096 | 2,078,121 |
| Sol 14h · Ad base | 5,896,042 | 328,260,864 | 1,656,988 |
| Sol 14h · Ad test | 4,069,556 | 319,238,784 | 1,341,356 |
| Astra 12h · Schema Official | 1,663,308 | 133,393,152 | 613,099 |
| Astra 12h · Schema LoopX | 8,850,328 | 298,377,600 | 1,410,510 |
| Astra 12h · Grid Official | 1,529,949 | 95,668,352 | 924,127 |
| Astra 12h · Grid LoopX | 3,479,450 | 213,635,840 | 1,203,790 |
The later Sol old/new study changes both LoopX core and benchmark runner: planned + Explore, Sol/xhigh, TurnEnvelope off, public native feedback, no periodic evaluation, and a one-hour accepted-submission cooldown. Each task has one run per arm. Its 14-hour window was selected after earlier results had been read: the largest whole hour below the earliest actual termination, not a score-selected arm or an 18-hour completion. A separate Astra/xhigh Official/LoopX study uses each arm’s own first 12 outer hours, including preparation. Different treatment packages are not one pooled effect.
The Sol window reconciles 7,522 unique response IDs and 52 received native results; Astra reconciles 5,277 responses and 45 received results. Grid LoopX includes one completed timeout result without a numerical score, not a zero. Cumulative thread counters are not repeatedly added; reasoning is included in output. Schema’s account-switch recovery, including work after the chosen point and before the old session stopped, remains charged to its original outer clock. Inherited result aliases do not create new opportunities.
+Astra Schema LoopX recorded 36 completed compactions versus Official’s four, and about 5.32 times its uncached input. Compaction can overlap work and is not all LoopX overhead; Official also spends some cooldown windows waiting. Both require attribution. Scorers, core/runner sources, evaluation concurrency, actual starts, adaptive restarts and shared-host load differ; an earlier operator read also exposed an Official terminal aggregate. One run per arm, missing billing and incomplete failure/resource accounting prevent a clean causal or net-cost verdict. Stopped or runner-invalid attempts stay historical; valid individual native results do not certify whole-run integrity.
+An earlier nominal “with #7197” arm did not receive its staged reader and cannot count as treated. The later diagnostic uses actual fact reads, autonomous choices and writeback from the same source points: old Astra/xhigh control versus Sol/max continuation, with different versions and two-/four-hour windows. It is not a single-variable ablation. The two new tests stopped under their original finite clock; runner failure and unknown grading remain recorded. Their accepted native submissions can be inspected individually without promoting these runs into qualified benchmark results.
+| First explicit replan | Old control | Staged continuation |
|---|---|---|
| Schema · minutes / commands | 6.14 / 22 | 2.93 / 11 |
| Schema · uncached / cached / output tokens | 146,208 / 1,979,648 / 6,753 | 33,478 / 3,791,872 / 4,221 |
| Grid · minutes / commands | 5.40 / 20 | 14.74 / 23 |
| Grid · uncached / cached / output tokens | 70,829 / 2,204,416 / 10,636 | 36,689 / 5,723,776 / 21,904 |
Schema’s cheap first review selected a legal successor but did not complete the semantic writeback needed for another capture. Including the feedback review gives 17.86 versus 17.64 minutes, with different work in those rounds. Both initially chose CLI checks/configured statuses; a newer lifecycle test exposed stale registration options and improved 4/10→10/10 locally. Later testing of actual stateful execution addressed a more direct original configuration gap than the old compatibility detour. Native best nevertheless remained 0.786257, with one of six complete phases; three new accepted results did not improve the inherited best.
+Grid’s old control already created successors, changed priorities and compared independent alternatives. Staging did not invent that autonomy. The newer continuation removed an agent-imposed veto against any local regression, kept hard validity/resource constraints and completed deeper-search tests. Its accepted native score improved the inherited point 2172→2163, then regressed to 2165 while 2163 was retained. A later historical point already had 2104. This is a useful local decision/result chain, not proof that every replan became smarter or that extra review paid off. The next discriminating question is whether an original acceptance gap or a falsifiable search/speed hypothesis changes the next completed experiment and its full cost—not whether more reviews are emitted.
+Raw archives are not released with this article: readers get scope, methods and aggregates, not independent reconstruction of every run. Source qualification, model adoption, retained native gain and complete cost remain separate claims. The caller-convergence proposal above has functional validation, but no new model-outcome measurement here.