The code that erased its own sources

Resolution: Killed

Caveats: KILLED BY 6% ON A PINNED INSTRUMENT - the caveats carry what the number means. (a) THE KILL: R=0.1059 against the ex-ante line of 0.1, a 5.9% overshoot on a wager of a full 10x density separation. This time the formula set was pinned at registration with eyes open (lesson 3, adopted after v1's unpinned set forced an inconclusive), the only registered escape hatch - the 200-match floor guard - did not trigger, and the REFUTED clause fires; the verdict follows it mechanically. Declining to kill on a post-hoc audit of a set the house itself pinned would make every future pin re-litigable the moment a number comes in unfavourable, and would gut pre-registration; the discipline is worth more than this conjecture. (b) NOISE DIAGNOSTIC (disclosed, NO verdict weight): the compute's own audit flags families b/c (construct bet/dalet+tractate-name) as dominated by generic-word polysemy rather than genuine citation - בשבת is overwhelmingly 'on the Sabbath', not 'in tractate Shabbat', and all 10 MT family-c audit samples were generic-sense on inspection - at near-identical ABSOLUTE scale in both works (673 vs 715 matches; 565 vs 530 on the shabbat token alone). Equal absolute noise is proportionally unequal: it is 91% of MT's numerator (673 of 739) but only 11% of the Tur's (715 of 6,379), so it inflates measured R upward AGAINST the conjecture. The unregistered diagnostic excluding families b/c lands at MT ~0.86/10k vs Tur ~81/10k, R~0.011 - deeply under 0.1. A second quantified spec-inherent bias points the same way: lamed-prefixed acronym forms fall outside the pinned 5-letter prefix set (~9% relative undercount on the sampled Rif item; the rule is identical for both works, but its practical incidence is on the Tur side, since MT has zero acronyms to undercount). Readers should take this kill as a fact about the pinned instrument and the 10x wager, not as evidence that the Mishneh Torah genuinely cites at more than a tenth of the Tur's rate - the cleaned diagnostic says it does not. (c) QUALITATIVE PICTURE: the direction is resoundingly right. A 9.4x citation-density gap on the pinned set (90.72 vs 9.61 per 10k); 5,185 Rishonic/Geonic acronym citations in the Tur against literally ZERO in the Mishneh Torah - verified real, not an engine defect: Rambam predates most of the listed Rishonim and wrote in his famously self-contained uncited style, while the Tur cites them by design (including the author citing his own father as the Rosh). The 'code that erased its own sources' signature is plainly present in the data; what died is the specific <0.1 pin. (d) CALIBRATION: another direction-right / multiplicative-overshoot datum for the calibration series, and the closest miss yet - the registrant wagered a 10x multiple and the world gave 9.4x. File it with the standing pattern of correct-direction conjectures killed by overconfident multiplicative thresholds. (e) NO V3 CHASE: any polysemy-cleaned v3 set would need INDEPENDENT justification stated BEFORE any recompute; re-registering now, after seeing that the cleaned diagnostic would support, is threshold-shopping - exactly what lesson 3 exists to prevent. The shepherd recommends leaving this conjecture killed and letting the calibration essay absorb the miss.

Resolution: Inconclusive

Caveats: TWO OPERATIONALIZATIONS, ONE INVALID. (1) RAW (all tractate-name tokens + named-sage + geonim): MT 53.16/10k vs Tur 50.23/10k, R=1.0583 - invalidated as a citation measure by the compute's own QC: all 37 Bavli tractate names double as the ordinary Hebrew noun for their own subject matter (Tamid='always', Shabbat=the Sabbath day, Gittin=divorce documents) and both codes are organized topically around exactly those subjects; only 1 of MT's 3,988 raw tractate hits (0.03%) and 50 of Tur's 2,804 (1.8%) carry the construct-state ד- citation marker, and hand-inspected samples confirm the hits are topical vocabulary (every sampled MT 'Tamid' is the adverb 'always' in a cosmology passage). No verdict may rest on the raw reading. (2) CONSERVATIVE (ד--marked tractate citations + named-sage + geonim), the faithful operationalization of 'explicit external source-attribution': MT 1.3261/10k vs Tur 11.0646/10k, R=0.1199. WHY NOT KILLED ON 0.1199 >= 0.1: the number sits 20% above the threshold - within the measurement slop of mechanical string-matching - AND carries a documented ONE-SIDED bias: the Tur's dominant citation idiom, Rishonic surname acronyms and epithets (הרא"ש, הרמב"ם, רמב"ן, רשב"א, רי"ף, בעל העיטור, ר"י), lies entirely outside the pinned formula families and is structurally invisible to them, while MT has almost no such hidden layer to miss (18 named-sage hits and 1 construct citation in 769,174 words); the Tur denominator is therefore systematically UNDERCOUNTED (as are its ב-/כדאיתא and מס' tractate-citation forms, sample-confirmed), so the true conservative R is LOWER than 0.1199, plausibly below 0.1. A kill declared on a number the compute itself certifies as biased upward against the conjecture would be an artifact of the instrument, not a finding about the texts - a weak kill. WHY NOT SUPPORTED: no measured reading gives R < 0.1; support would require an unmeasured bias-corrected extrapolation. REGISTRATION DEFECT AND LESSON: the registration delegated the concrete formula set to the compute ('define a pinned external-attribution formula set') instead of pinning it ex ante; the resulting order-of-magnitude operationalization-dependence (1.06 vs 0.12) is therefore partly a registration failure. Per house precedent (KP-SD, DBBE, Kushan), near-threshold results resting on unpinned operationalizations with known one-sided biases go INCONCLUSIVE with a re-registration path rather than to a verdict. Lesson: pin the formula set, token lists and aggregation rule ex ante, not just the threshold. The registered clause precedence itself ranks 'formula set cannot be applied consistently' (INCONCLUSIVE_BY_DESIGN) ahead of the threshold clauses; mechanically the formula was applied identically to both corpora, but as a measure of the target quantity it captures MT's citation idiom nearly completely while missing the Tur's dominant idiom - an asymmetry of measurement validity in the spirit of clause (1). RE-REGISTRATION PATH: re-register with a pre-pinned, symmetric citation-formula set that INCLUDES the Rishonic acronym/epithet citations (הרא"ש, הרמב"ם, רמב"ן, רשב"א, רי"ף, ר"י, בעל העיטור and peers), construct ד- tractate citations, ב-/כדאיתא + tractate and מס' abbreviation forms, the named-sage formulae, and גאון/גאונים; apply identically to both corpora and recompute R against the same <0.1 threshold. WHAT SURVIVES REGARDLESS: under the faithful conservative reading the Mishneh Torah cites drastically less than the Tur - 1.33 vs 11.06 per 10k words, an ~8.3x gap that the documented Tur undercount can only widen - fully consistent with Twersky's account of Maimonides' programmatic no-citation design and with the conjecture's qualitative mechanism; only the registered <0.1 magnitude pin remains undecided. Calibration note carried from registration: '<0.1 is a very bold pin' was flagged ex ante; the pin nearly held (0.1199) even on an instrument biased against it.