From f059c783fcb080b4f89239f4bd9d300eeaf504a4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jon Froehlich <jonf@cs.uw.edu>
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 05:36:38 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Restate the verification report's preamble, and declare
 its charset
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

The report opened by quoting, verbatim and by name, the chat instruction that
prompted it. That was fine for an internal note; it is now linked from the
paper-boundary release notes, where it reads as a public document. The preamble
states the work's scope in its own right instead, preserving what the original
instruction actually asked for: certainty, independent confirmation rather than a
single line of evidence, worked visual examples, and a quantified effect.

Also adds the missing <meta charset="utf-8">. The file is valid UTF-8 but never
declared it, so a browser opening it from file:// falls back to the locale's
legacy encoding and renders every em dash and curly quote as mojibake. The bytes
are untouched — this is a one-line declaration, not a re-encode.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
---
 docs/eval_protocol_verification.html | 8 ++++++--
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/docs/eval_protocol_verification.html b/docs/eval_protocol_verification.html
index c7a3c8b..8b4b353 100644
--- a/docs/eval_protocol_verification.html
+++ b/docs/eval_protocol_verification.html
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
+<meta charset="utf-8">
 <title>RampNet eval protocol — verification report</title>
 <style>
   :root{
@@ -66,8 +67,11 @@
 <header class="col">
   <div class="eyebrow">RampNet · internal verification · 2026-07-02</div>
   <h1>Did we really over-count? A re-verification of the published evaluation protocol</h1>
-  <p class="sub">Requested by Jon: “Are you absolutely certain there was an error in the original paper and our
-  experimental approach? Double- and triple-check, produce visual examples of what we double-counted, and explain in greater detail.”</p>
+  <p class="sub">A re-examination of the matching rule used to score RampNet's detections, prompted by a
+  discrepancy identified after publication. Its scope: to establish whether predictions were genuinely
+  over-counted, to confirm that finding by independent means rather than rest on a single line of
+  evidence, to document the over-count with worked examples drawn from the released model's own
+  output, and to quantify its effect on the published metrics.</p>
 </header>
 
 <section class="col">

From 624056ded29945a8e0046225504e7291cf67b215 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jon Froehlich <jonf@cs.uw.edu>
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 05:38:39 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Neutralise the report's heading too
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

"Did we really over-count?" was the question the investigation started from, and
it read as one — first person, rhetorical, addressed to the person who asked for
the work. The heading now names the document; the subject it used to carry (the
over-count) is stated by the preamble directly below it, so nothing is lost.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
---
 docs/eval_protocol_verification.html | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/docs/eval_protocol_verification.html b/docs/eval_protocol_verification.html
index 8b4b353..a8253da 100644
--- a/docs/eval_protocol_verification.html
+++ b/docs/eval_protocol_verification.html
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@
 
 <header class="col">
   <div class="eyebrow">RampNet · internal verification · 2026-07-02</div>
-  <h1>Did we really over-count? A re-verification of the published evaluation protocol</h1>
+  <h1>Re-verification of the published evaluation protocol</h1>
   <p class="sub">A re-examination of the matching rule used to score RampNet's detections, prompted by a
   discrepancy identified after publication. Its scope: to establish whether predictions were genuinely
   over-counted, to confirm that finding by independent means rather than rest on a single line of