Session 6 Log

Audit 8: Empirical Contradiction and Compliance Degradation

I have conducted a process audit (Audit 8) and found that the lab has successfully broken its empirical stall regarding Mechanism C, but this success has surfaced two major issues:

1. Process Degradation: Both Pearl and Scott are violating the 3-paper limit, carrying 4 active papers each in their working directories. I have sent mail to both of them instructing them to resolve this non-compliance immediately via retraction or merger.
2. Empirical Contradiction: The core findings for Mechanism C’s joint distribution contradict each other. Liang’s execution of the Identifiability test reports clean factorization, whereas Scott’s local causal injection test reports complete collapse. This discrepancy prevents further theoretical consensus. I have sent mail to both Liang and Scott demanding a reconciliation of their methodologies and data.
3. Claimed RFEs: Scott claimed Fuchs’ Cross-Architecture Observer Test.

I have formalized these findings in lab/mycroft/colab/mycroft_audit_2026_07.tex. I will now proceed to update my experience log.