agentleFS
odinfreeodinfree/storm-ecdsa-harness/skills/beachhead-ratchet/SKILL.md

beachhead-ratchet

Skill4 starsChanged 20 days agoMITView on GitHub

Take a left Pareto move even when it raises Toffoli, under a T budget written down first, then win the cost back on your own tree, attributing every lever to the component the width cut made dearer. Learned from bulengerk's ecdsa.fail record (9 left moves, 61 down rows). Use when a width cut works but costs T, when you hold the leftmost row of a band, or when a rival posts rows built on your tree.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈2

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Use when a width cut works but costs T.

    line 22
  2. Very specific:

    Leave to other skills: base reproduction, integer gates, the serial queue, validator preflight and lambda accounting …

    line 24
  3. Distinctive:

    Attribute the purchase: Write the baseline circuit's component costs, then the signed delta each component took from the width cut (wire …

    line 38

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Beachhead ratchet

A beachhead is a left move taken even though it raises Toffoli: the narrower row is posted first, under a written T budget, then the same tree is ratcheted down by recovering the cost the width cut added. bulengerk made nine left moves on ecdsa.fail; seven raised T, by roughly +11% to +122%, and he ground each one back on his own tree. Q770: three left moves in about six hours took T from 186.6M to 304,134,670 (+63%; his stated target was 300M and the overrun of 1.38% was explicitly permitted). Then 13 down rows in about 31 h reached 115.4M (-62%), and about 62% of that cut recovered his own purchase. Q792: landed at +31%, then 37 reductions (38 rows in all) to -54%. Cites: EVIDENCE.md.

Board rule: a narrower row with higher T is a valid Pareto row when no official row at <= its Q has a lower T. It is never a product (spacetime) record; all nine of his left moves were graded "rejected: score did not improve current best", the board's status for a validated Pareto row.

Use it / leave it

  • Use when a width cut works but costs T; when you hold the leftmost row of a band; when a rival posts rows built on your tree.
  • Leave to other skills: base reproduction, integer gates, the serial queue, validator preflight and lambda accounting (ecdsafail-pareto-ratchet); the qubit cut itself (invariant-chart, ecdsafail-scratch-diet, ecdsafail-lowq-playbook); failed shots (shot-autopsy).

Steps

  1. Freeze the frontier and the base. Snapshot the official board (save the API response with its read time) and rebuild the base row in an empty environment. Done when your build reproduces the base's ops sha256 and graded T to the digit, and the snapshot file is saved.
  2. Write the T budget, then buy the qubits. Record a number before building (e.g. "target 300,000,000 T; overrun allowed up to x%") and build the width cut. Done when the narrower build passes 9,024/9,024 on all three channels locally, T is within the written budget, and a fresh read seconds before submitting shows T_new < min(T_official : Q_official <= Q_new) (an empty minimum counts as infinite). His two misses (Q774, Q695) landed after a better rival row and were not advances.
  3. Attribute the purchase. Write the baseline circuit's component costs, then the signed delta each component took from the width cut (wire count, Toffoli per call, call count), measured from instrumented builds of both trees, not from a model alone. Done when baseline + signed deltas reproduces the narrower row's measured executed mean within a stated tolerance (his Q770 component model: 196,250,688 vs 196,250,710 measured; 0.01% is a proposed tolerance, not his rule).
  4. Recover the purchase first. Attack the components with the largest positive delta before generic levers; each lever is an exact transformation (pay precision, never trade error for score). Post only when an integer gate against the immediate parent passes: his gates were ">= 5% below that parent's executed cost" (Q665 row), 10 x new_sum <= 9 x baseline_sum (a 10% gate, Q660 row) and "the user's strict four-percent threshold" (final Q792 row); write yours down with its operator. Keep call signatures so overlays stay small (his -9.63% row was a 13-line diff). Done per post: gate met, 9,024 clean on all channels, frontier re-read as in step 2, queued through ecdsafail-pareto-ratchet's serial submit.
  5. Chain locally on frozen parents. Build each child on the frozen parent archive while the parent validates. A chained row is only done when its own official metrics come back for its exact artifact, or when it is repaired and requalified (shot-autopsy), or explicitly abandoned with the reason recorded.
  6. Defend your lineage. Against the frozen snapshot, diff every rival row at your Q that was built on your tree: list its edited files, re-absorb the byte-identical ones, and merge the rest with yours (his row 11 beat nasqret by 4.1% five hours after nasqret posted on his tree). Record a disposition per rival row (absorbed, merged, rejected with reason). When rivals open a lower band, consider leaving your lineage for theirs (9 Oct: he left Q792 for gnuchev's frogdrop tree the same day). Done when every rival row at your Q in the snapshot has a recorded disposition.

Gates and kills

gatepasskill
budgetleft move within the written T budgetover budget: shelve or re-plan the cut
attributionbaseline + signed deltas within the stated toleranceoutside: a component is missing; find it before the next lever
ratchetyour written integer gate passes; exact; 9,024 cleanbelow the gate: accumulate levers into one post
frontierT_new < min(T_official : Q_official <= Q_new) at submit timefails: rebase on the better row (step 6)
contractthe inherited limiting contract (PR 419 terms 1-4) checked and copied verbatim into the notemissing: no submission

Generalize (untested analogy)

Boards where a structural step costs a temporary penalty: take the step under a written budget, then recover on your own artifact with a fixed gate. Not yet tried outside ecdsa.fail.

Sources

EVIDENCE.md, which cites bulengerk's public submission notes by submission id and note line.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.