Round 41 complete: 3-method cos-vs-acc dissociation with DFA+pen added

DFA+penalty single seed s42, 30ep via cifar_resmlp.py (not the earlier
dfa_residual_penalty_test.py which doesn't save nudging):
- test acc: 0.3607 (matches existing 3-seed 0.363±0.001)
- deep cos: +0.166 (matches existing 3-seed 0.155±0.025)
- deep nudge Δloss (eta=0.01): -6e-5 (smallest)
- trajectory loss decrease: 0.104 (smallest)

Full 3-method comparison at 30 epochs:

              DFA+pen      SB+pen       CB+pen
  test acc    0.361        0.453        0.360
  deep cos    +0.166       +0.322       +0.684
  deep nudge  -6e-5        -1.78e-3     -0.45e-3
  traj Δloss  0.104        0.458        0.122

KEY INSIGHT: Deep cosine ranks methods CB > SB > DFA, but ALL functional
metrics (nudge, trajectory loss decrease, accuracy) rank them SB >> CB ≈ DFA.
Cos is the ONLY ordering that does not predict accuracy correctly.

This is the strongest form of the cos-vs-acc dissociation: the ordering
implied by angular agreement is contradicted by three independent functional
measurements, all of which do predict accuracy.

Appendix L ¶2 updated to report all 3 methods and note the ranking
contradiction. Main content still 9 pages.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions