Three problems, all visible in the first live run.
x1.03 on every phrase: category scores are 0..1 confidences and a phrase
rarely carries much of one axis, so `1 + strength * score` was applied
and inert. Weights are now relative to the strongest candidate, making
strength mean "how much the best phrase gets".
94 candidates capped to 8 by LENGTH kept an arbitrary eight. Ranking is
by weight; longest-first is now only the application order, so a phrase
still lands before one of its own words adds to it.
The prompt was assumed to be the tail of the conditioning. The same run
reported 367 conditioning rows against 368 modality tags, which is
exactly how that assumption breaks. minimax_token_tags marks text as 1
and vision blocks as 0, and references precede the prompt, so the prompt
is the trailing run of 1s — read it instead of inferring it. The status
line says which of the two placed it.
digital-garbage
338c6aadc2