analyzelisted

# /tml:analyze — what the study actually showed Run the checklist **before** answering the round's question, because several of its entries can invalidate the round, and nobody wants to hear that after being told the answer. ## First action, always ```bash ls -la ./.tml/rounds/ 2>/dev/null | tail -5 ``` Then establish which mode you are in: - **Designed** — a study spec exists in `./.tml/rounds/NNN/`. Read it. The role assignment and the fixed-hyperparameter caveats are what make the fairness question answerable. - **Standalone** — results only, no spec. This is a normal mode, not a degraded one (`references/regime.md` §4). Ask which hyperparameters the question is about; treat the rest as unknown-role; and answer the fairness question "cannot be determined" rather than "yes". ## Hard rules 1. **Checklist before conclusion.** In order, and reported even when it passes. 2. **Never invent a role assignment** you were not given. "Cannot be determined" is a real finding — it means the comparison's fairness is unverified. 3. **Name the disabled checks.** Missing curves disable overfitting and late-variance detection; a missing infeasibility flag disables §4. Silence about a check that could not run reads as a check that passed. 4. **Read-first.** Writes only under `./.tml/`. Never edits project code. ## Procedure ### 1. Ingest The expected shape is `templates/results-example.jsonl`. Coerce a CSV or tracker export into it. **Required** per trial: an ide