THE MULTI-HEAD SILO — THREE ENGINES, ONE VOTE
3 retrieval heads (independent seeds, per-head λ) → probability-mean vote → shared Engine B · the 95→99 rung
tier: lit · independence check: joint errors 1.2–1.6× the independent prediction at K=0 · Honda timing retained lol · 2026-07-10
3D — THE TRIDENT: THREE A-STACKS VOTE INTO ONE B-STACK
three Engine-A silos (heads 1 / 2 / 3),
each unit-0 worldline hunting the same cue phase (white ring marker) · they merge at the vote and continue up the shared Engine B stack ·
all four stacks idle at 1-3-4-2
2D — TAIL LIFT & THE INDEPENDENCE LEDGER
top: accuracy vs K — thin lines = single heads, bold teal = probability-mean ensemble, dashed = majority vote ·
bottom: the independence ledger and the full arc ladder 80.3 → 95.2 → 99.0
🖍 TODDLER CORNER
Our robot was right 95 times out of 100. The last 5 mistakes weren’t sloppiness — they were rare total mix-ups, grabbing the wrong secret entirely. You can’t polish away a mix-up.
So we built two more finder robots, raised differently, and made all three vote. The new two are actually a bit clumsier than the original! But here’s the magic: they almost never make the same mistake at the same time. When one goofs, the other two outvote it. Three so-so friends who disagree in different ways beat one genius who sometimes has a very bad day. Score: 99 out of 100.
One more trick: don’t just count hands. A robot that’s sure should count more than a robot that’s shrugging — averaging their confidence beat plain voting, 99.0 to 96.8.
The big lesson: when mistakes are rare-but-total, don’t train harder — get witnesses. lol