From 5714a9b22271e93c266b476a0e507246834dd105 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Emily Boudreaux Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 15:59:28 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] docs: distinguish conservative screening from virial milestone --- experiments/check_plateau_physics_README.md | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git a/experiments/check_plateau_physics_README.md b/experiments/check_plateau_physics_README.md index 1f786b1..1f913bb 100644 --- a/experiments/check_plateau_physics_README.md +++ b/experiments/check_plateau_physics_README.md @@ -14,6 +14,12 @@ It reads `metadata.txt` and `final_physical.csv` and prints standard JSON. Exit The eight checks comprise energy and force virials with both P(h) and P(rho), each at quadrature orders 14 and 18. An undefined check is distinguished from a finite check exceeding the threshold. Pressure validity, density/enthalpy signs, negative-density budgets, mass/J errors, and local EOS/Bernoulli measurements are reported separately. Nonfinite numbers become JSON null with a retained finite flag and NaN/infinity classification. +This joint solver-and-eight-virial screen is deliberately stricter than the primary +physical milestone of virial balance within 1e-5. The n=1.5 endpoints meet that +milestone using P(h); an undefined P(rho) caused by small signed DG undershoot +does not by itself demonstrate a physical virial failure. The JSON keeps those +individual outcomes separate from its conservative aggregate result. + Passing this gate is **not full physical validation**. No new tolerance is assigned to mass/J or local errors. Sampled signs and extrema are not certified pointwise bounds. The script trusts the diagnostic's recorded convergence flag and physical measurements; it does not reconstruct a model, validate provenance, or independently recompute integrals. It does not inspect or modify production code. Verification on the September 16 campaign: