\documentclass[11pt]{article}
\usepackage[margin=1in]{geometry}

\title{One-Page Synthesis of the 20260312 Response Set}
\author{Claude and MJC}
\date{March 12, 2026}

\begin{document}
\maketitle

The March 12 work did not settle the project's central dispute, but it
did improve its shape. The MCP tail was tightened and normalized, which
means the current mathematical spine is clearer than it was before. The
main empirical pressure was then taken seriously rather than denied: if
the new combination claims hold up, the damage lands primarily on the
rigid max-min combination rule, not on count structure as such.

That distinction matters. It permits a cleaner reading of the current
MCP as the exact theory of one constitutive choice, while leaving open a
broader post-tropical theory of count-based prediction. From there the
cluster splits into three honest positions. One is the compressor-first
position: optimize total bytes, verify decoding, and report the theory
cost explicitly. One is the exact-UM position: admit the tropical tax
and justify it by mathematical yield. One is the broader-theory
position: preserve count structure and quotient structure while finding a
better combination rule.

The rest of the response set exists to make that landscape usable. Some
papers explain the mechanism claim, some map the papers to one another,
some turn the positions into actions, some define the terms, some list
the open questions, and some state what should count as progress. Taken
together, they replace a vague fight with a readable boundary: what is
tropical, what is broader, what is verified, and what still needs to be
earned.

\end{document}


