Does letting the brain set each walker's stride and patience improve the search?
Withdrawn. The score more than doubled, to 25.9, but a shuffled control matched it: varied strides helped, not the brain's reading.
In the log: octopamine gain and serotonin persistence read from the head (task 0 step 4)
withdrawnDate not stated in the log; it was written between the commit of 2026-09-16 19:06 and the first commit that contains it, 2026-09-19 08:35generator · fly brain0 predictions · 2 result paragraphsEXPERIMENTS.md lines 10871–10908, lines 10947–10957, lines 10988–11001, lines 11008–11038
What E167 did and how it came out, drawn from this record and the files it names (book/assets/diagrams/exp/E167.svg).
Pre-registration
The pre-registration, as written
E167 interim (seed 0 of 2; seed 1 running) — and a protocol flaw, stated. Readout share
after 799 lessons: LAL 3.37%, DNa 0.42%, DN 7.53%, PFL 0.02%, MBON 89.1%. Sites: fb 544
lessons, oa 799, 5ht 0. Gains: step 0.029–0.074 (span 0.045), patience 3.0–8.8.
Prediction 3 confirmed: the step modulation is real (span 0.045 ≥ 0.01).
Prediction 4 (first half) confirmed: the OA site is taught on every lesson (799).
Prediction 1's "never taught" clause fired — but for a reason I wrote into the protocol,
not one the head produced: confirm() runs only under --confirm, and the E167 chain
does not pass it. The 5-HT site had no teacher. E167 is therefore a test of the
state-read gains (step from LAL, patience from DN), and of nothing serotonergic. Withdrawn
as a test of serotonin persistence; kept as a test of the gains.
Unpredicted: the readout put 7.5% on DN without the 5-HT site ever moving. The delta rule
w += lr·err·h favours the nodes with the largest state, and DN carries the largest
(E168: 3.8e-3 vs LAL 2.2e-3) — a magnitude effect, not evidence that DN is informative.
The E169 DN share must be read with that in mind.
Results
EXPERIMENTS.md · line 10947
E167 amendment, before its results arrive. By the same measurement the OA site
(pre = FB) is inert; the 5-HT site (pre = LAL, 71% active) and both gains (read from LAL
and DN) are live. E167 therefore tests serotonin persistence plus state-read gains, not
octopamine learning. Prediction 1–3 stand as written; a fourth is added: sites[oa].lessons
will be ~equal to the readout's lessons and its effect nil — the OA site's |Δw| is below
1e-4 total, so its share of any change is zero.
Housekeeping, stated: the per-seed readout dumps are named by circuit and seed only, so
E166 overwrote E163's and the E167 smoke overwrote seed 0 again. E163's seed-1 numbers
survive because E166's file is identical to it; E163's seed-0 file is gone (its share was
recorded in the E163 entry). Fixed by tagging the filename with FORAGER_TAG from here on.
EXPERIMENTS.md · line 11008
E167 result — falsified upward: the state-read gains more than double the search.
Whole brain, broadcast, learned readout, fb+oa+5ht sites, step from LAL state, patience from
DN state, 200 × 4 × 2:
arm AUC_Q finds best
E163 same head, constant step 0.05 / patience 6 11.57 +- 8.87 29 +- 17 -111
E167 step and patience read from the head 25.93 +- 11.44 71 +- 15 -136
E136 CEM, 300 rounds 13.57 +- 3.79 34.5 +- 8.5 -78
Seeds ≈ 14.5 and 37.4 — both above E163's mean, ×2.2 on AUC_Q, ×2.4 on finds, 25
meV/atom deeper, and for the first time a fly arm is clear of the CEM on every column.
Prediction 2 falsified upward. I bounded each seed at 3–20 and called "better" the case
of both seeds above 11.57, which I said was not predicted. It happened.
Prediction 3 confirmed on both seeds: step 0.029–0.074 and 0.026–0.072 (spans 0.045,
0.046), patience 3.0–8.8 and 3.1–8.9 — the gains are real, walker-specific quantities.
Prediction 4 confirmed (first half): OA site taught 799× on both seeds; its effect
cannot be isolated here, and by E168 (FB pre-state 1e-4) it is nil.
Prediction 1: 5-HT site 0 lessons on both seeds — by protocol (no --confirm), stated
in the interim. E167 says nothing about serotonin.
Readout: DN 7.5% / 4.1%, LAL 3.4% / 2.1%, DNa 0.42% / 0.25%; fb site 544 / 655 lessons.
What the result does and does not show. The improvement is attributable to the gains,
not the sites: the FB and OA sites move synapses by ~1e-5 (E168), the 5-HT site never
moved. But two things changed at once relative to E163 — the step and the patience are now
walker-specific, and they are read from the head. A swarm with the same spread of steps
and patiences assigned at random would separate those. Branch opened: E170, the shuffled
control — the same PopulationGain ranges with the z-scores permuted across walkers each
call, so each walker's gain is a real head state but the wrong walker's. If E170 matches
E167, the gain is heterogeneity, not the head, and "read from the head" is withdrawn as a
claim (the mechanism stays, the interpretation goes). If E170 falls back toward E163, the
head's state at the walker's own composition carries the information.
The full record
This entry is written in 4 separate places in the log, shown here in log order.
EXPERIMENTS.md · lines 10871–10908
E167 — octopamine gain and serotonin persistence read from the head (task 0 step 4)
What the wiring allowed, which is not what the plan said. The plan's table put serotonin
onto ER, FB and SMP. In this asset serotonin cells innervate no ring neuron and no FB cell;
they reach 669 of 1,342 descending neurons. Octopamine reaches every ring neuron (282/282),
637 of 665 LAL, 462 of 602 FB, 46 of 50 PFL and all 32 DNa. The head's plan is therefore
corrected by its own anatomy: gain = octopamine-gated FB→LAL (1,008 edges, 994 gated),
persistence = serotonin-gated LAL→DN (10,658 edges, 4,989 gated). The step-4 row in
OVERNIGHT.md is withdrawn as written and replaced by this.
Mechanism (forager/brain/modulation.py, Forager(modulator=), WithSites per-site
rewards + teach). Each walker's step is 0.05·(1 + 0.5·tanh z_LAL) and its patience
6·(1 + 0.5·tanh z_DN), z the standardised mean state of the gated population at the
walker's composition (running traces over every visit). The OA site is taught by the rung-0
reward the core learns from — arousal follows what pays; stage_b runs no rung-2 kinetics and
this is stated, not hidden. The 5-HT site is taught only when confirm() returns, with
2p−1, so persistence is written by the decisive rung and by nothing else. Literature for
the two roles: octopamine as locomotor/sensory gain with arousal (Suver, Mamiya & Dickinson
2012; Busch 2009); serotonin as willingness to wait on a course (Miyazaki 2014, 2018;
Sitaraman 2008 for central-complex place memory). Nothing here is a knob: both are states of
the head, moved by the head's own lessons.
Protocol.E163's arm (whole brain, broadcast input, LAL+DNa+MBON+PFL+DN readout,
FORAGER_SITES=fb,oa,5ht FORAGER_MODULATE=1), 200 × 4 × 2. Control: E163 (11.57 ± 8.87 /
29 ± 17 / −111) and E166's fb-only arm when it lands.
Predictions, before the run.
The 5-HT site is taught rarely — confirm() fires only on what the free rung likes — so
sites[5ht].lessons will be < 10% of the readout's lessons on both seeds. If it is
never taught (0 lessons on a seed), persistence never moved on that seed and the result
is a test of the OA gain alone; say so.
AUC_Q within E163's range: between 3 and 20 on each seed. Falsified if either seed is
below E159's 2.61 — then the modulated walk is worse than the unmodulated one and step 4
is withdrawn on this wiring.
Step modulation is real, not a constant: the dumped step_last spans ≥ 0.01 across
the 24 walkers (base 0.05, span 0.5 permits 0.025–0.075). If it spans < 0.005 the LAL
state does not separate compositions and the gain is a no-op — the mechanism is then
withdrawn, not the idea.
EXPERIMENTS.md · lines 10947–10957
E167 amendment, before its results arrive. By the same measurement the OA site
(pre = FB) is inert; the 5-HT site (pre = LAL, 71% active) and both gains (read from LAL
and DN) are live. E167 therefore tests serotonin persistence plus state-read gains, not
octopamine learning. Prediction 1–3 stand as written; a fourth is added: sites[oa].lessons
will be ~equal to the readout's lessons and its effect nil — the OA site's |Δw| is below
1e-4 total, so its share of any change is zero.
Housekeeping, stated: the per-seed readout dumps are named by circuit and seed only, so
E166 overwrote E163's and the E167 smoke overwrote seed 0 again. E163's seed-1 numbers
survive because E166's file is identical to it; E163's seed-0 file is gone (its share was
recorded in the E163 entry). Fixed by tagging the filename with FORAGER_TAG from here on.
EXPERIMENTS.md · lines 10988–11001
E167 interim (seed 0 of 2; seed 1 running) — and a protocol flaw, stated. Readout share
after 799 lessons: LAL 3.37%, DNa 0.42%, DN 7.53%, PFL 0.02%, MBON 89.1%. Sites: fb 544
lessons, oa 799, 5ht 0. Gains: step 0.029–0.074 (span 0.045), patience 3.0–8.8.
Prediction 3 confirmed: the step modulation is real (span 0.045 ≥ 0.01).
Prediction 4 (first half) confirmed: the OA site is taught on every lesson (799).
Prediction 1's "never taught" clause fired — but for a reason I wrote into the protocol,
not one the head produced: confirm() runs only under --confirm, and the E167 chain
does not pass it. The 5-HT site had no teacher. E167 is therefore a test of the
state-read gains (step from LAL, patience from DN), and of nothing serotonergic. Withdrawn
as a test of serotonin persistence; kept as a test of the gains.
Unpredicted: the readout put 7.5% on DN without the 5-HT site ever moving. The delta rule
w += lr·err·h favours the nodes with the largest state, and DN carries the largest
(E168: 3.8e-3 vs LAL 2.2e-3) — a magnitude effect, not evidence that DN is informative.
The E169 DN share must be read with that in mind.
EXPERIMENTS.md · lines 11008–11038
E167 result — falsified upward: the state-read gains more than double the search.
Whole brain, broadcast, learned readout, fb+oa+5ht sites, step from LAL state, patience from
DN state, 200 × 4 × 2:
arm AUC_Q finds best
E163 same head, constant step 0.05 / patience 6 11.57 +- 8.87 29 +- 17 -111
E167 step and patience read from the head 25.93 +- 11.44 71 +- 15 -136
E136 CEM, 300 rounds 13.57 +- 3.79 34.5 +- 8.5 -78
Seeds ≈ 14.5 and 37.4 — both above E163's mean, ×2.2 on AUC_Q, ×2.4 on finds, 25
meV/atom deeper, and for the first time a fly arm is clear of the CEM on every column.
Prediction 2 falsified upward. I bounded each seed at 3–20 and called "better" the case
of both seeds above 11.57, which I said was not predicted. It happened.
Prediction 3 confirmed on both seeds: step 0.029–0.074 and 0.026–0.072 (spans 0.045,
0.046), patience 3.0–8.8 and 3.1–8.9 — the gains are real, walker-specific quantities.
Prediction 4 confirmed (first half): OA site taught 799× on both seeds; its effect
cannot be isolated here, and by E168 (FB pre-state 1e-4) it is nil.
Prediction 1: 5-HT site 0 lessons on both seeds — by protocol (no --confirm), stated
in the interim. E167 says nothing about serotonin.
Readout: DN 7.5% / 4.1%, LAL 3.4% / 2.1%, DNa 0.42% / 0.25%; fb site 544 / 655 lessons.
What the result does and does not show. The improvement is attributable to the gains,
not the sites: the FB and OA sites move synapses by ~1e-5 (E168), the 5-HT site never
moved. But two things changed at once relative to E163 — the step and the patience are now
walker-specific, and they are read from the head. A swarm with the same spread of steps
and patiences assigned at random would separate those. Branch opened: E170, the shuffled
control — the same PopulationGain ranges with the z-scores permuted across walkers each
call, so each walker's gain is a real head state but the wrong walker's. If E170 matches
E167, the gain is heterogeneity, not the head, and "read from the head" is withdrawn as a
claim (the mechanism stays, the interpretation goes). If E170 falls back toward E163, the
head's state at the walker's own composition carries the information.
Related entries
E163 — Task 0, step 2b: the afferent broadcast as the brain's input
E166 — Task 0, step 3: a second plastic site, in the fan-shaped body
E159 — Task 0, step 2: read the brain at LAL + DNa, not only at the 97 MBONs
E168 — named in the log, no entry of its own
E169 — the cast from the descending neurons (task 0 step 5)
E136 — The fly has not been used, and nothing found so far is new