The argument in text
For marginals (0.10, 0.10) the both-fail probability is identified only to [0.0, 0.10]; both endpoints are attained by explicit joint distributions that satisfy the marginals; independence names 0.01, a point inside that set it was never entitled to.
A declared illustrative input (CC-001) and the kernel's bounds and witnesses (CC-001, CC-004), reproduced from a clean clone of the bound cc-framework commit in CI. The 100-item population and which items each guard misses are illustrative constructions; no measured system appears.
What this does not establish
- does not certify any stacked system as safe, and shows no measured system
- does not estimate or recover the true dependence between any two guards
- does not select a point inside the interval; the amber tick is what one assumption would select, not an answer
- the population and the item arrangements are illustrations of feasible worlds, not data
What would require a correction
A clean-clone execution of the bound kernel on marginals (0.10, 0.10) returns AND bounds other than [0.0, 0.10], or a witness distribution that fails nonnegativity, the unit sum, either marginal, or endpoint attainment at tolerance 1e-9 (CC-001 / CC-004 falsifiers, consequence REJECT); or the film's rendered counters show a both-miss count outside 0–10 while the marginal counters read 10 — checked by re-rendering the claim frames.
Sources and render record
Film manifest · Render receipt · First site deployment record
Current render: 2026-09-15. The receipt records the rendered inputs and output hash. It checks provenance, not scientific validity.