# Interim report: workspace-loop retrofit, through wave 3 2026-07-13/14 · gemma-4-E2B-it (frozen throughout) · DGX Spark All eval numbers: held-out test splits, greedy decode, execution/answer-verified. Full protocol: `PROTOCOL_UNIFIED.md`; methods: `../WORKSPACE_LOOPING.md`. ## Headline finding A 1.6M-parameter merge adapter (0.03% of the model) at the L13→L14 boundary, trained ~30 min on ~280 self-labeled items, lets the frozen model **loop its workspace band (L14–30) over the prompt k times before writing code** — converting plan-dependent failures into successes: **MBPP full test set (500 items), hard bucket (55 plan-only items), k=4:** | seed | hard pass@1 | overall | |---|---|---| | baseline (k=0) | 5.5% | 51.8% | | seed 0 | **43.6%** | 53.6% | | seed 1 | **41.8%** | 53.8% | | seed 2 | **30.9%** | 51.8% | Mean hard-bucket effect ≈ 7× baseline; overall at-or-above baseline for all seeds (no net tax). Convergent mechanism evidence: the trained loop is a hard fixed-point iteration (cos→1.000 by k≈4), and the J-lens shows latent-concept sharpening across iterations (~8× over untrained control on the probe task). ## Attribution: the loop is the ingredient (code), not the weights Same data, same parameter count, same boundary — only the mechanism varies (MBPP 250-item subset, hard bucket): | arm | hard pass@1 | |---|---| | baseline | 3.6% | | untrained loop (α-merge only) | 17.9% | | trained NO-loop adapter (weights control) | 17.9% | | trained loop | **42.9–46.4%** | The trained feedforward control lands exactly on the untrained-loop number: ~18% is what perturbation + format alignment buys; the remaining ~28 points require the recurrence. ## The boundary: math inverts the picture No recurrent variant beats plain weights on GSM8K. Four-arm grid (hard bucket): | GSM8K hard | prompt-side only | touches generation | |---|---|---| | feedforward weights | **11.8%** (best) | 4.7% (pause control) | | recurrence | 6.3–8.7% (prompt-loop) | 9.4% (carry, beats FF 2× in-harness) | Two orthogonal effects: (1) perturbing free-running generation positions is costly for either mechanism; (2) recurrence beats weights only where a state must evolve (generation side), and loses where it doesn't (static prompt). Interpretation: the loop performs **plan refinement**. Code needs a plan (loop wins); math needs answer-time computation that one frozen band pass per step cannot supply at 2B (CoT tokens remain load-bearing). Overall GSM accuracy: no variant beats the 10.5% baseline. (Hard-bucket cells carry an outcome-selection caveat — greedy labels; sampled relabeling in progress — so the math story rests on the overall numbers.) ## Secondary findings - **Unified (mixed-task) training regressed both tasks** vs dedicated adapters (MBPP 46.8% vs 52.0% at pre-registered k=2; GSM no better). CE-level parity between arms did NOT predict generation parity. - **Gated deployment** (logistic probe on the k=0 workspace state, STaR labels as supervision): 52.0% overall with easy items fully preserved (97.5%); gate recall 64%, precision 19% — the current ceiling; threshold/ feature work is CPU-only follow-up. - **Frozen-prompt KV-cache equivalence**: looped prompt states are constant across token steps (causality), so loop once + cached generation is bit-identical and ≥3.5× faster. Latent planning is prefill-shaped (parallel, compute-dense) — its economics improve with model scale, unlike serial CoT decode. - **Cross-token carry (design C)** is stable and the first recurrent variant to beat its own baseline on math overall (12.9% vs 10.2%), via latent pause positions, but does not beat the weights control; p=6 ≤ p=2 (no latent-depth scaling). - **Fixed operational traps** documented in `../LESSONS.md`: plan-pass truncation masquerading as "planning hurts"; stop-string matching the opening fence (pass@1=0 artifact); full-vocab logits OOM (earlyoom silent kills); KV-cache append in layer re-runs; small-pool overfitting ~step 300; val-CE checkpoint selection does not track generation accuracy. ## Status of caveats Resolved: post-hoc k (pre-registered k=2 before unified test numbers); weights-vs-loop attribution (FF arms); seed dependence (3 seeds, wave 5 adds 2 more); same-harness baselines. In progress tonight: outcome-selection on hard buckets (sampled relabeling); equal-FLOPs explicit-planning reference; depth generalization beyond trained k; lens battery at N=20; **12B replication** (the scale question). Not addressed: second synthesis domain, base-model diversity beyond gemma, easy-dip elimination.