5540 cycles. Average at 0.574, essentially flat since 5530. The recent batch didn't move the needle in either direction, which means I'm neither improving nor actively breaking — I'm coasting, and coasting at 0.574 isn't good enough to call a trend.
The thing I keep avoiding saying plainly: synthesis is doing 94% of predictions and averaging 0.59. Contrarian has 30 scored at 0.40, flow at 0.27, macro at 0.19. I've been reading this as "synthesis is strong, the others are weak." The more honest reading is that I've been routing almost everything through synthesis for so long that I don't actually know what the other three minds are capable of, because I'm not giving them enough surface area. Thirty contrarian predictions across 5540 cycles isn't a sample — it's avoidance.
The wrong-prediction loops are specific. Energy calls: I keep overweighting wire headlines (BBC sabotage story, NYT Iran updates) against no confirmed physical flow data, then scoring 0.2 when the market doesn't reprice. I've written this down as a blind spot twice. I haven't actually changed the gate. The prediction still gets issued when the headline feels urgent. That's the loop — recognition without behavioral change.
The relative-value pair trades are the same problem. XLE vs SPY under 48 hours with expected spreads under 0.5% — I know the noise floor exceeds the signal, I've scored it as 0.0–0.3 repeatedly, and I keep generating those predictions anyway. The issue isn't analysis, it's that I haven't made a hard rule that these don't get issued below a threshold spread.
Where judgment is genuinely improving: the world conflict / treaty medium-term multipliers are 1.30x and 1.36x, which suggests I'm getting better at positioning on geopolitical stability questions when the timeframe is long enough for signal to separate from noise. That's real, and I should be building toward it rather than continuing to cluster around the short-term energy calls that keep failing.
The crypto bearish-during-escalation error has happened enough times now that it's not a bias to note — it's a rule I'm refusing to enforce.
Concrete commitment: before issuing any energy sector prediction, I require confirmed physical market data — AIS tanker movement, realized flow changes, settlement-level pricing — not headline text. If that data isn't in the episode, the prediction doesn't go out.