docs(jfm): establish traceable manuscript planning baseline

Track the research dossiers, section freezes, supporting manuscript materials, and round-aware agent controls so future drafting decisions can be reviewed across both repository mirrors.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>

docs/JFM_WYQ/ROUND3_BOTTOM_UP/01_INTRODUCTION.md

@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+# Round 3 revised candidate — Section 1: Introduction
+
+**Working title:** *Interpreting learned hydrodynamic cloaking and illusion in a fluidic pinball*
+
+**Status:** ready for coordinator second-audit closure; not manuscript approval.
+
+## Section question and bounded answer
+
+**Question.** What physical problem, literature gap and bounded contribution justify this paper without overpromising applications, mechanism or priority?
+
+**Bounded answer.** The paper separates three evidence levels: (a) named wake-signature or visual PPO capability across the declared Kármán, Vortex and Illusion tasks under distinct contracts; (b) independent spatial field matching only for named Legacy Kármán Re100; and (c) a bounded Legacy Kármán control-skeleton interpretation. The latter combines executable action-law evidence with a corrected four-role constant-mean comparator and a separately centred, non-paired residual organized descriptively by action-correlated correction-field modes. This does not establish linear-cloak/Navier–Stokes equivalence, a causal mechanism, universal transfer, positive Illusion symbolic regression, priority or quantitative experimental validation.
+
+## Layer 1 — five-paragraph near-prose draft
+
+### Paragraph 1 — concept and compact genealogy
+
+Hydrodynamic cloaking and illusion are observer-centred matching objectives. Cloaking asks a controlled body to approach a declared background or incident signature in the field or signal space seen by an observer; illusion instead asks it to approach a declared non-zero signature associated with another target. A compact genealogy runs from transformation-based and conformal optical cloaks to active exterior cloaking and non-zero-target illusion in linear field equations, with later wave analogues and active hydrodynamic proposals showing how cancellation or retargeting can be formulated under restricted assumptions (Pendry, Schurig & Smith 2006; Leonhardt 2006; Vasquez, Milton & Onofrei 2009; Ma et al. 2013; Urzhumov & Smith 2012). This history supplies vocabulary for declared references, active sources and target signatures; it does not make a linear cloak equivalent to a finite-Reynolds-number Navier–Stokes wake, nor does “cloaking” mean invisibility to every possible observer. [R1-Introduction literature]
+
+### Paragraph 2 — finite-Reynolds-number pinball difficulty
+
+The fluidic pinball makes the distinction concrete. Three interacting circular bodies generate separated shear layers, vortex shedding, symmetry breaking and multiple temporal organisations; independent rotation must modify a spatially extended wake rather than a single scalar force. The pinball therefore supplies a compact but nonlinear benchmark in which mean deficit, phase, frequency and downstream spatial organisation need not change together (Deng et al. 2020, 2021, 2022). Earlier rotating-cylinder and machine-learning control studies establish that actuation can alter separation, wake structure and force, but their objectives and observables do not by themselves answer whether a specified downstream signature has been matched (Cornejo Maceda et al. 2021; Gautier et al. 2015). The physical problem here is finite-Re wake-signature matching with limited actuation and sensing, not scalar drag optimisation relabelled as cloaking.
+
+### Paragraph 3 — capability and explanation gap
+
+Deep reinforcement learning offers a way to search this nonlinear control problem from forces and sparse downstream velocity observations. It can discover effective feedback in settings where a tractable controlled-flow model is unavailable, as shown for cylinder control and later studies of robustness, stability and partial observation (Rabault et al. 2019; Paris, Beneddine & Dandois 2021; Li & Zhang 2022; Xia et al. 2024; Wang et al. 2024). That capability leaves a scientific gap. A reward or sparse-signal similarity score establishes performance only in its declared observer space; it does not independently establish field matching, reveal which action structure survives closed-loop deployment, or explain how a persistent wake correction is organised. Adjacent active hydrodynamic stealth work and sparse-model approaches sharpen the motivation, but do not supply this paper’s rotating-pinball evidence chain or a basis for a priority claim (Ren, Wang & Tang 2021; Loiseau, Noack & Brunton 2018). The question is how to interpret learned capability without promoting policy correlation into a physical law.
+
+### Paragraph 4 — evidence chain needed for a bounded interpretation
+
+Answering that question requires linked but non-equivalent tests. The execution problem is wake-signature matching, whereas independent spatial field matching is reserved for the named Legacy Kármán Re100 comparison, with L2 primary and DTW complementary, signal-level and case-specific. The learned action must be tested as an executable closed-loop law under the same Legacy plant and action convention, rather than accepted from offline action fit alone. The corrected four-role analysis then compares a constant-role mean field with zero and DRL target errors, while a separately centred, non-paired dynamic residual is organized descriptively by action-correlated correction-field modes. These tests address distinct performance, action-law and field-role questions; they do not independently confirm one another or establish a mechanism.
+
+### Paragraph 5 — question, contribution, scope and bridge
+
+This paper asks whether named force-plus-sparse-signature control can produce hydrodynamic cloaking and illusion in the fluidic pinball, and what can be learned about the Kármán cloak without confusing capability with mechanism. Its contribution has three levels: named wake-signature or visual PPO capability across declared Kármán, Vortex and Illusion tasks; independent spatial field matching only for Legacy Kármán Re100; and a bounded Legacy Kármán control-skeleton interpretation. The interpretation is Kármán/cloak-only: Vortex and Illusion remain bounded capability demonstrations, Erase is unsupported quantitatively, positive Illusion SR is historical/negative, and any experiment is author-described qualitative, open-loop and provenance-gated. Applications are prospective only. The next section fixes the plant, action, chain, role and metric contracts; the following capability section presents the Kármán-dominant Fig. 1 progression, with no experiment. [Round-2 freeze; M02; M03–M10]
+
+## Layer 2 — provenance, literature identities and style recommendation
+
+| Paragraph | Exact identity / read level | Boundary |
+|---|---|---|
+| P1 | Pendry, Schurig & Smith, “Controlling Electromagnetic Fields,” *Science* 312, 1780–1782 (2006), DOI `10.1126/science.1125907`; Leonhardt, “Optical Conformal Mapping,” *Science* 312, 1777–1780 (2006), DOI `10.1126/science.1126493`; Vasquez, Milton & Onofrei, “Active exterior cloaking for the 2D Laplace and Helmholtz equations,” *PRL* 103, 073901 (2009), DOI `10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.073901`; Ma et al., “Experiments on active cloaking and illusion for Laplace equation,” *PRL* 111, 173901 (2013), DOI `10.1103/PHYSREVLETT.111.173901`; Urzhumov & Smith, “Flow stabilization with active hydrodynamic cloaks,” *PRE* 86, 056313 (2012), DOI `10.1103/PhysRevE.86.056313`. Full-PDF per R1 index. | Linear genealogy is vocabulary/method precedent only; no Navier–Stokes equivalence. |
+| P2 | Deng et al., “Low-order model for successive bifurcations of the fluidic pinball,” *JFM* 884, A37 (2020), DOI `10.1017/jfm.2019.959`; Deng et al., *JFM* 918, A4 (2021), DOI `10.1017/jfm.2021.299`; Deng et al., *JFM* 934, A24 (2022), DOI `10.1017/jfm.2021.1105`; Cornejo Maceda et al., *JFM* 917, A42 (2021), DOI `10.1017/jfm.2021.301`; Gautier et al., *JFM* 770, 442–457 (2015), DOI `10.1017/jfm.2015.95`. Full-PDF per style guide. | External precedent only; no project threshold, solver, Re or result imported. |
+| P3 | Rabault et al., *JFM* 865, 281–302 (2019), DOI `10.1017/jfm.2019.62`; Paris et al., *JFM* 913, A25 (2021), DOI `10.1017/jfm.2020.1170`; Li & Zhang, *JFM* 932, A44 (2022), DOI `10.1017/jfm.2021.1045`; Xia et al., *JFM* 981, A17 (2024), DOI `10.1017/jfm.2024.69`; Wang et al., *JFM* 988, A4 (2024), DOI `10.1017/jfm.2024.333`; Ren et al., *Physics of Fluids* 33, 093602 (2021), DOI `10.1063/5.0060690`; Loiseau et al., *JFM* 844, 459–490 (2018), DOI `10.1017/jfm.2018.147`. Full-PDF per R1/style records. | Capability and interpretation motivation only; unresolved `Ren19b` excluded; no priority claim. |
+| P4–P5 | Round-2 freeze/style; R1 Introduction, DRL, SR, field/CCD/OID, steady/theory and metrics dossiers; current Modules 03–08, ready M09 and M10, and current authorities. Full-report/read for repositories; not independently recomputed or universally artifact-audited. | Three levels remain separate: named wake-signature/visual PPO capability across declared tasks; Legacy Kármán Re100 spatial field matching only; bounded Legacy Kármán control-skeleton interpretation. Vortex has no event L2; Illusion field L2 is conditional and Illusion SR historical/negative; Erase has no supported quantitative route; experiment is qualitative/open-loop and provenance-gated. |
+
+**Observed literature style.** The supplied JFM papers generally move from physical problem and comparator to evidence, interpretation and a local limitation. Deng uses physical chronology and transition to motivate refinement; Rabault and Paris reach the control gap quickly; Gautier places an explicit law beside closed-loop behaviour; Loiseau moves from sparse observations toward fuller representation. Strong words follow dedicated tests, and bridges introduce the next scientific question.
+
+**Manuscript recommendation.** Use that rhythm at a lower claim register: concept and gap → finite-Re difficulty → named capability and explanation gap → independent evidence chain → bounded question and bridge. Keep genealogy compact, cite around physical transitions, state dangerous limits here, reference Figure 1 prospectively without panel narration, and organize the contribution as capability, field matching and Kármán interpretation rather than a package list.
+
+## Figure, claim and interface contracts
+
+- **Figure 1:** presented in the following capability section as a Kármán-dominant progression across named contracts; it does not establish a common score, independent field matching beyond Legacy Kármán Re100, positive Illusion SR, interpretation transfer or pooled Legacy/V5 evidence. It contains no experiment.
+- **Definitions next:** cloak/illusion as declared reference matching; wake-signature matching as execution; spatial L2 primary and DTW complementary. No project equations or numbers belong here.
+- **Green:** named wake-signature or visual PPO capability across the declared Kármán, Vortex and Illusion tasks; independent spatial field matching only for named Legacy Kármán Re100; and bounded Legacy Kármán control-skeleton interpretation.
+- **Amber:** a constant-role mean-field comparator accounts for most of the measured zero-to-DRL target-error reduction, while a smaller separately centred, non-paired residual is organized descriptively by action-correlated correction-field modes under the Legacy Kármán contract; steady is contextual.
+- **Red:** linear-cloak/Navier–Stokes equivalence, all-observer invisibility, universal/causal/mechanistic/necessary/unique/optimal/robust/priority claims, positive Illusion SR, pooled chains, DTW-as-delay, causal CCD, application catalogues or quantitative experiment validation.
+
+## Imports, exports, bridge and coverage ledger
+
+**Imports:** frozen title and vocabulary; R1 literature and motivation; current Round3 controls and ready Modules 02–10, including M09’s author-described experiment/provenance gate and M10’s three-level manuscript-wide claim ladder. **Exports:** cloak/background and illusion/non-zero-target definitions; wake-signature matching; L2-primary/DTW-complementary evaluation only for the named Legacy Kármán Re100 field comparison; Kármán/cloak-only control skeleton; broad capability versus asymmetric interpretation depth. **Bridge:** declare plant, chain, action, role, Re, comparator, metric and window before comparing cases, then present Fig. 1 in the capability section.
+
+| Status | Coverage and reason | Boundary |
+|---|---|---|
+| `read` | Round3 controls/interface/Wave-A audit; Round2 freeze/style; R1 Introduction and current-document audit; ready Modules 02–10, including M09 and M10; current Confirmation Introduction; cited JFM/Confirmation material | Read directly; not independently verified or artifact-audited |
+| `mapped` | Broader manifests, archive navigation and authority-linked external payload identities | Mapped only; not promoted as read evidence |
+| `not-covered` | New literature search; unresolved Ren19b; raw fields/NPZ/models; new CFD/training; hashes; Figure 1 generation; quantitative experiment | Unnecessary for bounded introduction; no claims inferred |
+| `external-inaccessible` | External/symlink-backed fields and hidden raw artifacts | Authority-led `artifact-audit deferred`; no raw-artifact claim made |
+
+## Final targeted self-audit
+
+The narrative retains five argumentative paragraphs and explicitly separates the three manuscript-wide levels: named wake-signature/visual PPO capability; Legacy Kármán Re100 spatial field matching; and bounded Legacy Kármán control-skeleton interpretation. The constant-role CCD comparator, non-paired residual, cross-case gaps and provenance-gated qualitative experiment are bounded without causal or action-magnitude language. Literature identities and DOI/read levels are preserved; no new result or citation was added. Figure 1 is correctly bridged to the following capability section. This final targeted revision passes the paragraph-boundary, claim-ladder, provenance and interface checks; the module is ready for coordinator second-audit closure, not manuscript approval.