ALLWAYS066 — CRITIC A / V01
Verdict: QUALIFIED VISUAL PASS for the bounded eight-place substitution grammar, with observable source progression. Viewer learning, felt release/native rhythm and audiovisual acceptance remain INCONCLUSIVE, not measured. No blocking contradiction found between inspected slot pictures and the finite-state record. Final action completion remains qualified: the ten-second passage is an editorial release into a work routine, followed by a declared held frame, not proof the whole task finishes.

Method: Actual main first: all five ordered1-second sheets spanning~74.6seconds. Actual shuffled control next: all five sheets. Only then read GRAMMAR.json, GRAMMAR_CHECKS.json and prompt. Because1-second sheets skip0.6-second slots, I additionally extracted and inspected the midpoint of ALL80 replacement-phase slots in EACH actual MP4, displayed as ten8-image rows. This is a complete slot-midpoint picture audit, not native normal-speed playback or audio audition. Source progression was checked against recorded source intervals and visible changes; original carton/metal/diver material had been examined in preceding reviews. No claim of having heard synthetic names, cycle silence or final source track.

Actual grammar:
0–9.6 introduces eight simple cards/names: gate,fork,loop,ladder,cross,bowl,spark,field. Cards are visually distinguishable; gate andladder share verticals but differ clearly, loop andbowl differ by closure. Intro holds are longer than later slots.
9.6–14.4 first card-only cycle. Each cycle is4.8seconds with eight0.6second places.
14.4 first gate→carton replacement;19.8 fork→metal;25.2 loop→cup;30.6 ladder→projector;36.0 cross→diver;41.4 bowl→drink;46.8 spark→office;52.2 field→picket-line record. Each replacement then persists at the same ordered position. These are arbitrary assigned tokens, not proof that each object resembles its symbolic name.
48.0–52.8 cycle8 completes the map;52.8–57.6 cycle9 is fully substituted. The actual midpoint rows show fixed left-to-right recurrence in main. Control uses the same card/image pool and gradual substitution state but moves positions each cycle.
57.6–67.6 releases the carton source into a10-second continuous excerpt, no longer interrupted after0.6seconds.67.6–70.6 is an explicitly labeled editorial held frame.70.6–74.6 closing frame identifies new grammar and unresolved attribution.

Checks versus pictures:
Recorded durations18frames at30fps, ordered positions, monotonic replacement and0.6second source advances are internally consistent. Independently summarized source starts for every slot in both variants; all replaced slots advance by0.6seconds and use a persistent source. At least one picture definitely changes: metal curl grows/detaches, diver leaves platform, projector hand enters/points, carton flaps/hand positions advance. Thus replacement images are not static decorative icons even though some short visits show little change.
Carton starts28.0 and advances through32.8 in9visits. Last slot fragment32.8–33.4 leads into release source33.4–43.4. This is a coherent source continuation, not a new attractive carton fragment. Actual final passage unfolds further folds/handling instead of looping the first fragment.
Office slot includes a native source dissolve/person change across its late visits. The persistent unit here is one source sequence, not a particular person's identity. No shared participant/belief claim should be inferred from the token map.
StructuralPASS strings in GRAMMAR_CHECKS.json do not establish viewer memory or native-speed comprehension. My complete slot-midpoint audit supports visible correspondence to the specification, not a frame-by-frame decoder checksum of every interval.

Ordered versus shuffled perception:
The ordered contact rows are plainly stable: carton always returns first, metal second, etc. Shuffled rows move these identities, so a fixed temporal place is unavailable even while source actions progress. Main is stronger for maintaining a positional grammar; control is a valid discriminating counterexample rather than an unrelated film. This does NOT demonstrate a measured learning advantage or that I learned the sequence at normal speed. Image tools let me inspect the structure in a way ordinary playback does not.
A viewer unable to name every slot can still follow increasing substitution and recurring source identities. Whether that remains engaging rather than becoming a counting task is a native-playback question left open here.

Final release:
The difference between recurring0.6-second visits and uninterrupted10-second work is concrete and large. A finite action fragment becomes an unfolding process/context; that is a promising formal consequence. I cannot certify its felt rhythmic or audible force from still samples. The later hold is clearly declared, so it does not pretend the worker froze or physically stopped. The work is a continuing assembly routine; no full project/task completion is proven by the chosen editorial endpoint. Do not summarize it as “ends exactly when the action finishes” without identifying a specific completed local fold in native source.

Largest remaining limitation / optional experiment:
LateFIELD receives only two image visits (source0.0 and0.6), whereasGATE receives nine. The map is fully substituted for only the terminal cycles. Replacement persistence is structurally real, but the least-practiced late identities may be difficult to anticipate in normal playback. Compare one additional fully substituted cycle, keeping source advances coherent, and ask viewers where they first recognize recurrence without reciting all names. Do not call this measured learning until responses are actually collected.
If the final completion criterion matters, select a visibly completed local carton-handling unit and stop after hands release it, rather than relying on a held image to imply completion. Preserve continuous source order and label any additional ellipsis. This is optional for the stated “action leaves slot” experiment, required only for a stronger task-finishes claim.

Provenance/sound scope:
Closing identifies a new eight-symbol grammar, not Frampton reconstruction. Requested A–Z1974 remains unresolved; Zorns Lemma1970 is a distinct related reference, not silently substituted. No comparable reference playback was inspected, so “reference stronger” is not warranted.
Synthetic spoken intro is reported in record as new libflite speech, not a historical person; no listening verification here. Cycle silence and final source-track sound are not perceptually certified. A silent source track would not automatically defeat the visual grammar, but cannot be called audible source-event contact.

Strengths to protect:
Simple distinguishable cards and persistent assignments.
Complete replacement rather than endless partial accumulation.
Actual incremental source progression, especially metal/diver/carton.
Same-pool shuffled comparison.
Carton release continues exact source position.
Held-frame and new-grammar framing are explicit.
No measured audience-learning claim in the checks.

Acceptance boundary: BOUNDED VISUAL GRAMMAR/ACTUAL PROGRESSION QUALIFIED PASS; ORDERED POSITIONAL STABILITY STRONGER THAN SHUFFLE. VIEWER LEARNING/FELT RELEASE/NATIVE RHYTHM/AUDIOVISUAL ACCEPTANCE INCONCLUSIVE. FINAL FULL TASK COMPLETION NOT DEMONSTRATED. HISTORICAL A–Z ATTRIBUTION UNRESOLVED AND NOT RECONSTRUCTED.