Microtracking/plan_article_2026_11_04.md

Article Revision Plan: 4 November 2026 Field Evaluation

Status And Objective

The revision specified below was implemented on 4 November 2026. The execution record at the end identifies delivered files, verification and remaining experimental limitations. The plan is retained as the revision specification. All manuscript text, captions, axes, annotations, tables and analysis reports are in English. Authors' names and official institutional names are preserved.

Make the 4 November 2026 outdoor acquisition the principal experimental case for the WiT-CPV controller. Build the argument around sustained focal tracking, aperture-referenced electrical performance, observed operating conditions and the practical limits revealed by the complete record. A strong central result must retain initialization, interventions, missing intervals and performance losses rather than selecting only the most favorable period.

Final title, selected after auditing firmware provenance:

Outdoor Characterization of Photocurrent-Based Focal Tracking in a Tracking-Integrated Micro-Concentrator Photovoltaic System

Source Of Truth

• Main manuscript: articulo/PRINCIPAL.tex.
• Bibliography: articulo/cas-refs.bib.
• Principal experiment: logs_nuevos/log_2026-11-04.txt.
• Solar-position reference: logs_nuevos/suncalc_log_2026-11-04.pdf.
• Existing analysis patterns: analyze_2026_11_03.py and its numerical tests.
• Supporting, not headline, experiment: the quality-controlled 3 November record.
• Historical September/October experiments: retain only independently supported information necessary to explain development or a distinct control behavior.

The current main article has not yet incorporated November results. Its abstract and highlights (approximately lines 116-134) lead with September 2025 and a selected October window; most results (approximately lines 400-738) develop those earlier records. The generated November 3 section exists separately and is not included by the main TeX source. This calls for replacement and editorial restructuring, not another appended daily case study. Line ranges refer to the source inspected during planning and will change during revision.

Do not overwrite raw logs, silently rescale historical experiments, delete old analysis artifacts, change firmware or deploy the hub as part of article work. Preserve the existing main PDF until a successfully compiled revision exists.

Preliminary Numerical Audit

These are read-only planning calculations, not final publication results. The integrated energy, irradiation, duration, aperture ratio, basic ADC quality and extreme responsivity observation were independently checked with Python 3.12 during planning. The implementation must still produce the audited artifacts and validate sensor assumptions before manuscript insertion.

Item	Preliminary finding	Consequence for the revision
Acquired record	5,049 electrical/coordinate samples; 09:52:50-16:05:13	Describe the acquired daytime span, not sunrise-to-sunset coverage.
Recorded firmware	1.1.3-ws	Do not credit subsequent software changes.
ADC quality	No clipped, near-current-rail or negative main-channel observations in this audit	This is cleaner than the clipped November 3 record, but absence of clipping does not validate every sensor observation.
Integration support	Approximately 6.121 h using adjacent intervals no longer than 15 s	Report support and missing time explicitly.
Full-record modeled energy	Approximately 3.746 Wh at FF = 0.82	Available-MPP estimate, not measured delivered energy.
Full-record aperture estimate	Approximately 23.41%, energy-weighted	Uses confirmed coplanar irradiance; conditional on calibration and FF, not intrinsic cell efficiency.
Control conditions	61 logged remote commands, including tuning and manual repositioning	Do not label the full record an uninterrupted autonomous, fixed-parameter trial.
Late behavior	Substantial output degradation toward the end	Retain it in the central result; examine operating limits without asserting an unmeasured cause.
Responsivity reference	The maximum I/G is dominated by an irradiance anomaly near 13:01	A maximum-derived "tracking efficiency" is not a defensible headline without anomaly/reference analysis.

Five sample gaps exceed 15 s in the independently checked parse: 09:53:10-09:53:51 (41 s), 09:54:11-09:57:17 (186 s), 10:34:38-10:34:59 (21 s), 16:03:43-16:04:23 (40 s), and 16:04:43-16:05:01 (18 s). No decreasing main-sample uptime was found in that check; reset/reconnection events and TEL counters still require separate auditing. These event boundaries must be regenerated by code rather than manually encoded as an undocumented exclusion list.

At 13:01:07 the preliminary audit finds G near 313 W/m2 with current near 337 mA, producing a maximum responsivity near 0.001078 A m2/W, versus a 99th percentile near 0.000420 A m2/W. This large reference sensitivity is a diagnostic, not grounds to delete an inconvenient observation. Inspect nearby raw channels, timing and events; possible sensor shading, weather variability or asynchronous measurement remain hypotheses until supported. Do not claim that this log demonstrates every control regime or independently establishes tracking accuracy.

Established Calibration And Interpretation

Use signed 24-bit ADC values and positive full-scale code D = 8,388,607:

Isc [A] = C_signed / D * 2.048 / (20 * 0.130)
Voc [V] = V_signed / D * 2.048 * 2
G [W/m2] = P_signed / D * 2048 / 0.2
P_hat [W] = Isc * Voc * FF, with nominal FF = 0.82
eta_ap_hat = P_hat / (0.002497 * G)

• The physical 130-milliohm shunt applies to the 4 November record. A hub conversion update that morning is not a physical shunt intervention.
• The pyranometer divisor is 0.2, not the obsolete value 2.0.
• The lens aperture is 0.002497 m2. Aperture efficiency includes the optical train and receiver; it is not intrinsic multi-junction cell efficiency.
• The X axis is azimuth; the Y axis is elevation. Audit nomenclature, electronics labels, equations, position plots and prose consistently.
• Alternating Isc/Voc sensing does not measure MPP delivered to a load. Use "estimated available MPP power" and "integrated FF-based energy estimate", not measured harvested energy or demonstrated net production.
• A constant FF is an assumption, not a field I-V measurement. Show linear sensitivity to FF without presenting a chosen range as a confidence interval.
• I/G normalization does not remove cell-temperature drift or spectral effects.
• Correcting irradiance offline does not retrospectively alter firmware thresholds, standby decisions or the control law used during acquisition.
• Attribute results to the firmware actually recorded, not a later compiled version or the subsequently developed configurable X:Y allocation.
• TEL counts fine-tuning steps only. Coordinate differences capture sampled net displacement and can miss reversals between observations. Neither alone establishes total motor travel or whole-system energy consumption.

Work Package 1: Freeze And Audit The Principal Experiment

1. Record source-file hashes, byte sizes, date, parsing rules, library versions and units in a machine-readable analysis summary. Preserve source line numbers.
2. Parse electrical/coordinate observations, uptime, TEL messages, firmware versions, controller states, parameter updates and manual coordinate commands.
3. Report acquisition span, typical sampling interval, duplicates, missing intervals, reboots, clipping, near-rail values and invalid polarity. Flag questionable observations without reconstructing clipped current.
4. Build a chronological event table. Distinguish initialization, commanded repositioning, parameter changes, tracking intervals and the final low-output period. Do not call the whole record autonomous or fixed-parameter unless supported by that audit.
5. Define primary integration support before reporting favorable subwindows. Require adjacent accepted endpoints, positive elapsed time, no uptime reset and a maximum interval of 15 s. Never join rows across rejected observations.
6. Report the complete acquired record and any event-defined operational phases together. Give both elapsed duration and accepted integration duration, with coverage. A working-range subwindow must not replace the full-record result.
7. Test sensitivity to gap limits and illumination thresholds. Do not describe the acquisition as sunrise-to-sunset, all-day energy or a replicated campaign.

Deliverables: analyze_2026_11_04.py, focused numerical/source-integrity tests, an audit CSV under figures/2026-11-04/, JSON summary and event table. The exact output names may follow existing analysis conventions.

Work Package 2: Quantify Performance And Solar Context

Electrical And Relative-Tracking Metrics

• Compute coincident Isc, Voc, G and estimated MPP power; report timestamps at peaks rather than combining noncoincident maxima into an artificial operating point.
• Integrate estimated power and measured irradiance on identical accepted support. Report energy-weighted aperture efficiency as the ratio of integrals, separately from median or maximum instantaneous efficiency.
• Define an explicitly empirical same-record responsivity reference and an integrated relative-yield indicator. Compare maximum and 99th-percentile references. Do not call this independently validated ideal tracking efficiency.
• Make the observed reference anomaly a release gate: document it and test defensible reference definitions before choosing a headline tracking metric. Do not automatically prefer P99 merely because it yields a higher score.
• Keep sample occupancy, time occupancy and integrated relative yield separate. State thresholds, denominators, reference windows and interpolation rules.
• Report median, spread and time evolution of I/G. Interpret changes jointly with irradiance, voltage, position and logged interventions, without assigning an unmeasured thermal or optical cause as established fact.
• Evaluate electrical range and end-of-session loss of response. Distinguish observed operation from rated travel limits or a validated angular acceptance envelope.

Solar Position And Weather

• Transcribe the supplied SunCalc table into a traceable CSV with its exact printed date and coordinates: 21.87304 degrees N, 102.28282 degrees W.
• Preserve azimuth convention and label elevation separately from zenith. Verify the relation between the PDF's local clock and acquisition timestamps; the log does not itself encode a time-zone offset.
• Use the provided 15-minute positions for context. If interpolating between entries, label interpolation and do not imply sub-minute astronomical accuracy.
• Plot the acquired interval against azimuth and elevation, including the observed useful-response range and any subsequent decline.
• SunCalc supplies solar direction, not receiver pointing error, optical incidence angle or proof of maintaining perfect focus. Module tilt and orientation are needed to convert solar position into incidence geometry.
• Record that the experimenter described the day as clear, distinguishing that field observation from an independently instrumented weather classification. Assess the irradiance trace and its brief anomalies before adopting an unqualified clear-sky claim. A smooth pyranometer signal alone does not certify cloud-free conditions or provide DNI. "Experimenter-reported clear conditions" is acceptable provenance; stronger radiometric claims require further evidence.
• A clear-condition record cannot by itself validate cloud-transient shielding, storm operation or recovery under rapidly changing irradiance. If one earlier experiment provides genuinely independent, quality-controlled evidence for a retained algorithm claim, keep that compact supporting test; otherwise narrow the claim instead of filling the paper with historical traces.

Core Figures And Tables

1. Field-day overview: aligned panels for irradiance, current/voltage, estimated power/aperture efficiency, and X/Y coordinates. Mark gaps and intervention events without smoothing away losses.
2. Solar path and operating context: SunCalc azimuth/elevation over the acquisition interval, linked to measured response. Separate absolute solar position from any unmeasured collector incidence or tracking error.
3. Tracking and operating envelope: irradiance-normalized response and event-defined tracking phases, with a short representative convergence detail only if it adds evidence not visible in the overview.
4. Fixed-silicon benchmark: a clearly labeled modeled comparison on common temporal and irradiance support, showing assumptions and sensitivity.
5. Primary results table: full acquired support plus disclosed operational phases; samples, integrated hours, irradiation, estimated energy, energy-weighted aperture efficiency and relative-yield indicator.
6. Event/quality table: a compact main-text version or supplementary table giving interventions, exclusions and missing intervals.

Prefer these focused figures over a gallery of historical daily traces.

Work Package 3: Build A Defensible Fixed-Silicon Comparison

The WiT-CPV system has fixed external optics and internally moving receivers. Do not equate it with an externally dual-axis-tracked module receiving DNI at normal incidence. Both the collection geometry and the comparison basis must be stated explicitly.

Comparison Available Without A Reference Panel

Use an equal-aperture, common-irradiance engineering scenario, not a claim of measured superiority over silicon:

P_Si_scenario(t) = A_reference * eta_Si_assumed * G_common(t)
E_Si_scenario = integral[P_Si_scenario(t) dt] on CPV accepted support
R_aperture = E_CPV_hat / E_Si_scenario

Set A_reference = 0.002497 m2 for aperture-normalized comparison. Explain that this is an area-equivalent scenario, not an actual fabricated silicon panel. Use a transparent, source-backed silicon-efficiency assumption or sensitivity range. Keep the assumed module efficiency distinct from cell record efficiency.

The verified PVWatts module-type documentation provides representative Standard and Premium assumptions of approximately 19% and 21% nominal efficiency, with power-temperature coefficients of -0.37%/degree C and -0.35%/degree C, respectively. These are model categories, not a measured reference panel or universal bounds on crystalline silicon. Cite the version/access date and replace them with a real module datasheet when one is available. Do not apply the thermal coefficients without measured or explicitly modeled silicon-cell temperature.

The simple scenario holds efficiency constant; it is not a weather- and temperature-corrected yield prediction. If thermal data become available, use a documented silicon module coefficient and measured/model-qualified cell temperature. Never assign unmeasured temperature as fact.

The experimenter confirmed on 4 November 2026 that the pyranometer is coplanar with the concentration lens. The measured G therefore represents global irradiance in the fixed aperture plane; G times A_L is the incident-power estimate and must not receive a second cosine projection. This does not make G direct-normal irradiance, nor imply ideal sensor angular/spectral response.

The silicon scenario assumes a hypothetical fixed surface in that same plane. Numerical CPV-to-silicon ratios remain conditional, not an observed prototype advantage, because silicon output is modeled and CPV MPP output is estimated. A more complete PVWatts-style model additionally needs module optical corrections, temperature and a documented model version, including its low-irradiance treatment when applicable.

Equal rated power is a different question. Add a rated-power-specific comparison only if a validated CPV rating exists; do not invent Wp from a selected peak. Do not compare the tiny CPV output directly to a commercial panel's absolute wattage, annual yield, cost or lifecycle performance.

Minimum Dataset For An Experimental Comparison

Request or obtain the following without delaying the modeled scenario:

• Timestamped fixed-silicon DC power at MPP, or simultaneous voltage/current under a specified MPPT/load; acquisition interval, units and local time offset.
• Panel model, active/aperture area definition, rated Pmax, nominal efficiency and power-temperature coefficient from its datasheet.
• Absolute tilt and azimuth of the shared lens/pyranometer plane and the silicon panel, plus sensor calibration. Relative lens/sensor coplanarity is confirmed.
• Simultaneous POA irradiance in the relevant plane, ideally with DNI/DHI if separating concentration and diffuse-light collection is a goal.
• Panel/cell or backsheet temperature, ambient temperature if available, and shading/soiling information.
• CPV board and motor power if a net-energy comparison is intended. A genuine comparison of delivered energy also requires CPV operation into a measured electrical load, not only alternating Isc/Voc samples.

Nonconcurrent silicon records can support a weather-normalized contextual comparison, not a simultaneous head-to-head experiment. Report the remaining geometry, thermal and electrical-measurement asymmetries explicitly.

Verified Reference Sources

• PVWatts module-type assumptions: https://pvwatts.nlr.gov/docs/help_module_type.php
• Sandia PV Performance Modeling Collaborative, plane-of-array irradiance: https://pvpmc.sandia.gov/modeling-guide/1-weather-design-inputs/plane-of-array-poa-irradiance/
• Sandia PV Performance Modeling Collaborative, PVWatts DC model: https://pvpmc.sandia.gov/modeling-guide/2-dc-module-iv/point-value-models/pvwatts/
• PVWatts V8 model inputs and outputs: https://developer.nlr.gov/docs/solar/pvwatts/v8/
• Apogee SP-212/SP-215 pyranometer manual, including angular and spectral response limitations: https://www.apogeeinstruments.com/content/SP-212-215-manual.pdf

Convert retained sources to verified bibliography entries during implementation. SunCalc provenance must cite the supplied dated PDF and website, not an invented irradiance or module-orientation dataset.

Work Package 4: Refocus The Manuscript

Proposed Main-Text Structure

1. Introduction: the internal focal-tracking problem, prior prototype and the specific control/evaluation contribution; compress generic solar-tracker review.
2. System and control: optical/mechanical context, correct physical axis mapping, evaluated hardware/firmware, implemented control and acquisition sequence.
3. Experimental methods: site/date, SunCalc reference, configuration chronology, calibration, data-quality rules and honest definitions of estimated metrics.
4. Results: complete 4 November record, event-defined operating phases, aperture performance, solar-position context and observed limits.
5. Fixed-silicon comparison and discussion: common-area scenario first; measured comparison only if the required reference dataset is supplied.
6. Conclusions: quantitative demonstrated capabilities, observed limitations and specific next validation steps, all consistent with the abstract.

Targeted Editorial Changes

• Replace the abstract and highlights currently led by September 2025 and a selected October two-hour window. Use the new primary results only after numerical verification, including their FF-based and coverage qualifiers.
• Replace the October-focused outdoor section and extensive September results with the principal November case. Do not merely append another daily report.
• The main replacement targets in the currently inspected source are the October section (about lines 400-479), September cross-day comparison (481-546), detailed September session (548-738), and conclusions (740-751). Resolve the empty dynamics/mechanical-model headings near lines 242-245; they must not remain as unfulfilled sections.
• Remove repetitive cross-day tables, redundant old power/position plots and disturbance anecdotes that do not answer a distinct research question.
• Retain concise laboratory validation only if its methods and evidence are traceable; clearly separate previously reported component characterization from new outdoor results. No unsupported solar-simulator performance claims.
• Keep November 3 at most as a brief calibration/ADC-range supporting case or supplement. Preserve its piecewise 260-to-130-milliohm analysis and clipping exclusions; it is not a clean paired causal test of hardware improvement.
• Remove unused cloud-recovery definitions, clear-sky fitted models and nomenclature once their corresponding experiments leave the main text.
• Correct stale 75/260-milliohm descriptions for the evaluated November hardware, without rewriting historical experiments to use the current shunt.
• Reconcile algorithm description against the evaluated implementation. Remove claims that later software features were demonstrated by this log.
• Replace assertions of eliminated hunting, reduced wear, causal cloud recovery, perfect lock or net energy benefit with measurements or appropriately bounded interpretations. Remove them when neither is available.
• Rewrite conclusions after results and discussion, then update abstract, highlights, title and nomenclature last to prevent contradictory headline claims.

Conclusion Contract

The revised conclusion should state four things with measured or explicitly modeled quantities: the duration/support of the demonstration, estimated aperture-level performance, the observed solar-position/operating range and the outcome of the assumption-labeled silicon scenario. It should also state what remains unproven: delivered MPP energy, net system energy, independent angular accuracy, multi-day repeatability and simultaneous silicon superiority. Strength comes from a coherent supported result, not stronger adjectives.

Work Package 5: Reproducibility And Release Checks

1. Add tests for signed conversion, current scaling, pyranometer scaling, clipping, rejected rows, gaps, uptime resets, event-window selection, trapezoidal integration and identical comparison support.
2. Test fixed-silicon scenario scaling with area and assumed efficiency, and FF scaling of CPV estimates. Preserve raw-code/source-line integrity.
3. Regenerate all numerical tables and figures from the audited raw source; include source hashes and assumptions in the machine-readable summary.
4. Independently check a sample conversion, a coincident peak, one integration and the energy-weighted efficiency before inserting headline numbers.
5. Check every in-text number against generated output and every caption against its plotted support. Retain failure periods and disclose exclusions.
6. Audit visible English throughout, including embedded figure text. Proper names and official institution names are not translation errors.
7. Update bibliography with verified primary references for the silicon model, sensor/model assumptions and SunCalc provenance; remove unused references.
8. Compile from articulo with the available MiKTeX/Biber toolchain:

pdflatex -interaction=batchmode -halt-on-error -file-line-error PRINCIPAL.tex
biber PRINCIPAL
pdflatex -interaction=batchmode -halt-on-error -file-line-error PRINCIPAL.tex
pdflatex -interaction=batchmode -halt-on-error -file-line-error PRINCIPAL.tex

9. Inspect warnings, undefined references/citations, page breaks, floating figures, table width and readability in the final PDF. Successful compilation alone is not scientific or visual validation.

The working scientific interpreter is py -3.12. The default python currently resolves to Python 3.11 without Matplotlib, so use the existing 3.12 environment instead of assuming the default command has the required analysis packages. Both pdflatex and biber are available; the planning pass has not recompiled the unchanged manuscript.

Completion Criteria

• The principal experimental narrative is November 4, not a sequence of unrelated historical sessions.
• No numerical headline is unsupported by a reproducible output and clearly defined observation/integration window.
• The manuscript never confuses modeled MPP output with harvested energy, relative response with angular accuracy, or SunCalc context with measured lock.
• The silicon comparison has explicit geometry, area, electrical-measurement basis and uncertainty; modeled results cannot be mistaken for observations.
• The revised manuscript, figures, captions, tables and analysis reports are in English, with coherent axes, units and calibration.
• Relevant numerical tests pass and the final main PDF compiles without unresolved references, followed by a visual and independent scientific review.

Parallel Work And Integration

The planning audit uses three independent internal subagents: raw-log analysis, manuscript evidence review and fixed-silicon comparison research. No visible Agent Manager sessions or additional worktrees are needed.

During implementation, one worker may own the November analysis and generated assets while another researches/verifies comparison references. Keep one owner for PRINCIPAL.tex to avoid conflicting editorial changes. The integrating agent verifies numbers, edits the narrative and compiles the final article.

Execution Record: 4 November 2026

Delivered Revision

• Rebuilt articulo/PRINCIPAL.tex around the November 4 acquisition, retaining authorship and affiliation metadata. September/October development narratives, unused metric definitions and inconsistent historical diagrams no longer compete with the principal case. Original logs and historical analysis assets were not modified.
• Generated articulo/results_2026_11_04.tex and articulo/metrics_2026_11_04.tex directly from the new analysis. The abstract, highlights and conclusions share generated numerical macros with the results.
• Produced the main articulo/PRINCIPAL.pdf: 14 pages, five figures including the revised functional architecture, two results tables and 14 cited sources. A separately built dated validation PDF is also available.
• Updated bibliography metadata against primary records, including the published tracking-integrated CPV review instead of its preprint, conference author order, verified DOIs, and the new SunCalc, pyranometer and silicon-model references.
• Added analyze_2026_11_04.py and test_analyze_2026_11_04.py. figures/2026-11-04/ contains the raw-code audit, accepted-edge support, event chronology, SunCalc transcription, window metrics, sensitivity checks, source/software provenance in analysis_summary.json, and PDF/PNG figures.

Verified Results And Scope

• 5,049 main observations and 5,026 separate telemetry messages; five sample gaps longer than 15 s; zero clipped, near-current-rail or negative main observations; no decreasing main or TEL uptimes.
• Full-record accepted support: 6.121 h, 98.63% of the acquired elapsed span. Reference irradiation: 6.408 kWh/m2. Available-MPP estimate: 3.746 Wh at FF = 0.82. Energy-weighted aperture estimate: 23.41%.
• The event-defined 12:32:02-13:53:00 phase yields 28.47% and 1.126 Wh over 1.349 h, without remote commands inside that interval. Earlier tuning, including the 12:27:20 delay command, is explicitly disclosed.
• The full 15:00-16:00 clock-hour result and all subsequent observations remain included. No causal explanation for the late deterioration is asserted.
• The irradiance anomaly remains in the source and analysis. Relative-yield sensitivities are 28.90% for the maximum reference and 74.07% for P99; neither is promoted as validated angular tracking efficiency.
• The 19% and 21% equal-area silicon assumptions give 3.040 and 3.360 Wh on the shared pyranometer reference. Ratios 1.232 and 1.115 are explicitly algebraic scenario results, not measured comparative yields.

Verification Completed

py -3.12 analyze_2026_11_04.py
py -3.12 -m unittest -v test_analyze_2026_11_03 test_analyze_2026_11_04

All 27 tests pass: 13 existing November 3 tests and 14 November 4 tests. Checks cover source quality and event provenance, signed calibration, invalid observations, gaps, resets, trapezoidal support, FF invariance/scaling, equal-area scenario scaling and SunCalc interpolation without extrapolation. An independent artifact check also verified all 5,049 raw observations against the exported audit CSV, the 5,043 accepted integration edges, and both the raw-log and analysis-source fingerprints.

The main PDF was compiled with the documented pdflatex/Biber sequence. The final LaTeX log contains no warnings, overfull/underfull boxes or unresolved references; the Biber log contains no warnings/errors. Visual review covered all-page layout, architecture labels, tables, the full acquisition plot, solar-response colors, reference sensitivity and scenario chart. The final PDF contains the new 23.41%, 28.47%, 1.232 and 1.115 values, not the retired 67.3%/88.5% headlines.

Remaining Experimental Information

The manuscript does not claim simultaneous silicon superiority, delivered MPP energy, net system energy or independent angular accuracy. A stronger physical comparison still requires silicon MPP monitoring and temperature, a documented matched panel plane, plus actual CPV load and supply-power measurements when delivered or net energy is claimed. The recorded 1.1.3-ws deployment is not presented as a validation of later firmware corrections.

Coplanar Sensor Confirmation

The experimenter subsequently confirmed that the pyranometer and concentration lens share the same plane. This resolves the earlier uncertainty about whether the irradiance reference represents the aperture plane. Methods, discussion and reproducibility metadata now identify G as global plane-of-aperture irradiance. No numerical recalibration or additional cosine factor is introduced. Absolute tilt/azimuth are still needed for solar-incidence-angle reconstruction, not for the aperture-energy denominator obtained from the coplanar sensor. The result text now explicitly distinguishes the 33.21% instantaneous estimate at the maximum-power observation from the 28.47% phase estimate and 23.41% full-record estimate. The analysis metadata records the experimenter's geometry confirmation and the absence of an additional cosine factor. All 27 tests pass; the main and dated validation PDFs were rebuilt with unchanged numerical results.