Errata and Retractions
7.1. Paper 5.3 downgraded from 0.80 to 0.60
2026-08-02 · downgrade · reported by A. Rahman and K. Osei
Two readers demonstrated the effect reproduces in private mailing lists with no ranking algorithm present, which breaks the mechanism proposed. Section 3 of that paper is being rewritten and currently says so at the top.
7.2. Paper 5.10 retracted in full
2025-11-14 · retraction
The central claim failed. Retrieval quality at scale turned out to depend on index properties I had dismissed, and the operational story matured faster than I predicted. What I was actually right about was narrower and less quotable. Original text preserved, struck through, with this note attached at the head.
7.3. Principle 4.3 was violated in production, by me
2025-06-30 · self-correction
The June 2025 ingest incident traced to a retry path with backoff and no budget, in code I reviewed and approved. Ninety-four minutes of degraded intake. Postmortem published unredacted, including the review comment where I did not ask the question.
7.4. Figure 3 of the ClickHouse note had the axis mislabelled
2025-02-11 · correction · reported by S. Datta
Milliseconds, not seconds. The conclusion was unaffected but the chart was flattering by a factor of a thousand, which is exactly the kind of error that should be published rather than quietly swapped.