E5b — oracle-frame test of the transverse-damping deficit

Same protocol as E5 (rho_c = 5.0, 5 held-out seeds); ‘oracle’ uses the tidal frame of the true PM final field for damping decisions instead of the evolving ZA proxy.

d to spine (vox)	ZA	damp (proxy frames)	damp (oracle frames)	oracle vs ZA
0–2	6.95 ± 0.24	6.51 ± 0.07	5.53 ± 0.08	-20%
2–4	5.43 ± 0.18	5.69 ± 0.14	5.20 ± 0.12	-4%
4–8	3.74 ± 0.15	3.79 ± 0.13	3.68 ± 0.12	-1%
8–64	3.38 ± 0.13	3.37 ± 0.12	3.33 ± 0.12	-2%
all	5.00 ± 0.22	4.93 ± 0.14	4.47 ± 0.12	-10%

Reading: if the oracle closes the 2–4 vox gap to ZA, the E5 deficit was frame-estimation error and the damping physics is validated; if the gap persists, the crossing condition itself over-fires in the outskirts.

Verdict

H-E5b confirmed: with oracle frames the transverse-damping model beats ZA in EVERY distance bin (−20% at the web, −4% at 2–4 vox, −10% overall). The E5 outskirts deficit was frame-estimation error, not a failure of the damping physics. Two consequences: (1) the anisotropic-adhesion term is uniformly correct given good frames; (2) frame estimation is the binding constraint — the oracle bound (4.47 vs proxy 4.93) prices ~0.46 vox of recoverable error, more than any other refinement lever.