Full naive run (dash1) reached the same TP4=0.34 optimum as the harness but took 6
iters (vs 2), never stopped (full budget), and spent trials 2-5 on worse TP2+runtime
detours. The other naive run (dash0) wandered runtime-only on TP1, found nothing, and
crashed the engine. Refined conclusion (matches paper §7.3): a strong model can
sometimes find the right knob unaided, so the harness's value is reliability + speed +
stop discipline, not that naive always fails. Harness: 2 iters-to-best, stopped at 4,
no regression. Naive: 3x slower at best, no stop, failed at worst.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Gahow Wang
816765071f