rrt/artifacts/exports/rt3-1.06/runtime-effect-kind8-tier2-recipe-runtime-note.md

Runtime Effect Kind-8 Tier2 Recipe Runtime Note

This note summarizes the checked subgraph artifacts/exports/rt3-1.06/runtime-effect-kind8-tier2-recipe-runtime-subgraph.md, seeded from:

• 0x00435630
• 0x00412d70
• 0x00412fb0

High-level shape

The current Tier 2 recipe/runtime strip is one tightly coupled rebuild family, not a set of independent helpers.

Important bounded relationships:

• 0x00435630
  • rebuilds scenario-side port/warehouse cargo recipe runtime tables
  • re-enters 0x00412d70
• 0x00412d70
  • rebuilds candidate runtime records from scenario state
  • re-enters 0x00435630
  • also re-enters 0x00411ce0 and 0x00411ee0
• 0x00412fb0
  • broader collection-load owner
  • re-enters 0x004120b0
  • then 0x00412d70
  • then 0x00412ab0
  • then 0x00412c10

So the current recipe/runtime strip is not a simple one-way ladder. It is a coupled rebuild loop:

• recipe runtime rebuild
• candidate runtime-record rebuild
• per-record stream-load rebuild
• later named-availability latch refresh

Neighboring owners

The same bounded subgraph also shows the relevant downstream and side owners:

• named availability / cargo-economy side:
  • 0x00412c10
  • 0x0041eac0
  • 0x00434ea0
  • 0x00434f20
• broader load / bringup side:
  • 0x004131f0
  • 0x004384d0
  • 0x00443a50

Current implication

This supports the current Tier 2 bias:

• the shipped add-building carrier differences are more likely to live in the interaction between recipe rebuild, candidate runtime-record rebuild, and later availability-latch refresh
• not in one isolated helper or one isolated named-availability bit

One upstream pairwise check now supports that same read:

• compare-setup-payload-core Louisiana.gmp Dutchlantis.gmp already differs at:
  • payload_word_0x14: 1870 vs 2025
  • payload_byte_0x20: 0x3a vs 0xfd
  • payload_word_0x3b2: 2 vs 1
  • candidate-header words: 0xcdcdcdcd / 0xcdcdcdcd vs 0x00000000 / 0x00000000

So the current evidence no longer stops at the recipe-book lines themselves; there are already setup-payload-core differences upstream of the coupled Tier 2 rebuild strip.

The setup-side read is narrower now too:

• the currently grounded +0x20 -> [profile+0xc5] bridge weakens to a nonzero gate, not a unique preserved numeric input
• the only +0x14 peer (Mexico.gmp) stays zero across the checked recipe-book surface
• one same-header peer (Argentina Opens Up.gmp) keeps a broader mixed book01/book02 profile

So the stronger current differentiator is the imported recipe-runtime set itself, not the coarse setup-header class and not the raw +0x20 byte value.

The importer-side branch map now supports that more concrete read:

• 0x00435630 only materializes nonzero-mode rows into runtime descriptors
• Louisiana.gmp currently imports a minimal nonzero set centered on book00.line02
• Mexico.gmp imports none of that checked book content
• Argentina Opens Up.gmp keeps additional nonzero book01/book02 content

That makes the current Tier 2 question smaller and more specific:

• which maps share the same minimal imported nonzero recipe-runtime set as Louisiana.gmp
• and whether that minimal imported set, more than the setup-side bridge fields, predicts the shipped Add Building Warehouse05 runtime shape

So the next recovery pass should target the internal sequencing and data handoff across:

• 0x00435630
• 0x00412d70
• 0x00412fb0
• 0x00412c10

rather than returning to the title overlap or direct Warehouse05 availability question.