Direct verified control
Quality 0.92 · $0.050818 · 23.43 seconds
CONNECTED EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS · AUGUST 9, 2026
These connected trials compare a direct verified answer, a taxonomy-qualified multi-model plan, and selective repair. They are publishable experimental evidence, not production certification or a universal model-ranking claim.
HEADLINE RESULTS
Cost and latency include the complete tested chain. Quality was independently verified under the experiment contract.
Quality 0.92 · $0.050818 · 23.43 seconds
Quality 0.93 · $0.0121774 · 11.21 seconds
Quality gate passed in 2 of 3 replication trials.
CONNECTED COMPARISON
| Policy | Control | Quality | Cost | Latency | Finding |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 direct | — | 0.92 | $0.050818 | 23,429.98 ms | Verified baseline |
| P2 orchestration | P1 direct | 0.93 | $0.0121774 | 11,214.96 ms | Verified; beat P1 on quality, cost, and latency |
| P4 selective repair | P1 full redo | 0.9167 mean | $0.02847467 mean | 12,727.74 ms mean | 2/3 quality passes; use only behind verification and redo fallback |
| P1 full redo | — | 0.9567 mean | $0.04303167 mean | 20,957.02 ms mean | P4 replication control |
P2 used a flagship framework with taxonomy-qualified lower-cost workers and an independent verifier. P4 repaired only failed sections, verified the repair, and retained a full-redo fallback. All displayed economics are measured per complete tested chain rather than per isolated provider call.