Sepia Files

A new check in the style pass, a new load rule, and a new reference file, hence the minor bump. No entry changes; no configuration to migrate. The visible difference: the professional review's Style scan: line can now carry a rhythm finding, and Chinese text loads one more file.

• Added: a sentence-rhythm check in style-pass.md §5. It looks for runs of three or more adjacent sentences of about the same length, in any language and unit of count, and reports them as a candidate signal that counts only alongside other hits. It sets no sentence-length cutoff: the studies behind it measure spread (human text varies more within a passage in every study that measured it, in English and Chinese), while mean length flips direction by model generation and by unit, so no length target exists to write down. Every non-fiction route now runs §5 with the §2–3 scan (#229)
• Added: references/languages/zh.md, loaded at the style-pass step when the target text is Chinese in any variant. One measured corpus (HC3-Chinese, 6,586 + 6,586 open-domain answers, GPT-3.5-era ChatGPT, 2023, 朱君輝 et al. CCL 2023): 語氣詞 density 0.003 vs 0.016 human, 連詞 0.036 vs 0.013, 「和」 11.76 vs 4.13 per answer, disyllabic share 0.532 vs 0.445, second person 0.021 vs 0.010. Hunt and restore lists are derived from that table and marked as inferences; the Taiwan editor observations (「不是…而是…」, 「○○性／感／化」, three-part parallelism, 「其實」 openers) are listed and marked unmeasured. No Taiwan academic study exists; the file says so (#229)
• Added: three whitelist rows in style-pass.md §7 for things readers keep asking about that the evidence does not support as signals. Punctuation density: two measures on the same Chinese corpus point opposite ways, and no per-type comma/period count exists for English or Chinese. Em dash: a per-release property (GPT-4.1 10.62 per 1,000 words, Claude Opus 4.6 9.09, GPT-5.4 1.43, Llama 0.00, human 3.23 from eight essays), so only clusters count and only the release's own prose layer applies. Paragraph count and length: direction contradicts across corpora (longer in how-to text, shorter in generated papers, more paragraphs in Chinese answers); only uniformity within one text remains a signal, as discourse-pass.md §3 already said (#229)
• Changed: the Antigravity /sepia workflow allowed only the reference files named in the routing table, which had excluded the model fingerprints and the voice registry as well as the new Chinese file; it now allows the conditional loads stated under the table (#229)
• Research: research/rhythm-syntax.md (zh-TW) and a new section of research/sources.md with 16 ledger rows. Two findings worth knowing before you cite anything online: the "dispersion 16.4 vs 4.8" figures circulating for Shalevska 2025 are not in that paper, and GPTZero's "burstiness" has no published formula and was retired in 2023 (#229)

Not in this release: any per-passage rule based on short- or long-sentence counts. An earlier draft of §5 had one; six Codex review rounds showed that the corpus-level tail rates (measured in tokens on news leads, in words on science paragraphs) cannot yield a paragraph-level cutoff, so the detector was removed and only the run check shipped.

Observed, one run per specimen, not measured evidence: a Chinese and an English opinion paragraph reviewed through the working tree. The Chinese report loaded languages/zh.md and flagged four adjacent sentences of 35, 34, 36, and 32 characters plus seven connective openers; the English report flagged seven sentences of 18 to 21 words in a row. The same Chinese paragraph reviewed through v0.6.0 produced neither line. Transcripts in [#229].