Adds the bottom-up ratio solver, programme parser, Perl-oracle bridge,
and two experiments. Headline finding: the "isolated size solver on a
frozen topology" hypothesis is NOT validated.
- resolve_ratios.py: re-solving candidate-002 from programme targets
recovers areas accurately but scores below the original (introduces
width/perpendicular/crinkliness failures the area objective ignores).
- refine_sweep.py: warm-start refine of all 34 evolved candidates
regresses 34/34 (fails 124->297 perpendicular-tied; 124->626 area-only
with free skew). Moving cuts to fix room area breaks the coupled
adjacency/access/shape constraints those designs balanced.
Conclusion: sizing is not separable from the rest of Urb's fitness;
a geometry inner loop must optimise the full objective, not an area proxy.
Geometry port remains validated byte-identical to Urb.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Bruno Postle
497d05c343