literal links and image references in the public edition; no inferred semantic support

# 2026-06-23-4K无字幕母文件开场94分03秒到94分16秒第1006失联状态登记与相信追问接缝复核

本文为研究档案公开版，保留来源版本的论述与限制。公开时间：2026-09-08；不表示已完成同行评审。 本文属于公开研究资料（历史笔记、研究稿或来源记录）：已完成格式、来源限制与重复项筛查，尚未完成逐篇独立事实复核；原文中的解释、候选判断和未确认内容均按其原有限制阅读。

来源版本日期：2026-06-23

证据边界：T0 台词账锁定 #1006 甲瑞 `已经失联一整天了`，时间 01:34:03.900-01:34:05.733；#1007 阿蒙 `你相信我` 于 01:34:05.700 进入，和 #1006 名义重叠 0.033s。本页只复核 #1006 作为 #1005 呼叫后的状态登记及 #1007 接缝；不得写成真实外部任务事故、真实宇航员失踪、真实塔台空间、报告界面显影、声源透明、口型同步、可确认音乐或硬切换场。

# 2026-06-23-4K无字幕母文件开场94分03秒到94分16秒第1006失联状态登记与相信追问接缝复核

## 取证范围

- 母文件：`〔本地资料路径省略〕 无字幕 28g 4k.mov`
- 时间轴：无偏移文件时间轴。
- 资产目录：`inspool-wiki-zh/raw/assets/4k-nosub-restart-20260623/1006-lost-contact-status-nooffset`
- 目标句：#1006 甲瑞 `已经失联一整天了`，`01:34:03.900-01:34:05.733`。

核心资产：

```text
audio/1006_exact.wav
audio/1006_to1007_chain.wav
audio/1006_to1012_chain.wav
clips/1006_to1012_chain_720p_audio.mp4
frames/1006_labeled_keyframes_contact.jpg
frames/1006_to1012_contact.jpg
waveforms/1006_exact_waveform.png
waveforms/1006_to1007_chain_waveform.png
metrics/audio_summary_metrics.tsv
metrics/audio_top_windows.tsv
metrics/audio_micro_bins.tsv
metrics/audio_core_deltas.tsv
metrics/stereo_channel_metrics.tsv
metrics/frame_color_metrics.json
```

## T0 链条

```text
#1005 01:34:02.000-01:34:03.900  ACT-JIARUI / 甲瑞  塔台呼叫7号宇航员
#1006 01:34:03.900-01:34:05.733  ACT-JIARUI / 甲瑞  已经失联一整天了
#1007 01:34:05.700-01:34:06.800  ACT-AMENG / 阿蒙  你相信我
#1008 01:34:07.066-01:34:08.166  ACT-AMENG / 阿蒙  可是你要走
#1012 01:34:15.066-01:34:16.833  ACT-ZICHOU / 子丑  07报告一切正常
```

#1006 是 #1005 呼叫后的状态句。它不能单独读成“外部任务事故事实”，必须放在 `塔台呼叫 -> 已经失联 -> 你相信我 -> 可是你要走 -> 07报告一切正常` 这一串里看。

## 声音事实

核心 RMS：

```text
1005_exact        RMS=-15.5315dBFS  Peak=-2.8958dBFS
1006_exact        RMS=-18.2817dBFS  Peak=-4.3136dBFS
1007_exact        RMS=-26.7330dBFS  Peak=-8.1668dBFS
1008_exact        RMS=-28.6081dBFS  Peak=-11.0749dBFS
1012_exact        RMS=-17.1946dBFS  Peak=-0.4295dBFS
```

关键差值：

```text
1006_exact 比 1005_exact 低 2.7502dB
1006_exact 比 1007_exact 高 8.4512dB
1006_exact 比 1008_exact 高 10.3264dB
1006_exact 比 1012_exact 低 1.0871dB
```

稳定判断：#1006 不是比 #1005 更强的整体升级。它是呼叫之后的回落式补充。但它仍然显著高于紧随其后的 #1007/#1008，所以“失联”状态句在声场里保有系统前景，而 #1007 `你相信我` 是低位贴近，不是强力夺权。

## #1006 内部结构

#1006 前后半：

```text
1006_first_half  RMS=-16.5136dBFS
1006_tail_half   RMS=-21.3231dBFS
差值：前半高 4.8095dB
```

#1006 四分段：

```text
1006_q1  RMS=-19.5875dBFS
1006_q2  RMS=-14.7254dBFS
1006_q3  RMS=-19.1670dBFS
1006_q4  RMS=-25.7842dBFS
```

第二四分段最强，第四四分段显著塌落。滑窗高点集中在 `01:34:04.370-01:34:04.470`：

```text
top20   01:34:04.420-01:34:04.440  RMS=-10.2732dBFS
top50   01:34:04.390-01:34:04.440  RMS=-10.7007dBFS
top100  01:34:04.370-01:34:04.470  RMS=-11.5729dBFS
top250  01:34:04.370-01:34:04.620  RMS=-13.2981dBFS
top500  01:34:04.370-01:34:04.870  RMS=-14.8150dBFS
```

50ms 小窗也支持这个判断：

```text
01:34:04.400-01:34:04.450  RMS=-10.9000dBFS
01:34:04.500-01:34:04.550  RMS=-13.1508dBFS
01:34:04.450-01:34:04.500  RMS=-13.8918dBFS
01:34:04.350-01:34:04.400  RMS=-13.9405dBFS
```

这使 #1006 不像一条均匀展开的中性播报。它有一个很明确的局部托起，随后迅速退入尾部。按台词语义，这个局部高点大概率落在 `失联` 附近；但本页不做逐字口型或逐字声纹裁决，只稳写为“失联状态词附近的局部声学高点”。

## #1006 到 #1007

#1006 与 #1007 在 T0 上名义重叠 `0.033s`：

```text
#1006 结束：01:34:05.733
#1007 开始：01:34:05.700
重叠：0.033s
```

但这个重叠并不强：

```text
1006_to1007_overlap  RMS=-27.3097dBFS
1006_last_500        RMS=-24.9147dBFS
1007_entry_600       RMS=-24.3155dBFS
1007_exact           RMS=-26.7330dBFS
```

#1007 entry_600 只比 #1006 last_500 高 `0.5991dB`，而 #1007 全句比 #1006 低 `8.4512dB`。因此，不能把 #1007 写成大声打断或立刻夺权。更稳的写法是：#1006 先把“失联”状态登记出来，尾部急速退低；#1007 `你相信我` 贴着这个尾部低位进入，把状态登记重新拖回信任关系。

## 画面事实

#1006 到 #1007/#1008/#1012 没有切到真实塔台、太空、飞船、宇航员装备、通信设备、控制台、屏幕、星空、报告界面或外部任务室。

可见结构保持为：

- 同一抬高平台；
- 半透明膜面/塑料面覆盖上方和背景；
- 黑衣站立人物背对镜头，在膜面前触碰、拉扯或处理膜面；
- 中间白衣坐姿男性右手在头部/后脑/颈部附近，低头、身体内收；
- 右侧白衣坐姿人物朝向中间人物；
- 左下方和平台下方仍有旁观者/观众；
- 光线在 #1006 内部从较冷灰转为更暖、更暗。

关键帧指标：

```text
1006_start  luma=73.473 warm=0.137240 dark=0.096476
1006_peak   luma=68.521 warm=0.448385 dark=0.120625
1006_mid    luma=63.683 warm=0.592448 dark=0.164115
1006_tail   luma=59.531 warm=0.792448 dark=0.224375
1006_end    luma=59.878 warm=0.819896 dark=0.220312
1007_start  luma=60.158 warm=0.820990 dark=0.220295
```

这说明 #1006 不是把画面打开成外部任务空间，而是让同一膜面现场变暖、变暗、变近。台词说“失联”，画面不给失联物证，只把失联状态留在公开舞台和膜面关系里。

## 切场、静默、声道与音乐边界

`scene>0.04` 对以下窗口均无命中：

```text
1006_exact
1006_to1007_chain
1006_to1008_chain
1006_to1012_chain
1005_to1007_chain
```

低阈值 `scene>0.008` 只支持同一场内的起点、身体、遮挡、膜面和光线变化，不支持硬切或新空间。

`silencedetect -45dB:d=0.3` 对以下窗口均无 silence event：

```text
1006_exact
1006_to1007_chain
1006_to1008_chain
1006_to1012_chain
1005_to1007_chain
```

声道复核：

```text
1006_exact          L/R RMS=-18.2817/-18.2817  corr=1.000000
1006_to1007_chain   L/R RMS=-19.9259/-19.9259  corr=1.000000
1006_to1012_chain   L/R RMS=-22.4298/-22.4298  corr=1.000000
1007_exact          L/R RMS=-26.7330/-26.7330  corr=1.000000
```

因此，这不是左右声道打开的真实通讯空间，也不是静默后另开外部频道。音乐边界也必须守住：本页不能确认旋律、节拍、和声、乐器、合成器或配乐高潮。#1006 的强度来自人声内部局部高点和系统语义，不来自音乐。

## 结论

#1006 的最稳写法是：它把 #1005 的呼叫失败翻译成状态档案，但这个状态档案没有获得外部任务空间、报告界面或真实失联物证。它只在同一膜面舞台里以人声局部高点出现，然后尾部迅速退低，被 #1007 `你相信我` 低位咬住。

链条应写成：

```text
塔台呼叫7号宇航员
-> 已经失联一整天了
-> 你相信我
-> 可是你要走
-> 07报告一切正常
```

所以 #1006 不是“真实事故揭示”，而是“系统给未完成回应生成状态名”；#1007 则立刻把这个状态名重新拉回信任关系。

## 文中引用的图像资料

以下图像由本篇已有文件引用对应；保留历史引用范围，图像展示不增加新的事实判断。

![1006_labeled_keyframes_contact.jpg](/research/images/1110e335833bff8f57d9.webp)

![1006_to1012_contact.jpg](/research/images/830e97e52ead5eb06996.webp)

![1006_exact_waveform.png](/research/images/d494d479191b7d6c70a2.webp)

![1006_to1007_chain_waveform.png](/research/images/f0bca263ec6ec63710b2.webp)

取证范围

母文件： 〔本地资料路径省略〕 无字幕 28g 4k.mov

时间轴：无偏移文件时间轴。

资产目录： inspool-wiki-zh/raw/assets/4k-nosub-restart-20260623/1006-lost-contact-status-nooffset

目标句：#1006 甲瑞 已经失联一整天了 ， 01:34:03.900-01:34:05.733 。

核心资产：

T0 链条

1006 是 #1005 呼叫后的状态句。它不能单独读成“外部任务事故事实”，必须放在 塔台呼叫 -> 已经失联 -> 你相信我 -> 可是你要走 -> 07报告一切正常 这一串里看。

声音事实

核心 RMS：

关键差值：

稳定判断：#1006 不是比 #1005 更强的整体升级。它是呼叫之后的回落式补充。但它仍然显著高于紧随其后的 #1007/#1008，所以“失联”状态句在声场里保有系统前景，而 #1007 你相信我 是低位贴近，不是强力夺权。

#1006 内部结构

1006 前后半：

1006 四分段：

第二四分段最强，第四四分段显著塌落。滑窗高点集中在 01:34:04.370-01:34:04.470 ：

50ms 小窗也支持这个判断：

这使 #1006 不像一条均匀展开的中性播报。它有一个很明确的局部托起，随后迅速退入尾部。按台词语义，这个局部高点大概率落在 失联 附近；但本页不做逐字口型或逐字声纹裁决，只稳写为“失联状态词附近的局部声学高点”。

#1006 到 #1007

1006 与 #1007 在 T0 上名义重叠 0.033s ：

但这个重叠并不强：

1007 entry_600 只比 #1006 last_500 高 0.5991dB ，而 #1007 全句比 #1006 低 8.4512dB 。因此，不能把 #1007 写成大声打断或立刻夺权。更稳的写法是：#1006 先把“失联”状态登记出来，尾部急速退低；#1007 你相信我 贴着这个尾部低位进入，把状态登记重新拖回信任关系。

画面事实

可见结构保持为：

同一抬高平台；

半透明膜面/塑料面覆盖上方和背景；

黑衣站立人物背对镜头，在膜面前触碰、拉扯或处理膜面；

中间白衣坐姿男性右手在头部/后脑/颈部附近，低头、身体内收；

右侧白衣坐姿人物朝向中间人物；

左下方和平台下方仍有旁观者/观众；

光线在 #1006 内部从较冷灰转为更暖、更暗。

关键帧指标：

切场、静默、声道与音乐边界

切场、静默、声道与音乐边界

切场、静默、声道与音乐边界

scene>0.04 对以下窗口均无命中：

切场、静默、声道与音乐边界

切场、静默、声道与音乐边界

低阈值 scene>0.008 只支持同一场内的起点、身体、遮挡、膜面和光线变化，不支持硬切或新空间。

切场、静默、声道与音乐边界

silencedetect -45dB:d=0.3 对以下窗口均无 silence event：

切场、静默、声道与音乐边界

切场、静默、声道与音乐边界

声道复核：

切场、静默、声道与音乐边界

切场、静默、声道与音乐边界

结论

1006 的最稳写法是：它把 #1005 的呼叫失败翻译成状态档案，但这个状态档案没有获得外部任务空间、报告界面或真实失联物证。它只在同一膜面舞台里以人声局部高点出现，然后尾部迅速退低，被 #1007 你相信我 低位咬住。

链条应写成：

文中引用的图像资料

以下图像由本篇已有文件引用对应；保留历史引用范围，图像展示不增加新的事实判断。


吴景茜

本页为实体锚点页，确保图谱双链完整性。

# 吴景茜

本文为研究档案公开版，保留来源版本的论述与限制。公开时间：2026-09-08；不表示已完成同行评审。 本文属于公开研究资料（历史笔记、研究稿或来源记录）：已完成格式、来源限制与重复项筛查，尚未完成逐篇独立事实复核；原文中的解释、候选判断和未确认内容均按其原有限制阅读。

来源版本日期：2026-06-07

证据边界：本页为实体锚点页，确保图谱双链完整性。

## 实体关系图

```mermaid
flowchart TB
    WJQ["吴景茜<br>演员"]
    O["角色 O<br>马戏帐篷长发灰衣无声女孩"]
    FILM["人类投降派<br>影片"]

    WJQ --> |"饰演"| O
    O --> |"出现在"| FILM

    style WJQ fill:#f778ba,stroke:#f778ba,color:#000,font-size:14px
    style O fill:#d2a8ff,stroke:#d2a8ff,color:#000
    style FILM fill:#58a6ff,stroke:#58a6ff,color:#000
```

## 与其他实体的关系

```mermaid
flowchart LR
    WJQ["吴景茜"] --> |"饰演"| O["角色 O"]
    O -.-> |"不是"| HM["黄蒙/阿蒙"]
    O -.-> |"不是"| ZC["子丑"]
    WJQ --> |"同片"| XBB["向于彬彬"]
    WJQ --> |"同片"| SJS["孙甲瑞"]
    style WJQ fill:#f778ba,stroke:#f778ba,color:#000
    style O fill:#d2a8ff,stroke:#d2a8ff,color:#000
```

# 吴景茜

## 基本信息

- **身份**：《人类投降派》演员
- **饰演角色**：角色 O（马戏帐篷长发灰衣无声女孩）
- **证据层级**：T2（MiMo 字幕读取）→ T1（人工校正确认）
- **来源**：片尾演职员表（154:30-156:22）

## 一句话定义

吴景茜是《人类投降派》中饰演角色 O 的演员，角色 O 是马戏帐篷中长发灰衣的无声女孩。

## 证据来源

AV 格式复扫 (fps=10, max) 从片尾字幕中读取：

- **原始 OCR**：吴婧倩
- **校正后**：吴景茜
- **校正来源**：T2→T1 人工复核（2026-05-28）

见 MiMo-AV格式复扫Wave33-34总账-2026-05-19（馆内参考，未随本文公开）

## 角色 O 的特征

- **外形**：长发、灰衣
- **行为**：无声（不说话）
- **场景**：马戏帐篷
- **边界**：O ≠ 黄蒙/阿蒙，O ≠ 子丑

## 重要边界

- [O](/research/hs-662884bee38c4a06) 不等于 [黄蒙](/research/hs-ef608a7155ec333c) / 阿蒙（馆内参考，未随本文公开）
- `00:45:48` 后外景短发黑吊带女性接回黄蒙/阿蒙，不是 O 的延续
- O 的 canonical 角色名在 2026-05-11 Owner/T0 校正后统一为 O

## 关联概念

- 人类投降派（馆内参考，未随本文公开） — 影片本体
- [被观看](/research/hs-bdc3e21c0c33b579) — O 作为被观看的对象
- 档案主体（馆内参考，未随本文公开） — 片尾归档机制

## 待确认

- 吴景茜在片中是否有台词（角色 O 被描述为"无声女孩"）
- 与其他角色的具体互动场景
- 与 P4 剧场的关系
- 以上信息均来自 T2 MiMo 字幕读取，需 T1 本地逐帧复核

实体关系图

flowchart TB
    WJQ["吴景茜
演员"]
    O["角色 O
马戏帐篷长发灰衣无声女孩"]
    FILM["人类投降派
影片"]

    WJQ --> |"饰演"| O
    O --> |"出现在"| FILM

    style WJQ fill:#f778ba,stroke:#f778ba,color:#000,font-size:14px
    style O fill:#d2a8ff,stroke:#d2a8ff,color:#000
    style FILM fill:#58a6ff,stroke:#58a6ff,color:#000

与其他实体的关系

吴景茜

基本信息

身份 ：《人类投降派》演员

饰演角色 ：角色 O（马戏帐篷长发灰衣无声女孩）

证据层级 ：T2（MiMo 字幕读取）→ T1（人工校正确认）

来源 ：片尾演职员表（154:30-156:22）

一句话定义

证据来源

AV 格式复扫 (fps=10, max) 从片尾字幕中读取：

原始 OCR ：吴婧倩

校正后 ：吴景茜

校正来源 ：T2→T1 人工复核（2026-05-28）

角色 O 的特征

外形 ：长发、灰衣

行为 ：无声（不说话）

场景 ：马戏帐篷

边界 ：O ≠ 黄蒙/阿蒙，O ≠ 子丑

重要边界

O 不等于 黄蒙 / 阿蒙（馆内参考，未随本文公开）

00:45:48 后外景短发黑吊带女性接回黄蒙/阿蒙，不是 O 的延续

关联概念

人类投降派（馆内参考，未随本文公开） — 影片本体

被观看 — O 作为被观看的对象

档案主体（馆内参考，未随本文公开） — 片尾归档机制

待确认

吴景茜在片中是否有台词（角色 O 被描述为"无声女孩"）

与其他角色的具体互动场景

与 P4 剧场的关系

以上信息均来自 T2 MiMo 字幕读取，需 T1 本地逐帧复核


第三十四片海域小样顺序：未成题的阅读呼吸

# 第三十四片海域小样顺序：未成题的阅读呼吸

本文为研究档案公开版，保留来源版本的论述与限制。公开时间：2026-09-08；不表示已完成同行评审。 本文属于公开研究资料（历史笔记、研究稿或来源记录）：已完成格式、来源限制与重复项筛查，尚未完成逐篇独立事实复核；原文中的解释、候选判断和未确认内容均按其原有限制阅读。

来源版本日期：2026-05-29

证据边界：本页为历史研究资料的公开版本。原始文件未单列 source_rule；此说明仅补充公开阅读边界，不构成对原文事实、模型判断或人物解释的新认证。请结合原文来源、日期、校正与不确定性阅读。

# 第三十四片海域小样顺序：未成题的阅读呼吸

## 0. 这一片要读到题未成立

第三十四片海域不能读成终于成题。

也不能读成题目未定。

它要读到题未成立。

读者已经经过未成名。

他们知道名也没有立刻成立。

现在要让他们知道：书已经靠近题目，但题还没有成立。

眼睛先遇到名后风。

再看题外潮先上来。

再看远称沙让称呼慢下来。

再看白名裂细细开着。

再进入回舟暗。

再听见岸外声。

再停在无题盐。

最后停在未成题。

## 1. 入场：从未成名过来

开头应该接着 未成名（馆内参考，未随本文公开）。

不要让未成名变成终于成题。

也不要让未成名走向题解。

可以先放一页名后的风。

页边只露：

```text
题也……
```

然后进入 名后风（馆内参考，未随本文公开）。

名后风让风没有名字，也不替名字收尾。

## 2. 第一组：名后风 -> 题外潮 -> 远称沙

第一组负责让题不成为统领。

顺序暂定：

```text
名后风
-> 名后风图
-> 题外潮
-> 题外潮图
-> 远称沙
-> 远称沙图
```

名后风不是命名之后的余波。

题外潮不是标题边缘。

远称沙不是称谓准备。

这组读完，读者应该知道：题已经靠近，但风、潮和沙都不让它压下。

## 3. 第一次题前停顿

第一组之后，需要一页题外停顿。

这页可以只有一句：

```text
潮不托举标题，它让题继续在外面。
```

不要解释潮。

解释会让潮成为标题边缘。

## 4. 第二组：白名裂 -> 回舟暗

第二组负责让白和舟都不进入题意。

顺序暂定：

```text
白名裂
-> 白名裂图
-> 回舟暗
-> 回舟暗图
```

白名裂不是名字破裂。

回舟暗不是漂回暗处。

这组读完，读者应该感觉：名字还没有来，舟也没有回。

## 5. 第二次题前停顿

回舟暗之后要停。

页边可以只写：

```text
舟没有回，暗先回了一下。
```

下一句不要让它成为象征。

让舟继续停着。

## 6. 第三组：岸外声 -> 无题盐 -> 未成题

最后一组负责让成题不被完成。

顺序暂定：

```text
岸外声
-> 岸外声图
-> 无题盐
-> 无题盐图
-> 未成题
-> 未成题图
```

岸外声不是外部呼声。

无题盐不是无题风格。

未成题不是题目未定。

## 7. 第三十四片临时顺序

暂时整片可以这样走：

```text
未成名余波
-> 题以前入场页
-> 名后风
-> 名后风图
-> 题外潮
-> 题外潮图
-> 远称沙
-> 远称沙图
-> 题前停顿一
-> 白名裂
-> 白名裂图
-> 回舟暗
-> 回舟暗图
-> 题前停顿二
-> 岸外声
-> 岸外声图
-> 无题盐
-> 无题盐图
-> 未成题
-> 未成题图
-> 二百七十四块页边回流语
-> 二百七十四块总回流图
```

这个顺序的重点不是标题。

是题没有成立。

## 8. 页边语如何进入

[二百七十四块页边回流语](/research/hs-a4aba08f2ea98510) 在这一片里应该像无题盐。

可以出现：

```text
名后风。
题外潮。
远称沙。
白名裂。
回舟暗。
岸外声。
无题盐。
仍未成题。
```

这些句子要停在题外。

不要像标题。

标题会把未成题写成已经成题。

## 9. 这一片结束时要停在未成题

第三十四片海域最后不能说“终于有题”。

也不能说“无题就是题”。

最后一句可以暂时写成：

```text
题也没有立刻成立。
```

这句话之后，下一片可以继续发芽。

它可以从题后雾、称外水、远上灰、白题折、回声岸、页外桥、无题后白和未成总继续往下探。

但下一片也不能把成总写成统治。

总太快，书需要继续漂。

## 10. 下一片开始

下一片已经从 [未成题之后](/research/hs-4b543a2cf8173d6f) 起雾。

题后雾不是题的余波。

称外水不是称呼的补丁。

远上灰不是上方的提示。

白题折、回声岸、页外桥和无题后白一起把书推近总以前。

但它们不让总成立。

总也没有立刻成立。

第三十四片海域小样顺序：未成题的阅读呼吸

第三十四片海域小样顺序：未成题的阅读呼吸

0. 这一片要读到题未成立

0. 这一片要读到题未成立

0. 这一片要读到题未成立

第三十四片海域不能读成终于成题。

0. 这一片要读到题未成立

也不能读成题目未定。

0. 这一片要读到题未成立

它要读到题未成立。

0. 这一片要读到题未成立

读者已经经过未成名。

0. 这一片要读到题未成立

他们知道名也没有立刻成立。

0. 这一片要读到题未成立

现在要让他们知道：书已经靠近题目，但题还没有成立。

0. 这一片要读到题未成立

眼睛先遇到名后风。

0. 这一片要读到题未成立

再看题外潮先上来。

0. 这一片要读到题未成立

再看远称沙让称呼慢下来。

0. 这一片要读到题未成立

再看白名裂细细开着。

0. 这一片要读到题未成立

再进入回舟暗。

0. 这一片要读到题未成立

再听见岸外声。

0. 这一片要读到题未成立

再停在无题盐。

0. 这一片要读到题未成立

最后停在未成题。

1. 入场：从未成名过来

1. 入场：从未成名过来

1. 入场：从未成名过来

开头应该接着 未成名（馆内参考，未随本文公开）。

1. 入场：从未成名过来

不要让未成名变成终于成题。

1. 入场：从未成名过来

也不要让未成名走向题解。

1. 入场：从未成名过来

可以先放一页名后的风。

1. 入场：从未成名过来

页边只露：

1. 入场：从未成名过来

题也……

1. 入场：从未成名过来

然后进入 名后风（馆内参考，未随本文公开）。

1. 入场：从未成名过来

名后风让风没有名字，也不替名字收尾。

2. 第一组：名后风 -> 题外潮 -> 远称沙

2. 第一组：名后风 -> 题外潮 -> 远称沙

2. 第一组：名后风 -> 题外潮 -> 远称沙

第一组负责让题不成为统领。

2. 第一组：名后风 -> 题外潮 -> 远称沙

顺序暂定：

2. 第一组：名后风 -> 题外潮 -> 远称沙

2. 第一组：名后风 -> 题外潮 -> 远称沙

名后风不是命名之后的余波。

2. 第一组：名后风 -> 题外潮 -> 远称沙

题外潮不是标题边缘。

2. 第一组：名后风 -> 题外潮 -> 远称沙

远称沙不是称谓准备。

2. 第一组：名后风 -> 题外潮 -> 远称沙

这组读完，读者应该知道：题已经靠近，但风、潮和沙都不让它压下。

3. 第一次题前停顿

第一组之后，需要一页题外停顿。

这页可以只有一句：

潮不托举标题，它让题继续在外面。

不要解释潮。

解释会让潮成为标题边缘。

4. 第二组：白名裂 -> 回舟暗

4. 第二组：白名裂 -> 回舟暗

4. 第二组：白名裂 -> 回舟暗

第二组负责让白和舟都不进入题意。

4. 第二组：白名裂 -> 回舟暗

顺序暂定：

4. 第二组：白名裂 -> 回舟暗

白名裂
-> 白名裂图
-> 回舟暗
-> 回舟暗图

4. 第二组：白名裂 -> 回舟暗

白名裂不是名字破裂。

4. 第二组：白名裂 -> 回舟暗

回舟暗不是漂回暗处。

4. 第二组：白名裂 -> 回舟暗

这组读完，读者应该感觉：名字还没有来，舟也没有回。

5. 第二次题前停顿

回舟暗之后要停。

页边可以只写：

舟没有回，暗先回了一下。

下一句不要让它成为象征。

让舟继续停着。

6. 第三组：岸外声 -> 无题盐 -> 未成题

6. 第三组：岸外声 -> 无题盐 -> 未成题

6. 第三组：岸外声 -> 无题盐 -> 未成题

最后一组负责让成题不被完成。

6. 第三组：岸外声 -> 无题盐 -> 未成题

顺序暂定：

6. 第三组：岸外声 -> 无题盐 -> 未成题

6. 第三组：岸外声 -> 无题盐 -> 未成题

岸外声不是外部呼声。

6. 第三组：岸外声 -> 无题盐 -> 未成题

无题盐不是无题风格。

6. 第三组：岸外声 -> 无题盐 -> 未成题

未成题不是题目未定。

7. 第三十四片临时顺序

7. 第三十四片临时顺序

7. 第三十四片临时顺序

暂时整片可以这样走：

7. 第三十四片临时顺序

7. 第三十四片临时顺序

这个顺序的重点不是标题。

7. 第三十四片临时顺序

是题没有成立。

8. 页边语如何进入

二百七十四块页边回流语 在这一片里应该像无题盐。

可以出现：

这些句子要停在题外。

不要像标题。

标题会把未成题写成已经成题。

9. 这一片结束时要停在未成题

9. 这一片结束时要停在未成题

9. 这一片结束时要停在未成题

第三十四片海域最后不能说“终于有题”。

9. 这一片结束时要停在未成题

也不能说“无题就是题”。

9. 这一片结束时要停在未成题

最后一句可以暂时写成：

9. 这一片结束时要停在未成题

题也没有立刻成立。

9. 这一片结束时要停在未成题

这句话之后，下一片可以继续发芽。

9. 这一片结束时要停在未成题

9. 这一片结束时要停在未成题

但下一片也不能把成总写成统治。

9. 这一片结束时要停在未成题

总太快，书需要继续漂。

10. 下一片开始

下一片已经从 未成题之后 起雾。

题后雾不是题的余波。

称外水不是称呼的补丁。

远上灰不是上方的提示。

白题折、回声岸、页外桥和无题后白一起把书推近总以前。

但它们不让总成立。

总也没有立刻成立。


艺术公演 |《人类投降派》始末——外星人还会再次降临吗？

# 艺术公演 |《人类投降派》始末——外星人还会再次降临吗？

本文为研究档案公开版，保留来源版本的论述与限制。公开时间：2026-09-08；不表示已完成同行评审。 本文属于公开研究资料（历史笔记、研究稿或来源记录）：已完成格式、来源限制与重复项筛查，尚未完成逐篇独立事实复核；原文中的解释、候选判断和未确认内容均按其原有限制阅读。

来源版本日期：2026-05-05

证据边界：P4 自有资料的历史来源卡或研究摘记。保留原始版本限制；来源卡中的摘要不能冒充完整原文，模型加工不能视作直接声画证据。未进行新的独立事实核验。

[阅读对应的历史文章全文](https://a.p4theater.top/wechat/wechat-2023-08-18-78b78da813)

## 来源结构

```mermaid
flowchart LR
    SRC["2023-08-18-p4剧场和你-艺术公演-《人"]
    SRC --> EVD["证据"]
    SRC --> CTX["上下文"]
    style SRC fill:#7ee787,stroke:#7ee787,color:#000
```

# 艺术公演 |《人类投降派》始末——外星人还会再次降临吗？

## 来源信息
- 账号：p4剧场和你
- 日期：2023-08-18
- 主题：活动与演出
- 系列：人类投降派
- 原文：https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/bn9_6frJSHNJZI_m4k0zWw
- 全文索引：`corpus-enriched.json[334]`

## 摘要入口
《Last Rehearsal》演出26号，在刺鱼书店（中间剧场店），欢迎大家来玩

## 系统摘要
这是一篇活动与演出向的中篇分析文章，图文形态偏图文并重型（8图，2912字）。核心切入口：《Last Rehearsal》演出26号，在刺鱼书店（中间剧场店），欢迎大家来玩。内部结构重点：p4剧场成立于15年，我接触戏剧制作则是在13年，当时参与了一个朋友的戏剧叫《我可怜的马拉特》，当时我就被戏剧这个形式深深地吸引了。大学时候也看过《恋爱的犀牛》，不过印象很弱，只记得满舞台的水，和被绑着的女人，还有一条大蛇在上方盘旋，剩下全。

## 结构线索
- p4剧场成立于15年，我接触戏剧制作则是在13年，当时参与了一个朋友的戏剧叫《我可怜的马拉特》，当时我就被戏剧这个形式深深地吸引了。大学时候也看过《恋爱的犀牛》，不过印象很弱，只记得满舞台的水，和被绑着的女人，还有一条大蛇在上方盘旋，剩下全忘了。
- 我是一个非常内向的人，从小就是一个边缘般存在的人，不合群，也从来没当过班干部，成绩不好又不爱耍宝从来没出过什么风头。印象中只有在不写作业或是作弊被抓的时候被老师当众羞辱过几次，才明白万众瞩目的滋味。我不喜欢背诵，我讨厌翻来覆去做无意义的事情，所以爱上了绘画。还记得当时学画素描，要画球，我可以为了球的边缘线画上一整天，我一直在不断地切它，直到与我心目中的圆相吻
- 我小学四年级曾在亲戚家渡过，他们对我不错，可离开妈妈的生活还是让我感受到了一种别样的孤独，每个周末她会来看我，离别后我会趴在窗户透过铁栅栏目送她从楼道口右拐消失。有一次，我从姨夫的杂物柜里偷偷翻出了一本叫《世界未解之谜》的旧书，从来不看书的我一下子被吸了进去，从此这本书就一直在我的书包里，我反复的读它。里头讲的是各种奇人异事，关于全宇宙，关于特异功能，关于多
- 。
- 有一天夜里，我看到窗户外有蓝色的光点忽闪忽闪，我又紧张又兴奋又恐惧，最后安慰自己可能只是玻璃的反光，就睡了。
- 后来，当了艺术生，进了美院，我选了摄影作为专业，一天到晚的拍，可我并拍不好人，我抬起相机的时候，对象恐惧，我也恐惧。我大学四年只把镜头对准了风景和街道，我害怕人类。一张张面具让我感到陌生与疏离，我按下的快门摄取的只有虚伪，而无真实。直到13年我和大学谈了三年的女友分手后，我才明白过来。爱是什么。

## 图谱线索
- 历史[证据层级](/research/hs-ffd57ca6ae2f2293)：P4 公众号语料 / 外部生产史，不直接替代影片时间码证据。
- 关键词命中：人类投降派、投降派、最后的排练、Last Rehearsal、外星人、甲瑞、p4、剧场、戏剧、现场、关系、参与、行动、排练、表演、观众、真实、电影、摄影、相机、镜头、拍摄、徐锦江、徐帅、入梦、声音、音乐、消失、游泳、水

## 使用边界
本页是逐篇索引卡。需要引用正文时，优先回到镜像的 `corpus-enriched.json` 和原始公众号链接；进入具体镜头分析时必须另接影片时间码证据。

阅读对应的历史文章全文

来源结构

艺术公演 |《人类投降派》始末——外星人还会再次降临吗？

艺术公演 |《人类投降派》始末——外星人还会再次降临吗？

来源信息

账号：p4剧场和你

主题：活动与演出

系列：人类投降派

全文索引： corpus-enriched.json[334]

摘要入口

系统摘要

结构线索

图谱线索

历史 证据层级 ：P4 公众号语料 / 外部生产史，不直接替代影片时间码证据。

使用边界

本页是逐篇索引卡。需要引用正文时，优先回到镜像的 corpus-enriched.json 和原始公众号链接；进入具体镜头分析时必须另接影片时间码证据。


After the Credits, Who Still Speaks for Them?

本文为基于影片与既有资料的研究阐释；历史版本中的判断不等于现实人物事实或已获外部审稿确认的结论。

本文为研究档案公开版，保留来源版本的论述与限制。公开时间：2026-09-07；不表示已完成同行评审。

# After the Credits, Who Still Speaks for Them?

本文为研究档案公开版，保留来源版本的论述与限制。公开时间：2026-09-07；不表示已完成同行评审。

来源版本日期：2026-07-14

证据边界：本文为基于影片与既有资料的研究阐释；历史版本中的判断不等于现实人物事实或已获外部审稿确认的结论。

# After the Credits, Who Still Speaks for Them?

## *Shoot Self with You / Human Surrender*: Proxy Speech, the Afterlife of Images, and the Right to Stop

*Shoot Self with You* (*Human Surrender*) begins by making one thing very narrow.

The world has not gone bad. A system has not collapsed. Humanity has not yet surrendered.

One person says:

> “I have to see you.”

The sentence is too small to resemble the entrance to a complex film. It sounds more like a private demand from which all alternatives have been removed. The speaker is neither advancing an argument nor proposing a plan. They place themselves before a relation: I can no longer remain separated by something else. I can no longer wait for another person to relay the message. I can no longer substitute an imagined version of you. I have to see you.

The film does not begin here in order to prove that seeing will solve anything. On the contrary, it quickly reveals that seeing another person is the beginning of many problems.

Seeing is never neutral. It brings position and light, confirmation and interrogation. It brings the questions: Who are you? Why are you here? What will you say now? Once a person becomes visible, they have not merely been encountered. They have been placed where interpretation, recording, and the demand for a response can reach them.

The film’s cruelest condition is therefore not that no one sees anyone. It is that people are seen too much.

At times visibility resembles care; at others, questioning. It resembles rescue, then occupation. Sometimes someone has finally heard you; sometimes every pause you make seems to enter a register. The film repeatedly places people amid camera, light, sound, subtitles, lists of names, rooms, doorways, white fabric, and other people’s words. One person approaches another and discovers that approach itself can become an apparatus.

This is the consequence of “I have to see you.”

The sentence is not merely a romantic request at the beginning. It is a thread that first draws people toward each other and then draws them into an event from which departure becomes increasingly difficult.

## They Are Not Concepts. They Are People Trapped by Sentences.

It is easy to turn this film into a theoretical system. *Human Surrender* offers too many things that can be named: looking, reference, eligibility for reality, archival capture, debt, proxy speech, invisibility, help, credits, and the boundary of sound. Each term can keep expanding; each could sustain another essay.

But the terms are not what hold the film in memory.

What remains is the way people look while speaking.

Someone says:

> “I’m here.”

The sentence sounds steady, almost like a promise or reassurance: someone has finally refused to leave. Yet in this film “I’m here” is never only tender. It also bears the pressure of proof. You must tell another person that you are present. You must turn presence into a sentence and make that sentence heard, recognized, and received.

“I’m here” ought to state the simplest fact. The film makes it difficult. Someone is visibly there and must still say it. Having said it, they cannot guarantee that the other person has truly received them. Even when another person hears “I’m here,” the speaker cannot be sure that being heard has returned possession of the self.

The sentence is heavy not because it expresses some immeasurable depth of feeling, but because it exposes a condition: presence does not establish itself naturally here. It must be spoken, confirmed, and placed within a relation by somebody else.

This is why “Wait” matters so much.

> “Wait.”

It is no grand resistance. Not a manifesto, an accusation, or a theory. It is the smallest request for suspension: do not continue yet; do not push me into the next step; let me recover some fragment of my body, words, relation, and position.

In *Human Surrender*, “Wait” rarely stops very much.

It resembles a hand reaching out to restrain a process already in motion. Someone may hear it. The air may pause for a moment. Or the word may leave only a minor crease in an event that continues to operate. Yet the request is not meaningless because it fails. Its failure reveals how difficult this event is to stop.

What matters is not whether “Wait” succeeds. It is why a person has only so small a sentence with which to protect themselves.

They do not say, “I refuse.” They do not say, “All of you are wrong.” They may not even be able to explain the situation as a whole. They can only say: wait.

It may be the film’s most fragile version of the right to stop—not the right to explain or decide, perhaps not even the right to leave, but the right to slow the pace of being pushed forward.

Again and again, the film places people there. They do not stand before ideas and deliver positions. They are caught by sentences. Once they speak, they bear the consequences of speech. If they remain silent, they may be required to explain the silence. A mistake can be corrected, an omission supplemented, a loss of words approached by somebody else. Even “I don’t want to say” can immediately become another question.

The film’s figures move us most not when they produce an answer, but when they cannot finish.

Their pauses, hesitations, repetitions, evasions, and interruptions are the film’s actual flesh.

## The Help Is Real. So Is the Debt.

There is a great deal of help in *Human Surrender*.

We cannot simply declare it false. Nor can we collapse help into control. Either answer would be too easy. The film’s greater difficulty is that help is often genuine. It allows a relation to continue. It keeps someone from falling immediately. It offers a small support within an event about to come apart.

Once help occurs, however, it is no longer only help.

It leaves a debt.

The person who has been helped may be expected to respond. The person who has been cared for may be expected to get better. Someone replaced by another may be asked to accept that the replacement worked. Someone soothed may be required to adopt the language of consolation. When a person is asked whether another should speak for them, they enter a narrower and more difficult gap: they may truly need help speaking, but once somebody else has spoken, do the words still belong to them?

This is not a moral verdict. The film does not take one side and announce that help is bad. It does something more precise. It lets help retain the shape of help while exposing what trails behind it.

Helping someone does not leave gratitude alone. It also leaves instructions for the next sentence, the next step, the next expected expression, and the next silence that may or may not be allowed.

This is why the line “Stay here for me” carries so much weight.

> “Stay here for me.”

On the surface, the request is concrete: remain in this place on my behalf. What it opens is much larger. It does more than ask someone to cover a shift. It turns presence into something transferable and gives one person’s position to another person to bear.

The sentence contains trust and cruelty at once.

The trust is: I leave this place with you. The cruelty is: this place is too heavy, and when I leave it cannot be allowed to stand empty, so you must bear it for me.

The person left behind remains in more than a location. They remain inside an unfinished relation, an action another person did not complete, and an event still requiring someone to prove, answer, and hold it together.

The film’s line of help is therefore neither sentimental nor an exposure of hypocrisy. It is a series of transfers that can never be settled.

You helped me. Now I owe you.

You comforted me. Now I must appear comforted.

You spoke for me. Now I possess less of my silence.

You let me sleep. Now I have been placed inside a form of ending.

You told me no one could see me. Now even my invisibility has been spoken by you and preserved.

This is the film’s deepest pain: people do hold one another up, but the hands that hold also leave their prints.

## “I Don’t Want to Say” Is Not a Blank

Late in the film, “I don’t want to say” becomes increasingly important.

> “I don’t want to say.”

The sentence is easily mistaken for a refusal to communicate. In the film it is not an empty negation. It resembles the last small place someone can preserve.

Not wanting to speak does not mean having nothing to say.

It does not mean needing no one.

It may mean: once these words leave me, you will take them. They will enter your understanding, your record, the story you have already prepared for me. They will become clear, and through clarity they will cease to belong entirely to me.

*Human Surrender* understands this danger with unusual precision.

Speaking is not always liberation. Often it simply delivers a person into another process. Once you speak, others can respond. Once they respond, they can judge. Judgment permits summary; summary permits archival capture.

“I don’t want to say” is not absence. It is a specific mode of preservation.

What it preserves is not secret content, but the right of a person not to be opened completely.

Many films treat silence as a riddle that must eventually be solved. *Human Surrender* does not treat silence only as mystery. It treats silence as a final space: perhaps this person can no longer be required to provide more.

That is why the offer to speak for you becomes so dangerous.

The offer may be genuinely kind. When one person cannot speak, having another speak can be necessary. But the film reveals the transformation at stake: proxy speech converts “cannot speak” into “will be spoken by someone else.” The person being helped may suffer less in the moment and possess less of themselves afterward.

The question is never simply whether help should be offered. It is how far help can go before it begins to occupy another person. At what point does speaking for somebody turn that person into evidence for the speaker?

The film does not convert this into an abstract ethical puzzle. It presses the problem into gaps between lines, into expressions and gestures, into the small pocket of air left after a sentence.

The most painful thing is not that these people lack a voice, but that voice itself has become suspect.

If they speak, the words may be possessed.

If they do not, the silence may be interpreted.

If they let somebody else speak, they may lose themselves.

If they refuse, they may remain alone with what cannot be said.

This is not a multiple-choice question. It is a room without a clean exit.

## Being Seen Is Not the End. Invisibility Is Not an Escape.

The film travels from “I have to see you” to “No one can see you.”

The line is so clear that it can be mistaken for a simple reversal: at first someone wants to be seen; at the end they want not to be seen. The film is not that simple.

Because the final “No one can see you” does not take place in a world where no one is watching.

It remains a sentence.

It is spoken, heard, preserved by the film, carried into the credits, and remembered by later viewers. Invisibility here is not a quiet disappearance but a wish uttered in public.

That is both cruel and exact.

Someone wants not to be seen, but the wish must appear within an event that can see, hear, and archive it. Invisibility is not a freedom obtained beyond the system. It is a request spoken inside it. The sentence resembles reassurance and final confirmation at once; protection and the registration of protection.

If “I have to see you” overheats the relation at the beginning, “No one can see you” is not the quiet that follows cooling. It resembles the plea of someone burned to the limit: do not cast any more light on me.

The film does not allow a simple departure.

The credits continue. Names and numbers continue. Attributions, archival order, relations, and responsibility do not disappear because someone has said that no one can see them.

The film does not depict a person finally escaping the gaze. It preserves the act of wanting to escape.

It grants invisibility no pure victory.

It preserves invisibility as a final wish.

That preservation matters. It is not a solution but a form of safekeeping.

The film never tells us that the person is safe. It tells us that after every explanation, offer of help, question, act of care, and demand for confirmation, someone still wishes not to be seen.

That wish must not be erased.

## After the Credits, the Film Has Not Truly Ended

If we attend only to story, we can say that the film has ended.

If we attend to what the film has set in motion, it has not.

It leaves a question with everyone who finishes watching: if these people have repeatedly been spoken about, seen, helped, replaced, spoken for, and entered into the record, what exactly are we doing when we begin to analyze them?

Are we understanding them, or continuing to possess them?

Are we preserving their testimony, or speaking for them once again?

Are we helping others see them, or displaying the place they most wanted to hide?

This question has not been added from outside. The film has already placed it within itself. The credits are not an ordinary device of closure. They make us realize that the accounting begins after the performance ends. People leave; their names remain. The event disperses; the record remains. The film ends; the work performed upon the film has only begun.

This is the afterlife of images: not merely the survival of footage after projection, but the continued redistribution of voices, gestures, names, and silences through memory, quotation, and criticism.

Later cataloging, repeated viewing, line-by-line reading, character-centered shot analysis, annotation, and conceptual glossaries may look like a complicated critical apparatus. In fact, they repeat actions already present in the film.

They count.

They confirm.

They try not to say the wrong thing.

And none can completely avoid speaking for somebody else.

This is the real relation between the film and the labor that follows it. The latter does not simply study the former. It continues to carry what the credits did not settle.

There is value in this continuation, and danger.

Its value lies in refusing to let small sentences disappear. It returns again and again to “I’m here,” “Wait,” “I don’t want to say,” and “No one can see you,” trying to determine who was present when each sentence occurred, who was asked to do something, who was replaced, and who was left behind.

The danger is that organization can become another source of light. The more serious the reading, the more brightly it may illuminate. The stronger the wish to protect, the more readily the protected person may be disassembled into entries. The greater the effort to avoid misreading, the more thoroughly the film may be opened.

This problem cannot be solved by “analyzing less.” Without analysis, much will be forgotten. The real question is where analysis intends to take the person.

If analysis produces only more concepts, it will circulate within its own apparatus.

If it can become a quieter and more exact form of writing, perhaps it can pass a portion of the debt outward.

Not repay it. The debt cannot be repaid.

Only translate it from a private machinery of analysis into something a stranger can receive.

## What Remains Is Not an Argument but a Series of Actions

What finally remains from *Human Surrender* is not a theme that can be summarized.

It is a series of actions.

Someone has to see another person.

Someone says they are here.

Someone asks for a moment.

Someone remains here for somebody else.

Someone helps another person speak.

Someone does not want to speak.

Someone tells another person that no one can see them.

These are very small actions. Without repeated viewing, larger structures might cover them. Yet the more one watches, the more clearly the film’s force appears to reside in these minor gestures.

It does not crush its figures beneath a grand narrative. Before that narrative can take form, it lets a slightly unstable bodily response become visible.

The figures do not fully understand what they are experiencing.

Nor do they fully command the words they speak.

They are often pushed into a moment in which they must find one sentence that will keep them alive for a little longer.

This gives the film a peculiar honesty. It refuses to turn people into vessels for an argument or puzzles of psychology. It films people repeatedly losing their boundaries within relations and repeatedly trying to ask for those boundaries back.

“I have to see you” opens the boundary.

“I’m here” asks that the boundary be acknowledged.

“Wait” slows the speed at which the boundary continues to collapse.

“Stay here for me” gives the boundary to somebody else to bear.

“I don’t want to say” closes it slightly.

“No one can see you” is its final imagined form.

Placed together, these sentences do not form a chain of conclusions. They sound like several difficult breaths.

The film never cleans up the breathing. It lets the breaths interrupt, contaminate, and indebt one another. One person’s protection may injure another. One person’s silence may summon another person’s proxy speech. One person’s departure may leave another standing in place.

The film does not ask who is right.

It asks what remains when everyone is trying, incompletely, to protect themselves and one another.

What remains is neither pure benevolence nor pure violence.

It is the residue of a relation.

Someone really did help.

Someone really was helped.

Someone really incurred an obligation to respond because help had been given.

Someone truly wanted to speak.

Someone truly did not.

Someone truly wanted to be seen.

Someone truly wanted never to be seen again.

None of these facts cancels another. They can only remain together.

## What Writing Must Be Most Careful Not to Do

The greatest danger in writing about this film is not an insufficiently elegant theory.

It is remaking the figures as examples.

Someone does not say “Wait” in order for us to demonstrate a concept of the right to pause.

Someone does not say “I don’t want to say” in order for us to prove the existence of untranslatable silence.

Someone does not say “No one can see you” so that we can summarize a politics of invisibility.

Such concepts may work backstage. They help us avoid flattening what happens, mishearing a line, treating help as uncomplicated goodness, or calling invisibility a victory. But they must not step in front of the people.

Mature criticism lets its concepts disappear.

The discipline of evidence remains beneath the surface. What the reader meets is the breathing of the figures.

This is not a reduction in intellectual intensity. It is a more difficult form of writing. The critic must know a great deal without rushing to display how much they know; see structure without escorting every detail immediately beneath a concept; produce a feeling of accuracy without forcing the reader to accept a terminology.

This may be the real destination of everything written after the film.

Not another explanation of how complex it is.

Not another demonstration of how many layers it possesses.

Not the assignment of every sentence to a concept.

The goal is to let a reader unfamiliar with the critical apparatus feel why these people face such difficulty: why “Wait” carries such weight, why “I don’t want to say” is not a blank, and why “No one can see you” does not bring quiet at the end.

This is not simplification for an audience.

It is the compression of every complex operation back into the film.

When concepts recede, people can reappear.

When the apparatus recedes, sentences can speak again.

When the critic does not rush to occupy the conclusion, the people who did not finish speaking may remain in the essay a little longer.

## The People After the Credits

After the credits, who is still speaking for them?

We are.

Every act of organization speaks for them. Every quotation speaks for them. Every explanation of what a sentence “means” speaks for them.

We cannot pretend otherwise.

Still less can we erase the responsibility by saying, “I am only presenting the facts objectively.” Objective presentation is also a selection: which sentences to present, whom to place first, what to call a fact, what to leave suspended.

This does not mean that we should fall silent.

Silence will not automatically preserve the sentences in the film. It will not make misreadings disappear. It merely abandons what has already been seen to forgetting.

The more honest approach is to acknowledge that we are speaking for others and therefore to leave a boundary around every act of proxy speech.

We can say: here I am describing only an action that can be seen or heard in the film.

We can say: here I am offering a synthesis based on repeated close reading.

We can say: this interpretation cannot be upgraded into authorial intention or a final judgment about the real identity of a person onscreen.

We can say: this sentence may open in several directions, and what is most important to retain for now is the feeling it produces.

Boundaries do not make an essay timid. They give it force.

Writing with force does not need to pretend that it possesses the final interpretation.

It needs only to set securely what should be seen, preserve what should not be forced open, and refuse to make light of sentences the film has already made heavy.

*Human Surrender* begins with “I have to see you.”

Every later act of analysis begins with some version of the same necessity: I have to look again. I have to return to this sentence. I have to verify this action. I have to know whether I misread what happened here.

But the longer we look, the more we should understand the weight of the last sentence:

> “No one can see you.”

It does not instruct us to stop looking.

It instructs us to know that looking has a cost.

After the credits, we are still looking, writing, and speaking for them.

The real question is not whether to continue.

It is whether continuation can possess less; whether the people in the film can remain beside us rather than being finished by our explanations; whether each of their small sentences can escape being swallowed by a grand conclusion.

Perhaps this is the most that criticism can finally do.

Not build a larger machine for the film.

But, after the machine has been built, learn slowly to lower the lights.

Let the people emerge.

Let the sentences emerge.

Let what did not end with the credits do more than enter another archive. Let it finally be heard by someone else.

## Watch and Continue

- [Start with the new six-essay guide to *Human Surrender*](https://p4theater.substack.com/p/human-surrender-is-not-about-surrender).
- [Watch the full film, *Shoot Self with You / Human Surrender*, with English subtitles](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1riPOyQuCI).
- [Explore the English criticism collection](https://p4theater.top/en/key-articles/#human-surrender).
- [Open the official film page and stills](https://p4theater.top/en/shoot-self-with-you/).

## Evidence Boundary

This essay is an interpretive synthesis grounded in repeated viewing of *Human Surrender*. The six recurring film lines were checked against the owner-confirmed Chinese T0 role corpus and the exact local English subtitle master `F1riPOyQuCI-English-merged-v2.srt` (SHA-256 `c79b944d4361dd23a0ef3768b927d137ac3a34ffbc8b91087abea353641dc131`). The local implementation record says this exact master was published as the full film’s English CC track on July 14, 2026; this local-only audit did not independently recheck the live player. “I don’t want to say” consolidates two consecutive cues (“I” / “Don’t want to say”); punctuation and capitalization elsewhere are editorial normalization.

For scholarly quotation, cite the Chinese T0 line and timecode together with the published English cue. The English wording here is an audited publication rendering; it does not imply that the entire 2,033-cue track has received a new bilingual copyedit beyond the structural and residue checks recorded in its manifest.

“Speaking for them” names an ethical problem in criticism, not a claim that the performers lack voices of their own. The essay does not infer private psychology, off-screen relationships, consent, harm, authorial intention, or production responsibility from pauses, refusals, offers of help, white fabric, or the credits. It treats names and roles in the credits as part of the film’s archival form, not as final judgments about real-world identity or responsibility.

After the Credits, Who Still Speaks for Them?

After the Credits, Who Still Speaks for Them?

Shoot Self with You / Human Surrender : Proxy Speech, the Afterlife of Images, and the Right to Stop

Shoot Self with You / Human Surrender : Proxy Speech, the Afterlife of Images, and the Right to Stop

Shoot Self with You ( Human Surrender ) begins by making one thing very narrow.

The world has not gone bad. A system has not collapsed. Humanity has not yet surrendered.

One person says:

“I have to see you.”

The film’s cruelest condition is therefore not that no one sees anyone. It is that people are seen too much.

This is the consequence of “I have to see you.”

They Are Not Concepts. They Are People Trapped by Sentences.

They Are Not Concepts. They Are People Trapped by Sentences.

It is easy to turn this film into a theoretical system. Human Surrender offers too many things that can be named: looking, reference, eligibility for reality, archival capture, debt, proxy speech, invisibility, help, credits, and the boundary of sound. Each term can keep expanding; each could sustain another essay.

But the terms are not what hold the film in memory.

What remains is the way people look while speaking.

Someone says:

“I’m here.”

This is why “Wait” matters so much.

“Wait.”

In Human Surrender , “Wait” rarely stops very much.

What matters is not whether “Wait” succeeds. It is why a person has only so small a sentence with which to protect themselves.

The film’s figures move us most not when they produce an answer, but when they cannot finish.

Their pauses, hesitations, repetitions, evasions, and interruptions are the film’s actual flesh.

The Help Is Real. So Is the Debt.

There is a great deal of help in Human Surrender .

Once help occurs, however, it is no longer only help.

It leaves a debt.

This is why the line “Stay here for me” carries so much weight.

“Stay here for me.”

The sentence contains trust and cruelty at once.

You helped me. Now I owe you.

You comforted me. Now I must appear comforted.

You spoke for me. Now I possess less of my silence.

You let me sleep. Now I have been placed inside a form of ending.

You told me no one could see me. Now even my invisibility has been spoken by you and preserved.

This is the film’s deepest pain: people do hold one another up, but the hands that hold also leave their prints.

“I Don’t Want to Say” Is Not a Blank

Late in the film, “I don’t want to say” becomes increasingly important.

“I don’t want to say.”

Not wanting to speak does not mean having nothing to say.

It does not mean needing no one.

Human Surrender understands this danger with unusual precision.

“I don’t want to say” is not absence. It is a specific mode of preservation.

What it preserves is not secret content, but the right of a person not to be opened completely.

Many films treat silence as a riddle that must eventually be solved. Human Surrender does not treat silence only as mystery. It treats silence as a final space: perhaps this person can no longer be required to provide more.

That is why the offer to speak for you becomes so dangerous.

The most painful thing is not that these people lack a voice, but that voice itself has become suspect.

If they speak, the words may be possessed.

If they do not, the silence may be interpreted.

If they let somebody else speak, they may lose themselves.

If they refuse, they may remain alone with what cannot be said.

This is not a multiple-choice question. It is a room without a clean exit.

Being Seen Is Not the End. Invisibility Is Not an Escape.

Being Seen Is Not the End. Invisibility Is Not an Escape.

The film travels from “I have to see you” to “No one can see you.”

Because the final “No one can see you” does not take place in a world where no one is watching.

It remains a sentence.

That is both cruel and exact.

The film does not allow a simple departure.

The film does not depict a person finally escaping the gaze. It preserves the act of wanting to escape.

It grants invisibility no pure victory.

It preserves invisibility as a final wish.

That preservation matters. It is not a solution but a form of safekeeping.

That wish must not be erased.

After the Credits, the Film Has Not Truly Ended

After the Credits, the Film Has Not Truly Ended

If we attend only to story, we can say that the film has ended.

If we attend to what the film has set in motion, it has not.

Are we understanding them, or continuing to possess them?

Are we preserving their testimony, or speaking for them once again?

Are we helping others see them, or displaying the place they most wanted to hide?

They count.

They confirm.

They try not to say the wrong thing.

And none can completely avoid speaking for somebody else.

There is value in this continuation, and danger.

If analysis produces only more concepts, it will circulate within its own apparatus.

If it can become a quieter and more exact form of writing, perhaps it can pass a portion of the debt outward.

Not repay it. The debt cannot be repaid.

Only translate it from a private machinery of analysis into something a stranger can receive.

What Remains Is Not an Argument but a Series of Actions

What Remains Is Not an Argument but a Series of Actions

What finally remains from Human Surrender is not a theme that can be summarized.

It is a series of actions.

Someone has to see another person.

Someone says they are here.

Someone asks for a moment.

Someone remains here for somebody else.

Someone helps another person speak.

Someone does not want to speak.

Someone tells another person that no one can see them.

The figures do not fully understand what they are experiencing.

Nor do they fully command the words they speak.

They are often pushed into a moment in which they must find one sentence that will keep them alive for a little longer.

“I have to see you” opens the boundary.

“I’m here” asks that the boundary be acknowledged.

“Wait” slows the speed at which the boundary continues to collapse.

“Stay here for me” gives the boundary to somebody else to bear.

“I don’t want to say” closes it slightly.

“No one can see you” is its final imagined form.

Placed together, these sentences do not form a chain of conclusions. They sound like several difficult breaths.

The film does not ask who is right.

It asks what remains when everyone is trying, incompletely, to protect themselves and one another.

What remains is neither pure benevolence nor pure violence.

It is the residue of a relation.

Someone really did help.

Someone really was helped.

Someone really incurred an obligation to respond because help had been given.

Someone truly wanted to speak.

Someone truly did not.

Someone truly wanted to be seen.

Someone truly wanted never to be seen again.

None of these facts cancels another. They can only remain together.

What Writing Must Be Most Careful Not to Do

What Writing Must Be Most Careful Not to Do

The greatest danger in writing about this film is not an insufficiently elegant theory.

It is remaking the figures as examples.

Someone does not say “Wait” in order for us to demonstrate a concept of the right to pause.

Someone does not say “I don’t want to say” in order for us to prove the existence of untranslatable silence.

Someone does not say “No one can see you” so that we can summarize a politics of invisibility.

Mature criticism lets its concepts disappear.

The discipline of evidence remains beneath the surface. What the reader meets is the breathing of the figures.

This may be the real destination of everything written after the film.

Not another explanation of how complex it is.

Not another demonstration of how many layers it possesses.

Not the assignment of every sentence to a concept.

This is not simplification for an audience.

It is the compression of every complex operation back into the film.

When concepts recede, people can reappear.

When the apparatus recedes, sentences can speak again.

The People After the Credits

After the credits, who is still speaking for them?

We are.

We cannot pretend otherwise.

This does not mean that we should fall silent.

We can say: here I am describing only an action that can be seen or heard in the film.

We can say: here I am offering a synthesis based on repeated close reading.

Boundaries do not make an essay timid. They give it force.

Writing with force does not need to pretend that it possesses the final interpretation.

Human Surrender begins with “I have to see you.”

But the longer we look, the more we should understand the weight of the last sentence:

“No one can see you.”

It does not instruct us to stop looking.

It instructs us to know that looking has a cost.

After the credits, we are still looking, writing, and speaking for them.

The real question is not whether to continue.

Perhaps this is the most that criticism can finally do.

Not build a larger machine for the film.

But, after the machine has been built, learn slowly to lower the lights.

Let the people emerge.

Let the sentences emerge.

Let what did not end with the credits do more than enter another archive. Let it finally be heard by someone else.

Watch and Continue

Start with the new six-essay guide to Human Surrender .

Watch the full film, Shoot Self with You / Human Surrender , with English subtitles .

Explore the English criticism collection .

Open the official film page and stills .

Evidence Boundary

This essay is an interpretive synthesis grounded in repeated viewing of Human Surrender . The six recurring film lines were checked against the owner-confirmed Chinese T0 role corpus and the exact local English subtitle master F1riPOyQuCI-English-merged-v2.srt (SHA-256 c79b944d4361dd23a0ef3768b927d137ac3a34ffbc8b91087abea353641dc131 ). The local implementation record says this exact master was published as the full film’s English CC track on July 14, 2026; this local-only audit did not independently recheck the live player. “I don’t want to say” consolidates two consecutive cues (“I” / “Don’t want to say”); punctuation and capitalization elsewhere are editorial normalization.


4K无字幕母文件136分44秒第1800下一幕二次流程加锁复核

# 4K无字幕母文件136分44秒第1800下一幕二次流程加锁复核

本文为研究档案公开版，保留来源版本的论述与限制。公开时间：2026-09-08；不表示已完成同行评审。 本文属于公开研究资料（历史笔记、研究稿或来源记录）：已完成格式、来源限制与重复项筛查，尚未完成逐篇独立事实复核；原文中的解释、候选判断和未确认内容均按其原有限制阅读。

来源版本日期：2026-07-02

证据边界：T1 本地复核页，使用 `1800-next-scene-second-lock-to-what-was-it-chain` 最小证据包，并复用 #1799 页 `1799-next-scene-repeat-chain` 的 #1799->#1800 低能间隙参照，锁定 #1800 exact、#1799->#1800 6.467s 低能间隙、#1800->#1801 3.833s 非静音接缝、#1800/#1801 boundary、#1801 `啥来着` 参照、#1800 exact 100ms 曲线、后 gap 500ms 分箱、频谱/声道边界、帧指标与联系图。T0 锁定 #1800 甲瑞第二次 `下一幕`；本页判断 #1800 是下一幕二次流程加锁：它不是新场景到达，而是在 #1799 第一次调用尚未完成转场后，重复同一流程词并把现场推向 #1801 的记忆空位。

# 4K无字幕母文件136分44秒第1800下一幕二次流程加锁复核

## 片源与资产

- 片源：`〔本地资料路径省略〕 无字幕 28g 4k.mov`
- 当前主证据目录：`〔本地资料路径省略〕`
- 前置间隙参照目录：`〔本地资料路径省略〕`
- 外置 T0 payload：`〔本地资料路径省略〕`
- #1800 exact 音频：`audio/1800_exact_next_scene_second_ref_mono.wav`、`audio/1800_exact_next_scene_second_ref_stereo.wav`
- 等待与参照：`audio/1800_to1801_gap_mono.wav`、`audio/1800_to1801_gap_stereo.wav`、`audio/1800_to1801_boundary_200ms_mono.wav`、`audio/1800_to1801_boundary_200ms_stereo.wav`、`audio/1801_exact_what_was_it_ref_mono.wav`、`audio/1801_exact_what_was_it_ref_stereo.wav`、`audio/1800_1801_chain_mono.wav`、`audio/1800_1801_chain_stereo.wav`
- 声音摘要：`metrics/audio_summary_1800_supplement.json`
- #1800 exact 100ms 曲线：`metrics/1800_exact_next_scene_second_ref_mono_100ms_bins.json`
- #1800->#1801 gap 500ms 分箱：`metrics/1800_to1801_gap_mono_500ms_bins.json`
- #1800/#1801 boundary 20ms 曲线：`metrics/1800_to1801_boundary_200ms_mono_20ms_bins.json`
- #1801 exact 100ms 参照曲线：`metrics/1801_exact_what_was_it_ref_mono_100ms_bins.json`
- 频谱/声道摘要：`metrics/audio_frequency_space_1800_supplement.json`
- 帧色彩指标：`metrics/frame_color_metrics_1800_supplement.json`
- 联系图：`metrics/648_contact_1800_next_scene_second_to1801_what_was_it_chain.jpg`

## T0 对照

```text
#1799 甲瑞：下一幕
#1800 甲瑞：下一幕
#1801 子丑：啥来着
#1802 甲瑞：对
```

T0 锁定 #1800 为甲瑞台词，时间 `02:16:44.233-02:16:45.000`。它是 #1799 `下一幕` 之后的第二次重复，后面接的不是新幕内容，而是子丑 #1801 `啥来着`。#1800 因而不是完成转场，而是二次加锁后暴露内容空位。

## 声音指标

| 窗口 | 时间 | duration | RMS / mean | peak / max | 说明 |
|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|---|
| #1799->#1800 gap ref | `02:16:37.766-02:16:44.233` | `6.467s` | `-43.774dBFS` | `-18.922dBFS` | 复用 #1799 页，第一次 `下一幕` 后的低能等待 |
| #1800 exact mono | `02:16:44.233-02:16:45.000` | `0.767s` | `-28.396dBFS` | `-12.031dBFS` | 甲瑞第二次 `下一幕`，较 #1799 更响 |
| #1800->#1801 gap | `02:16:45.000-02:16:48.833` | `3.833s` | `-29.266dBFS` | `-3.177dBFS` | 非纯静默，尾部明显抬向 #1801 |
| #1800/#1801 boundary 200ms | `02:16:48.733-02:16:48.933` | `0.200s` | `-14.278dBFS` | `-3.177dBFS` | #1801 进入前后出现强接缝 |
| #1801 exact ref | `02:16:48.833-02:16:49.600` | `0.767s` | `-21.263dBFS` | `-4.851dBFS` | 子丑 `啥来着` 参照，明显强于 #1800 |
| #1800-#1801 chain | `02:16:44.233-02:16:49.600` | `5.367s` | `-26.735dBFS` | `-3.177dBFS` | 第二次加锁到记忆空位 |

#1800 exact 100ms 曲线为：

```text
-44.152 / -39.358 / -22.632 / -24.487 / -29.492 / -32.906 / -36.427 / -40.205 dBFS
```

这条曲线支持“二次加锁”而不是“强声宣布”。#1800 前 `200ms` 很低，真正的声能集中在 `0.2-0.4s`，随后一路撤到 `-40.205dBFS`。它比 #1799 exact RMS=`-32.758dBFS` 更响，但仍不是强势开场；它像把第一次流程词再钉一下，然后立即撤声。

#1800->#1801 gap 的 500ms 分箱为：

```text
-43.169 / -41.798 / -38.021 / -31.660 / -41.863 / -42.103 / -35.495 / -19.362 dBFS
```

这里和 #1799->#1800 的低能等待不同。#1800 后的间隙 RMS=`-29.266dBFS`，silence ratio=`0.164063`，最后一格抬到 `-19.362dBFS`；#1800/#1801 boundary 200ms RMS=`-14.278dBFS`，#1801 exact RMS=`-21.263dBFS`。这说明第二次 `下一幕` 没有把现场带入平稳新段落，而是把能量推向一个更响的“啥来着”。

频谱/声道只能做边界判断。#1800、#1800->#1801 gap、#1801 的 stereo LR correlation 均为 `1.000000`，side≈`0`。high/air 和谱质心可提示人声边缘、材料/房间声或录音压缩边缘候选，但不能升级为设备声、无线电、通信声、系统 UI、声道空间打开、节拍、和声、乐器层或可确认独立配乐。

## 画面指标与联系图

| 帧 | mean_luma | dark_lt40_ratio | 说明 |
|---|---:|---:|---|
| #1799->#1800 gap late ref | `51.908` | `0.355553` | 第二次 `下一幕` 之前仍在同一近身场 |
| #1800 start | `50.623` | `0.372819` | 白衣人物、低位身体、前景肩背和黑色遮挡同场 |
| #1800 mid | `50.215` | `0.375439` | 画面没有切出新幕，仍是多人围绕 |
| #1800 tail | `50.769` | `0.366884` | 重复流程词后身体场继续存在 |
| #1800->#1801 gap early | `50.759` | `0.360363` | 间隙仍保持同一近身构图 |
| #1800->#1801 gap mid | `49.034` | `0.382756` | 低位身体略下沉，空间未换场 |
| #1800->#1801 gap late | `48.926` | `0.402010` | #1801 前画面更暗，仍未出现新场景 |
| #1801 start ref | `48.764` | `0.407021` | `啥来着` 仍在同一围绕关系中 |
| #1801 mid ref | `48.338` | `0.418323` | 内容空位没有被画面替代为新幕内容 |
| #1801 tail ref | `48.358` | `0.418213` | 低位身体和前景遮挡持续 |

联系图显示，从 #1800 到 #1801，画面几乎没有完成新幕意义上的换场。白衣人物在右侧，前景肩背与黑色遮挡在左侧，裸露上身的低位身体仍在中央，后排观看区和白色棚布仍构成同一公开观看空间。#1800 的 `下一幕` 在画面上不兑现为“下一场景”，而是继续把同一身体场压成可被流程安排的对象。

## 稳定支持

- #1800 是下一幕二次流程加锁：它重复 #1799 的流程词，说明第一次 `下一幕` 没有完成转场。
- #1800 exact RMS=`-28.396dBFS`，高于 #1799 的 `-32.758dBFS`，支持第二次加钉；但 100ms 曲线尾部撤声，不支持强势完成。
- #1800->#1801 gap RMS=`-29.266dBFS`、最后 500ms 到 `-19.362dBFS`，#1801 exact RMS=`-21.263dBFS`，支持“二次加锁后反而通向记忆空位”。
- 画面从 #1800 到 #1801 保持同一近身围绕结构，不支持新场景实际到达。
- 声道稳定居中同相，支持人声/现场声边界，不支持空间化设备声或独立音乐层。

## 不支持

- 不支持把 #1800 写成修复完成、安全中止、风险解除、责任裁决、现实保护完成、同意、道歉或安抚成功。
- 不支持把第二次 `下一幕` 写成外部剪辑事实、片外导演指令、舞台监督完成、叙事自然过渡、清场完成或新场景已经实际到达。
- 不支持把 #1800 写成流程已经成功稳定；#1801 `啥来着` 会把内容空位暴露出来。
- 不支持把 #1800->#1801 的 gap 或 high/air 写成音乐桥、设备提示、无线电、通信声、系统 UI、声道空间打开或可确认独立配乐。
- 不支持把画面写成外部安全空间、出口、清场、伤害完成、尸体、死亡确认、医疗/警务介入或裁判位置。

## Wiki 去向

- 分段正文：[人类投降派逐句对白声画解读-第1780-1829句-2026-06-24](/research/hs-08307b09a14da92a)
- 总入口：人类投降派逐句对白声画解读总入口-2026-06-20（馆内参考，未随本文公开）
- 下一顺序强读恢复点：第 `1780-1829` 卷 #1801 子丑 `啥来着`

## 文中引用的图像资料

以下图像由本篇已有文件引用对应；保留历史引用范围，图像展示不增加新的事实判断。

![648_contact_1800_next_scene_second_to1801_what_was_it_chain.jpg](/research/images/f5e91aca508f9125e41f.webp)

4K无字幕母文件136分44秒第1800下一幕二次流程加锁复核

4K无字幕母文件136分44秒第1800下一幕二次流程加锁复核

片源与资产

片源： 〔本地资料路径省略〕 无字幕 28g 4k.mov

当前主证据目录： 〔本地资料路径省略〕

前置间隙参照目录： 〔本地资料路径省略〕

外置 T0 payload： 〔本地资料路径省略〕

1800 exact 音频： audio/1800_exact_next_scene_second_ref_mono.wav 、 audio/1800_exact_next_scene_second_ref_stereo.wav

等待与参照： audio/1800_to1801_gap_mono.wav 、 audio/1800_to1801_gap_stereo.wav 、 audio/1800_to1801_boundary_200ms_mono.wav 、 audio/1800_to1801_boundary_200ms_stereo.wav 、 audio/1801_exact_what_was_it_ref_mono.wav 、 audio/1801_exact_what_was_it_ref_stereo.wav 、 audio/1800_1801_chain_mono.wav 、 audio/1800_1801_chain_stereo.wav

声音摘要： metrics/audio_summary_1800_supplement.json

1800 exact 100ms 曲线： metrics/1800_exact_next_scene_second_ref_mono_100ms_bins.json

1800->#1801 gap 500ms 分箱： metrics/1800_to1801_gap_mono_500ms_bins.json

1800/#1801 boundary 20ms 曲线： metrics/1800_to1801_boundary_200ms_mono_20ms_bins.json

1801 exact 100ms 参照曲线： metrics/1801_exact_what_was_it_ref_mono_100ms_bins.json

频谱/声道摘要： metrics/audio_frequency_space_1800_supplement.json

帧色彩指标： metrics/frame_color_metrics_1800_supplement.json

联系图： metrics/648_contact_1800_next_scene_second_to1801_what_was_it_chain.jpg

T0 对照

T0 锁定 #1800 为甲瑞台词，时间 02:16:44.233-02:16:45.000 。它是 #1799 下一幕 之后的第二次重复，后面接的不是新幕内容，而是子丑 #1801 啥来着 。#1800 因而不是完成转场，而是二次加锁后暴露内容空位。

声音指标

窗口 时间 duration RMS / mean peak / max 说明

#1799->#1800 gap ref 02:16:37.766-02:16:44.233 6.467s -43.774dBFS -18.922dBFS 复用 #1799 页，第一次 下一幕 后的低能等待

#1800 exact mono 02:16:44.233-02:16:45.000 0.767s -28.396dBFS -12.031dBFS 甲瑞第二次 下一幕 ，较 #1799 更响

#1800->#1801 gap 02:16:45.000-02:16:48.833 3.833s -29.266dBFS -3.177dBFS 非纯静默，尾部明显抬向 #1801

#1800/#1801 boundary 200ms 02:16:48.733-02:16:48.933 0.200s -14.278dBFS -3.177dBFS #1801 进入前后出现强接缝

#1801 exact ref 02:16:48.833-02:16:49.600 0.767s -21.263dBFS -4.851dBFS 子丑 啥来着 参照，明显强于 #1800

#1800-#1801 chain 02:16:44.233-02:16:49.600 5.367s -26.735dBFS -3.177dBFS 第二次加锁到记忆空位

1800 exact 100ms 曲线为：

这条曲线支持“二次加锁”而不是“强声宣布”。#1800 前 200ms 很低，真正的声能集中在 0.2-0.4s ，随后一路撤到 -40.205dBFS 。它比 #1799 exact RMS= -32.758dBFS 更响，但仍不是强势开场；它像把第一次流程词再钉一下，然后立即撤声。

1800->#1801 gap 的 500ms 分箱为：

这里和 #1799->#1800 的低能等待不同。#1800 后的间隙 RMS= -29.266dBFS ，silence ratio= 0.164063 ，最后一格抬到 -19.362dBFS ；#1800/#1801 boundary 200ms RMS= -14.278dBFS ，#1801 exact RMS= -21.263dBFS 。这说明第二次 下一幕 没有把现场带入平稳新段落，而是把能量推向一个更响的“啥来着”。

频谱/声道只能做边界判断。#1800、#1800->#1801 gap、#1801 的 stereo LR correlation 均为 1.000000 ，side≈ 0 。high/air 和谱质心可提示人声边缘、材料/房间声或录音压缩边缘候选，但不能升级为设备声、无线电、通信声、系统 UI、声道空间打开、节拍、和声、乐器层或可确认独立配乐。

画面指标与联系图

帧 mean_luma dark_lt40_ratio 说明

#1799->#1800 gap late ref 51.908 0.355553 第二次 下一幕 之前仍在同一近身场

#1800 start 50.623 0.372819 白衣人物、低位身体、前景肩背和黑色遮挡同场

#1800 mid 50.215 0.375439 画面没有切出新幕，仍是多人围绕

#1800 tail 50.769 0.366884 重复流程词后身体场继续存在

#1800->#1801 gap early 50.759 0.360363 间隙仍保持同一近身构图

#1800->#1801 gap mid 49.034 0.382756 低位身体略下沉，空间未换场

#1800->#1801 gap late 48.926 0.402010 #1801 前画面更暗，仍未出现新场景

#1801 start ref 48.764 0.407021 啥来着 仍在同一围绕关系中

#1801 mid ref 48.338 0.418323 内容空位没有被画面替代为新幕内容

#1801 tail ref 48.358 0.418213 低位身体和前景遮挡持续

联系图显示，从 #1800 到 #1801，画面几乎没有完成新幕意义上的换场。白衣人物在右侧，前景肩背与黑色遮挡在左侧，裸露上身的低位身体仍在中央，后排观看区和白色棚布仍构成同一公开观看空间。#1800 的 下一幕 在画面上不兑现为“下一场景”，而是继续把同一身体场压成可被流程安排的对象。

稳定支持

1800 是下一幕二次流程加锁：它重复 #1799 的流程词，说明第一次 下一幕 没有完成转场。

1800 exact RMS= -28.396dBFS ，高于 #1799 的 -32.758dBFS ，支持第二次加钉；但 100ms 曲线尾部撤声，不支持强势完成。

1800->#1801 gap RMS= -29.266dBFS 、最后 500ms 到 -19.362dBFS ，#1801 exact RMS= -21.263dBFS ，支持“二次加锁后反而通向记忆空位”。

声道稳定居中同相，支持人声/现场声边界，不支持空间化设备声或独立音乐层。

不支持

不支持把第二次 下一幕 写成外部剪辑事实、片外导演指令、舞台监督完成、叙事自然过渡、清场完成或新场景已经实际到达。

不支持把 #1800 写成流程已经成功稳定；#1801 啥来着 会把内容空位暴露出来。

Wiki 去向

分段正文： 人类投降派逐句对白声画解读-第1780-1829句-2026-06-24

下一顺序强读恢复点：第 1780-1829 卷 #1801 子丑 啥来着

文中引用的图像资料

以下图像由本篇已有文件引用对应；保留历史引用范围，图像展示不增加新的事实判断。


博士论文矩阵工程：主义主义画图者与《人类投降派》105窗力场

博士论文-主义主义画图者-人类投降派-2026-05-17

# 博士论文矩阵工程：主义主义画图者与《人类投降派》105窗力场

本文为研究档案公开版，保留来源版本的论述与限制。公开时间：2026-09-08；不表示已完成同行评审。 本文属于公开研究资料（历史笔记、研究稿或来源记录）：已完成格式、来源限制与重复项筛查，尚未完成逐篇独立事实复核；原文中的解释、候选判断和未确认内容均按其原有限制阅读。

来源版本日期：2026-05-19

证据边界：本工程为 T3 矩阵论文工程；矩阵只编码分析强度，不替代 T0/T1/T2 证据。

# 博士论文矩阵工程：主义主义画图者与《人类投降派》105窗力场

## 摘要

本文以未明子“主义主义”的四层结构为外部 T3 方法参照，将其转化为电影时间轴制图法。本文不把《人类投降派》归入某个固定主义编号，而是把每个时间窗视为一次现场重新画图：它怎样搭建场域，承认什么存在，授权什么知识，又把事件推向怎样的继续方式。全片被拆为 105 个约 90 秒窗口；每个窗口生成一个 `M_t = 4层 × 4运动` 的力场矩阵；相邻窗口之间生成 `ΔM_t` 形变向量。论文据此论证，影片的核心运动不是线性叙事推进，而是制图权在场域论、本体论、认识论和目的论之间不断扰动、转移和失稳。

## 矩阵总模型

```text
M_t = 4层 × 4运动
4层：场域论 F / 本体论 O / 认识论 E / 目的论 T
4运动：1闭合 / 2分裂 / 3中介 / 4敞开
```

数值解释：`0` 不活跃，`1` 背景，`2` 活跃，`3` 主导。比如 `T1=3` 表示该窗目的论强烈闭合；`E4=3` 表示认识论强烈敞开或无法裁决。

## 方法红线

- 不贴固定主义编号。
- T3 矩阵不覆盖 T0/T1。
- `02:16:30-02:20:35` 写作场内流程声重锁定区，不写成何发单点控制。

## 章节导航

### 正文

- [01-序论-从主义主义到矩阵制图](/research/hs-07a6b21b2b543883)
- [02-第一章-开场场域如何失稳-F2F4](/research/hs-e8185a6f396111ac)
- [03-第二章-亲密如何变成确认系统-O2到O3](/research/hs-1547e4b2d462a6b7)
- [04-第三章-条件视觉与认识论中介-E3E4](/research/hs-b2022ac5e07e9e23)
- [05-第四章-捕获游戏与规则授权-T1E3T3](/research/hs-945f35ee39e8c63a)
- [06-第五章-公共梦像公开观察与目的中介-F3T3](/research/hs-e4e9fa0ef1cfed12)
- [07-第六章-跳过伪闭合与身体债务-T1O4](/research/hs-f96797f0b0eabbda)
- [08-第七章-空白代管不可见与泄漏-O4E3E4](/research/hs-47c303263ebaa7fb)
- [09-第八章-片尾归档与结束失败-T1到F4O4E4](/research/hs-bd00f2db387b8d1e)
- [10-结论-没有完整地图的投降](/research/hs-46a8e8d72e356702)

### 数据与附录

- 20-105窗主义主义微矩阵总表（馆内参考，未随本文公开）
- [21-4x4力场编码规范](/research/hs-5eee5af3f3143da7)
- [22-时间扰动与矩阵形变总论](/research/hs-5f1f7644e8e8b6ac)
- [23-宏段到105窗映射表](/research/hs-84b5a6a119094223)
- [24-矩阵图谱Canvas说明](/research/hs-14964fc46e8999f3)
- [25-清晰标记运动与矩阵可读性规范](/research/hs-4c91e129261a79c6)
- [26-四维发生数列与世界生成图谱](/research/hs-1382568b8bf3cfe4)
- [27-105窗四维发生数列表](/research/hs-e3e93af657920c0c)
- 90-论文证据索引（馆内参考，未随本文公开）
- [91-概念词典](/research/hs-75ca368cdcbd24cf)
- [92-论证图谱](/research/hs-38bc3b0caecb1ebb)
- [93-关键形变谱系](/research/hs-61869782cb37a14b)
- [94-逐章论证加密表](/research/hs-02eb0cbfba73457e)
- [95-复核与修订驾驶舱](/research/hs-c1b0d8c2a1946469)
- [96-参考文献与理论来源](/research/hs-14afbf23e9a51e8f)
- [97-图解说明-4x4矩阵与关键形变](/research/hs-b8d48f121edf26c6)
- 99-合订稿（馆内参考，未随本文公开）
- 主义主义画图者105窗力场图谱-2026-05-17.canvas（馆内参考，未随本文公开）
- 主义主义画图者核心形变图解-2026-05-17.canvas（馆内参考，未随本文公开）
- 主义主义画图者4x4力场矩阵-2026-05-17.svg（馆内参考，未随本文公开）
- 主义主义画图者12宏段时间形变-2026-05-17.svg（馆内参考，未随本文公开）
- 主义主义画图者四维发生直列图-2026-05-17.svg（馆内参考，未随本文公开）

## 12 个宏段

| 宏段 | 窗号 | 时间范围 | 矩阵主型 | 论文功能 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 开场排练三角 | 001-005 | `00:00:00.000-00:07:30.000` | `F2/F4` | 排练/爱情/记录三场重叠，场域先于故事失稳。 |
| 02 爱情失败与演员词汇 | 006-013 | `00:07:30.000-00:19:30.000` | `O2/O3/T3` | 失败、爱情、漂亮和信任被转成创作任务词。 |
| 03 月亮命名与第四幕 | 014-020 | `00:19:30.000-00:30:00.000` | `F4/O3/O4` | 缺席对象、误名、月亮尺度和第四幕把关系拉向未显形作品。 |
| 04 感知过桥与镜像失效 | 021-023 | `00:30:00.000-00:34:30.000` | `E2/E4` | 眼睛、颜色和镜像让亲密确认变成感知测试。 |
| 05 水证明与纯感觉机器 | 024-040 | `00:34:30.000-01:00:00.000` | `E3/E4/O4/F3` | 证明失败、记忆危机、水/鱼/剧场理论把媒介结构推上台面。 |
| 06 条件视觉与梦前装置 | 041-052 | `01:00:00.000-01:18:00.000` | `E3/E4/F3` | 眼镜、白光、祈祷声、温度和声画分离让观看变成条件网络。 |
| 07 捕获游戏与数字门槛 | 053-055 | `01:18:00.000-01:22:30.000` | `T1/E3/T3` | 找/照/准备好/喜欢玩/数字3把关系转成规则文本。 |
| 08 公共梦像与公演阈值 | 056-080 | `01:22:30.000-02:00:00.000` | `F3/T3/E4` | 梦、无眼、说话压力、发呆、洞口和材料把内在状态推向公开义务。 |
| 09 公演I控制权竞争 | 081-089 | `02:00:00.000-02:13:30.000` | `F3/E2/T3` | 观众入场后，Ricky、阿蒙、甲瑞、子丑、声音和道具争夺调度权。 |
| 10 流程重锁定与跳过伪闭合 | 090-094 | `02:13:30.000-02:21:00.000` | `T1/O4/F3` | 下一幕、说话顺序、跳过、演过了把未演中间改写成伪过去。 |
| 11 切断感觉空白不可见债务 | 095-101 | `02:21:00.000-02:31:30.000` | `O4/E3/E4/T3` | 切断、未揭示、空白、帮说和不可见把身体债务转成说话/归档问题。 |
| 12 结束宣告与片尾归档 | 102-105 | `02:31:30.000-02:36:22.270` | `T1/F4/O4/E4` | 结束宣告、人数/主演字幕、残余声轨和标志把闭合变成档案泄漏。 |

## 论文写作原则

正文不把 105 窗表格当作附录材料，而把它当作分析引擎。每章必须至少选择一组关键形变来写：开场的 `F2/F4` 场域不稳，亲密确认的 `O2 -> O3`，条件视觉的 `E3/E4`，捕获游戏的 `T1 + E3`，发呆/公开观察的 `F3 + T3`，跳过的 `T1` 伪闭合，空白代管的 `O4 -> E3/T3`，不可见的 `E2/E4`，以及片尾 `T1 -> F4/O4/E4` 的归档泄漏。

## 清晰标记层

本工程新增清晰标记层：[25-清晰标记运动与矩阵可读性规范](/research/hs-4c91e129261a79c6)。它不改变影片事实，也不是 `M_t` 的第五行，而是专门把矩阵和正文的读法标清：本窗谁主导、相邻窗怎样形变、证据锚点在哪一层、哪些残余不能被讲成确定事实。

清晰基本公式：

```text
K_t = D_t -> P_t -> E_t -> R_t
D_t 主导清晰；P_t 形变清晰；E_t 证据清晰；R_t 残余清晰。
```

最常用的四个动作是：`K1` 定主导，`K2` 标转向，`K3` 挂证据，`K4` 留不可裁决。强判断进入正文前，必须先标清它的主导、形变、证据和残余。

## 四维发生直列

本工程新增发生学直列层：[26-四维发生数列与世界生成图谱](/research/hs-1382568b8bf3cfe4) 与 [27-105窗四维发生数列表](/research/hs-e3e93af657920c0c)。它暂不使用小数坐标，而把每窗 `4x4` 矩阵直接罗列成：

```text
S_t = F{...} O{...} E{...} T{...}
```

括号内只写 `1/2/3/4`：闭合、分裂、中介、敞开；`*` 表示主导运动，`bg` 表示背景在场但暂不主读。它的目的不是恢复传统时间线，而是让读者直观看到世界条件怎样在四层上并列闭合、分裂、中介和敞开。

## 当前状态

这是 `working-v2`。105 窗矩阵已经完成第一版编码，Canvas 图谱已经生成；01-10 正文已经进入第二轮加密，其中 04 条件视觉章、07 跳过章、08 空白不可见章已补入证据层级小表、时间码链条、反读段和本地来源回链；96 参考文献与理论来源已建立引用分层；97 图解说明、核心形变 Canvas、4x4 矩阵 SVG 与 12 宏段时间形变 SVG 已补齐；25 清晰标记运动已建立；26/27 四维发生直列已建立，负责把整部电影的世界生成变化转成 `1234` 直列码和 105 窗直列表。下一步应把其余章节推进到同等证据密度，并在合订稿中逐步嵌入图注、清晰标记和发生直列读法。

博士论文矩阵工程：主义主义画图者与《人类投降派》105窗力场

博士论文矩阵工程：主义主义画图者与《人类投降派》105窗力场

摘要

本文以未明子“主义主义”的四层结构为外部 T3 方法参照，将其转化为电影时间轴制图法。本文不把《人类投降派》归入某个固定主义编号，而是把每个时间窗视为一次现场重新画图：它怎样搭建场域，承认什么存在，授权什么知识，又把事件推向怎样的继续方式。全片被拆为 105 个约 90 秒窗口；每个窗口生成一个 M_t = 4层 × 4运动 的力场矩阵；相邻窗口之间生成 ΔM_t 形变向量。论文据此论证，影片的核心运动不是线性叙事推进，而是制图权在场域论、本体论、认识论和目的论之间不断扰动、转移和失稳。

矩阵总模型

数值解释： 0 不活跃， 1 背景， 2 活跃， 3 主导。比如 T1=3 表示该窗目的论强烈闭合； E4=3 表示认识论强烈敞开或无法裁决。

方法红线

不贴固定主义编号。

T3 矩阵不覆盖 T0/T1。

02:16:30-02:20:35 写作场内流程声重锁定区，不写成何发单点控制。

章节导航

正文

01-序论-从主义主义到矩阵制图

02-第一章-开场场域如何失稳-F2F4

03-第二章-亲密如何变成确认系统-O2到O3

04-第三章-条件视觉与认识论中介-E3E4

05-第四章-捕获游戏与规则授权-T1E3T3

06-第五章-公共梦像公开观察与目的中介-F3T3

07-第六章-跳过伪闭合与身体债务-T1O4

08-第七章-空白代管不可见与泄漏-O4E3E4

09-第八章-片尾归档与结束失败-T1到F4O4E4

10-结论-没有完整地图的投降

数据与附录

20-105窗主义主义微矩阵总表（馆内参考，未随本文公开）

21-4x4力场编码规范

22-时间扰动与矩阵形变总论

23-宏段到105窗映射表

25-清晰标记运动与矩阵可读性规范

26-四维发生数列与世界生成图谱

27-105窗四维发生数列表

90-论文证据索引（馆内参考，未随本文公开）

91-概念词典

92-论证图谱

93-关键形变谱系

94-逐章论证加密表

95-复核与修订驾驶舱

96-参考文献与理论来源

97-图解说明-4x4矩阵与关键形变

99-合订稿（馆内参考，未随本文公开）

12 个宏段

宏段 窗号 时间范围 矩阵主型 论文功能

01 开场排练三角 001-005 00:00:00.000-00:07:30.000 F2/F4 排练/爱情/记录三场重叠，场域先于故事失稳。

02 爱情失败与演员词汇 006-013 00:07:30.000-00:19:30.000 O2/O3/T3 失败、爱情、漂亮和信任被转成创作任务词。

03 月亮命名与第四幕 014-020 00:19:30.000-00:30:00.000 F4/O3/O4 缺席对象、误名、月亮尺度和第四幕把关系拉向未显形作品。

04 感知过桥与镜像失效 021-023 00:30:00.000-00:34:30.000 E2/E4 眼睛、颜色和镜像让亲密确认变成感知测试。

05 水证明与纯感觉机器 024-040 00:34:30.000-01:00:00.000 E3/E4/O4/F3 证明失败、记忆危机、水/鱼/剧场理论把媒介结构推上台面。

06 条件视觉与梦前装置 041-052 01:00:00.000-01:18:00.000 E3/E4/F3 眼镜、白光、祈祷声、温度和声画分离让观看变成条件网络。

07 捕获游戏与数字门槛 053-055 01:18:00.000-01:22:30.000 T1/E3/T3 找/照/准备好/喜欢玩/数字3把关系转成规则文本。

08 公共梦像与公演阈值 056-080 01:22:30.000-02:00:00.000 F3/T3/E4 梦、无眼、说话压力、发呆、洞口和材料把内在状态推向公开义务。

09 公演I控制权竞争 081-089 02:00:00.000-02:13:30.000 F3/E2/T3 观众入场后，Ricky、阿蒙、甲瑞、子丑、声音和道具争夺调度权。

10 流程重锁定与跳过伪闭合 090-094 02:13:30.000-02:21:00.000 T1/O4/F3 下一幕、说话顺序、跳过、演过了把未演中间改写成伪过去。

11 切断感觉空白不可见债务 095-101 02:21:00.000-02:31:30.000 O4/E3/E4/T3 切断、未揭示、空白、帮说和不可见把身体债务转成说话/归档问题。

12 结束宣告与片尾归档 102-105 02:31:30.000-02:36:22.270 T1/F4/O4/E4 结束宣告、人数/主演字幕、残余声轨和标志把闭合变成档案泄漏。

论文写作原则

正文不把 105 窗表格当作附录材料，而把它当作分析引擎。每章必须至少选择一组关键形变来写：开场的 F2/F4 场域不稳，亲密确认的 O2 -> O3 ，条件视觉的 E3/E4 ，捕获游戏的 T1 + E3 ，发呆/公开观察的 F3 + T3 ，跳过的 T1 伪闭合，空白代管的 O4 -> E3/T3 ，不可见的 E2/E4 ，以及片尾 T1 -> F4/O4/E4 的归档泄漏。

清晰标记层

本工程新增清晰标记层： 25-清晰标记运动与矩阵可读性规范 。它不改变影片事实，也不是 M_t 的第五行，而是专门把矩阵和正文的读法标清：本窗谁主导、相邻窗怎样形变、证据锚点在哪一层、哪些残余不能被讲成确定事实。

清晰基本公式：

最常用的四个动作是： K1 定主导， K2 标转向， K3 挂证据， K4 留不可裁决。强判断进入正文前，必须先标清它的主导、形变、证据和残余。

四维发生直列

本工程新增发生学直列层： 26-四维发生数列与世界生成图谱 与 27-105窗四维发生数列表 。它暂不使用小数坐标，而把每窗 4x4 矩阵直接罗列成：

S_t = F{...} O{...} E{...} T{...}

括号内只写 1/2/3/4 ：闭合、分裂、中介、敞开； * 表示主导运动， bg 表示背景在场但暂不主读。它的目的不是恢复传统时间线，而是让读者直观看到世界条件怎样在四层上并列闭合、分裂、中介和敞开。

当前状态

这是 working-v2 。105 窗矩阵已经完成第一版编码，Canvas 图谱已经生成；01-10 正文已经进入第二轮加密，其中 04 条件视觉章、07 跳过章、08 空白不可见章已补入证据层级小表、时间码链条、反读段和本地来源回链；96 参考文献与理论来源已建立引用分层；97 图解说明、核心形变 Canvas、4x4 矩阵 SVG 与 12 宏段时间形变 SVG 已补齐；25 清晰标记运动已建立；26/27 四维发生直列已建立，负责把整部电影的世界生成变化转成 1234 直列码和 105 窗直列表。下一步应把其余章节推进到同等证据密度，并在合订稿中逐步嵌入图注、清晰标记和发生直列读法。


六部分材料链入口

# 六部分材料链入口

本文为研究档案公开版，保留来源版本的论述与限制。公开时间：2026-09-08；不表示已完成同行评审。 本文属于公开研究资料（历史笔记、研究稿或来源记录）：已完成格式、来源限制与重复项筛查，尚未完成逐篇独立事实复核；原文中的解释、候选判断和未确认内容均按其原有限制阅读。

来源版本日期：2026-06-15

证据边界：本页为历史研究资料的公开版本。原始文件未单列 source_rule；此说明仅补充公开阅读边界，不构成对原文事实、模型判断或人物解释的新认证。请结合原文来源、日期、校正与不确定性阅读。

# 六部分材料链入口

- 所属轴线：[材料性](/research/hs-edb6d9042f67f28d)
- 从上层继承：从全片六部分继承时间、空间、声音、身体和档案的顺序。
- 向下层传递：向哲学性传递发生逻辑，向文学性传递章节编排。

## [全片母版](/research/hs-8988fa7568effa13)

| 优先级 | 条目 | 原始页 | 保留理由 |
|---|---|---|---|
| P0 | 五条机制线索-声债材料身体空间时间如何穿越六部分-2026-05-28（馆内参考，未随本文公开） | [五条机制线索-声债材料身体空间时间如何穿越六部分-2026-05-28](/research/hs-a787dca8daa0c6dc) | 声债、材料、身体、空间、时间五条线穿过六部分。 |
| P0 | 人类投降派全片系统时间线与大小章节母版-2026-05-24（馆内参考，未随本文公开） | [人类投降派全片系统时间线与大小章节母版-2026-05-24](/research/hs-e06a2f190566b187) | 全片时间线和章节母版，是人工核对电影结构的主轴。 |

## [第一部分方位装置](/research/hs-e123f01cc09e8f26)

| 优先级 | 条目 | 原始页 | 保留理由 |
|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | 第一部分方位装置深挖-光位预印期待训练与空位抓人-2026-05-28（馆内参考，未随本文公开） | [第一部分方位装置深挖-光位预印期待训练与空位抓人-2026-05-28](/research/hs-e09df560b6ca15cd) | 第一部分作为方位装置：光位、期待和空位如何先行。 |

## [第二部分排练器官](/research/hs-c50df00ae863696d)

| 优先级 | 条目 | 原始页 | 保留理由 |
|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | 第二部分排练结构-罗拉快跑如何制造器官-2026-05-27（馆内参考，未随本文公开） | [第二部分排练结构-罗拉快跑如何制造器官-2026-05-27](/research/hs-d6d27173641a6382) | 第二部分作为排练结构：出入、重复和逃逸如何制造器官。 |
| P1 | 第二部分排练器官内部机制-从数字启动到程序运行-2026-05-28（馆内参考，未随本文公开） | [第二部分排练器官内部机制-从数字启动到程序运行-2026-05-28](/research/hs-1994b07e7ec266c0) | 第二部分内部机制补足数字启动、声床和程序运行。 |

## [第三部分感官证明](/research/hs-082748deadd9cfae)

| 优先级 | 条目 | 原始页 | 保留理由 |
|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | 第三部分感官证明机制-声债感官占据与梦的公共播放-2026-05-27（馆内参考，未随本文公开） | [第三部分感官证明机制-声债感官占据与梦的公共播放-2026-05-27](/research/hs-ea52f01d314db261) | 第三部分把声债、感官占据和梦的公共播放连起来。 |

## [第四部分公开推演](/research/hs-ce2af4c90409e248)

| 优先级 | 条目 | 原始页 | 保留理由 |
|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | 第四部分微阶段划分-从三人场到材料法庭再到声场移交-2026-05-28（馆内参考，未随本文公开） | [第四部分微阶段划分-从三人场到材料法庭再到声场移交-2026-05-28](/research/hs-be92be10ec8ee31c) | 第四部分从三人场、材料法庭到声场移交，是公开推演的骨架。 |
| P2 | 第四部分角色识别速查卡-2026-05-26（馆内参考，未随本文公开） | [第四部分角色识别速查卡-2026-05-26](/research/hs-6b15823e58f179f7) | 角色识别速查卡可辅助第四部分阅读，但不应压过诗学主线。 |

## [第五第六部分后台档案](/research/hs-fcf6d275fea48061)

| 优先级 | 条目 | 原始页 | 保留理由 |
|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | 第六部分档案静默机制深挖-移交归档降噪与停手-2026-05-28（馆内参考，未随本文公开） | [第六部分档案静默机制深挖-移交归档降噪与停手-2026-05-28](/research/hs-04a4ce8af3e10fc1) | 第六部分说明归档、降噪和停手如何完成。 |
| P1 | 第五部分后台声场内部机制-五种声源的协作与阶段划分-2026-05-28（馆内参考，未随本文公开） | [第五部分后台声场内部机制-五种声源的协作与阶段划分-2026-05-28](/research/hs-642fa6ab2c00feee) | 第五部分把五种声源和后台声场分阶段拆开。 |
| P1 | 第五到第六部分过渡-后台声场如何移交档案静默-2026-05-28（馆内参考，未随本文公开） | [第五到第六部分过渡-后台声场如何移交档案静默-2026-05-28](/research/hs-4049cb7947f76552) | 第五到第六部分过渡，是从继续发声到停止占有的关键桥。 |

六部分材料链入口

所属轴线： 材料性

从上层继承：从全片六部分继承时间、空间、声音、身体和档案的顺序。

向下层传递：向哲学性传递发生逻辑，向文学性传递章节编排。

全片母版

优先级 条目 原始页 保留理由

P0 五条机制线索-声债材料身体空间时间如何穿越六部分-2026-05-28（馆内参考，未随本文公开） 五条机制线索-声债材料身体空间时间如何穿越六部分-2026-05-28 声债、材料、身体、空间、时间五条线穿过六部分。

P0 人类投降派全片系统时间线与大小章节母版-2026-05-24（馆内参考，未随本文公开） 人类投降派全片系统时间线与大小章节母版-2026-05-24 全片时间线和章节母版，是人工核对电影结构的主轴。

第一部分方位装置

优先级 条目 原始页 保留理由

P1 第一部分方位装置深挖-光位预印期待训练与空位抓人-2026-05-28（馆内参考，未随本文公开） 第一部分方位装置深挖-光位预印期待训练与空位抓人-2026-05-28 第一部分作为方位装置：光位、期待和空位如何先行。

第二部分排练器官

优先级 条目 原始页 保留理由

P1 第二部分排练结构-罗拉快跑如何制造器官-2026-05-27（馆内参考，未随本文公开） 第二部分排练结构-罗拉快跑如何制造器官-2026-05-27 第二部分作为排练结构：出入、重复和逃逸如何制造器官。

P1 第二部分排练器官内部机制-从数字启动到程序运行-2026-05-28（馆内参考，未随本文公开） 第二部分排练器官内部机制-从数字启动到程序运行-2026-05-28 第二部分内部机制补足数字启动、声床和程序运行。

第三部分感官证明

优先级 条目 原始页 保留理由

P1 第三部分感官证明机制-声债感官占据与梦的公共播放-2026-05-27（馆内参考，未随本文公开） 第三部分感官证明机制-声债感官占据与梦的公共播放-2026-05-27 第三部分把声债、感官占据和梦的公共播放连起来。

第四部分公开推演

优先级 条目 原始页 保留理由

P1 第四部分微阶段划分-从三人场到材料法庭再到声场移交-2026-05-28（馆内参考，未随本文公开） 第四部分微阶段划分-从三人场到材料法庭再到声场移交-2026-05-28 第四部分从三人场、材料法庭到声场移交，是公开推演的骨架。

P2 第四部分角色识别速查卡-2026-05-26（馆内参考，未随本文公开） 第四部分角色识别速查卡-2026-05-26 角色识别速查卡可辅助第四部分阅读，但不应压过诗学主线。

第五第六部分后台档案

优先级 条目 原始页 保留理由

P1 第六部分档案静默机制深挖-移交归档降噪与停手-2026-05-28（馆内参考，未随本文公开） 第六部分档案静默机制深挖-移交归档降噪与停手-2026-05-28 第六部分说明归档、降噪和停手如何完成。

P1 第五部分后台声场内部机制-五种声源的协作与阶段划分-2026-05-28（馆内参考，未随本文公开） 第五部分后台声场内部机制-五种声源的协作与阶段划分-2026-05-28 第五部分把五种声源和后台声场分阶段拆开。

P1 第五到第六部分过渡-后台声场如何移交档案静默-2026-05-28（馆内参考，未随本文公开） 第五到第六部分过渡-后台声场如何移交档案静默-2026-05-28 第五到第六部分过渡，是从继续发声到停止占有的关键桥。


# MiMo-4K无字幕第1003我相信你但是失联与07报告标准API声画音频复核-2026-06-23

本文为研究档案公开版，保留来源版本的论述与限制。公开时间：2026-09-08；不表示已完成同行评审。 本文属于公开研究资料（历史笔记、研究稿或来源记录）：已完成格式、来源限制与重复项筛查，尚未完成逐篇独立事实复核；原文中的解释、候选判断和未确认内容均按其原有限制阅读。

来源版本日期：2026-06-23

证据边界：MiMo 只作 T2 候选；不得覆盖 T0 台词账、T1 本地声学指标、帧图或人工判断。可保留其对同一固定舞台空间、无真实塔台/宇航员/通信设备物证、黑衣人物继续膜前动作、白衣坐姿人物手扶后脑/低头/内收候选、#1003 非强确认、#1004 转折、#1005/#1006 更系统化、低频只能降级为环境纹理或声床的观察；必须降级具体心理、口型同步、声源物理来源、真实塔台/真实失联/真实通讯链路、人物身份和任何音乐裁决。

# MiMo-4K无字幕第1003我相信你但是失联与07报告标准API声画音频复核-2026-06-23

## 运行范围

本次使用 MiMo 标准兼容入口对 `01:34:00.066-01:34:16.833` 做两路反读：

```text
video: clips/1003_to1012_chain_720p_audio.mp4
audio: audio/1003_to1012_chain.wav
model: mimo-v2.5
video mode: formal-safe, fps=4, media_resolution=max
audio mode: analysis
```

原始报告位于：

```text
raw/assets/4k-nosub-restart-20260623/1003-believe-you-but-system-return-nooffset/mimo-run/1003-to1012-video-formal-counterread/mimo-report.md
raw/assets/4k-nosub-restart-20260623/1003-believe-you-but-system-return-nooffset/mimo-run/1003-to1012-audio-sound-music-counterread/mimo-audio-report.md
```

用量：

```text
video total_tokens=34599, prompt_tokens=30964, completion_tokens=3635
audio total_tokens=3121, prompt_tokens=749, completion_tokens=2372
```

## 可保留的 T2 方向

视频报告可保留：

- 片段维持在同一固定舞台空间：抬高平台、反光地面、半透明塑料膜面、暖橙光晕和冷暗背景。
- #1005/#1006 虽然出现 `塔台 / 宇航员 / 失联`，但画面没有宇航服、控制台、屏幕、星空、驾驶舱、通讯设备或外部任务空间。
- 黑衣站立人物背对镜头，继续在膜面前移动、抬手、触碰或画写候选；本地写法只能保留可见动作，不能确认意图。
- 白衣坐姿人物之间保持近距离相向关系；其中一名白衣坐姿人物在 #1003-#1006 附近有手扶后脑/颈部、低头、身体内收的可见变化。
- 右侧白衣坐姿人物保持朝向中间人物，身体距离近但无明确肢体接触。
- 无硬切、无场景重置、无新叙事地点显影；所有变化都发生在同一长镜头内部。

音频报告可保留：

- #1003 `我相信你` 不是强有力确认，更接近低位回应、安抚候选或迟疑回应。
- #1004 `但是` 是明确转折，会破坏 #1003 的稳定感。
- #1005/#1006 相比 #1003/#1004 更广播化、系统化或口令化，但不能由此坐实真实塔台。
- #1007/#1008 把信任问题重新拉回 `你/我` 的个人关系层面。
- 低频声床或环境纹理存在，但不能称为可确认音乐；没有稳定旋律、节拍、和声推进、明确乐器进入或音乐高潮。
- 没有绝对静默、清晰硬断开或空间声场重置。

## 必须降级的部分

以下 MiMo 判断必须降级或只作人工复核问题：

- 具体人物心理，如迟疑、拒绝、不安、内心不确信，只能作为形式解释参考，不能写成事实。
- 口型同步、声源物理来源、可见人物等同说话人、真实广播设备或真实通信链路。
- 音频报告中把系统声类比为“指挥舱”或同声场通讯空间的说法。画面没有指挥舱物证，只能写舞台声场里的系统口令。
- 白衣人物性别、身份、具体关系和黑衣人物工具意图。
- 对 #1003 句内“前弱后强/尾部增强”的精确判断。MiMo 自己也说需波形/RMS 验证；最终以 T1 本地指标为准。
- 任何把低频声床确认成配乐、合成器、乐器或音乐高潮的说法。

## 与 T1 的合并规则

本地 T1 指标是主证据：

```text
#1003 RMS=-25.8621dBFS
#1003 front RMS=-28.4170dBFS
#1003 tail RMS=-23.0603dBFS
#1003 second_half 比 first_half 高 6.2046dB
#1004 RMS=-27.6171dBFS
#1005 RMS=-15.5315dBFS
#1006 RMS=-18.2817dBFS
```

因此，MiMo 的“低位回应”“转折破坏稳定感”“系统口令更强”“音乐不可确认”可以作为 T2 补充；但 #1003 是否尾部抬起、#1005/#1006 高出多少、是否有 silence event、是否存在左右声道差异、是否有硬切或音乐结构，均以 [2026-06-23-4K无字幕母文件开场94分00秒到94分16秒第1003我相信你尾部抬起与但是失联系统复核](/research/hs-0cde7ff1fabf9ad0) 为准。

## 结论

MiMo 本轮没有发现能推翻本地读法的新物证。它支持一个保守方向：#1003 是低位回应而非强确认，#1004 使确认立即转折，#1005/#1006 更系统化，但画面仍不兑现外部塔台或真实通讯。#1003 到 #1012 的变化仍在同一舞台、平台、膜面和旁观现场内部展开；音乐仍不可确认。

运行范围

本次使用 MiMo 标准兼容入口对 01:34:00.066-01:34:16.833 做两路反读：

原始报告位于：

用量：

可保留的 T2 方向

视频报告可保留：

1005/#1006 虽然出现 塔台 / 宇航员 / 失联 ，但画面没有宇航服、控制台、屏幕、星空、驾驶舱、通讯设备或外部任务空间。

右侧白衣坐姿人物保持朝向中间人物，身体距离近但无明确肢体接触。

无硬切、无场景重置、无新叙事地点显影；所有变化都发生在同一长镜头内部。

音频报告可保留：

1003 我相信你 不是强有力确认，更接近低位回应、安抚候选或迟疑回应。

1004 但是 是明确转折，会破坏 #1003 的稳定感。

1007/#1008 把信任问题重新拉回 你/我 的个人关系层面。

没有绝对静默、清晰硬断开或空间声场重置。

必须降级的部分

以下 MiMo 判断必须降级或只作人工复核问题：

口型同步、声源物理来源、可见人物等同说话人、真实广播设备或真实通信链路。

白衣人物性别、身份、具体关系和黑衣人物工具意图。

任何把低频声床确认成配乐、合成器、乐器或音乐高潮的说法。

与 T1 的合并规则

本地 T1 指标是主证据：

因此，MiMo 的“低位回应”“转折破坏稳定感”“系统口令更强”“音乐不可确认”可以作为 T2 补充；但 #1003 是否尾部抬起、#1005/#1006 高出多少、是否有 silence event、是否存在左右声道差异、是否有硬切或音乐结构，均以 2026-06-23-4K无字幕母文件开场94分00秒到94分16秒第1003我相信你尾部抬起与但是失联系统复核 为准。

结论