feat(benchmarks): measurement (b) MEASURED — optimization transfer only, mean-pose baseline wins

WiFlow-STD fine-tuned on 2,046 fresh single-room ESP32 paired windows
(temporal 70/15/15, 70->540 adapter, K=17): pretrained-init 65% PCK@20 vs
scratch 0% (optimization transfer) but frozen-trunk ~0% (no feature
transfer), and NOTHING beats the mean-pose baseline (95.9% PCK@20 —
single subject, near-static normalized coords). Honesty gates held: pred
std 0.0113 (non-constant model) but mean-baseline dominance means no
citable CSI->pose capability from this data. ADR-152 open question 1
answered partially; definitive answer needs multi-subject/position data.

Two new aligner findings: heterogeneous csi_shape with silent zero-padding
(~20%), and extractCsiMatrix's transposed shape label (frame-major data,
[nSc, nFrames] label) — fixes pending.

Co-Authored-By: claude-flow <ruv@ruv.net>

benchmarks/wiflow-std/RESULTS.md

@@ -264,9 +264,117 @@ same split. WiFlow-STD assets stand ready on ruvultra (`~/wiflow-std-bench/`).
 Also worth investigating: ADR-079's protocol predicts ~9k windows per 30 min;
 the May session under-delivered ~8× (aligner drop rate?).
 
+## Measurement (b) (MEASURED 2026-06-10/11)
+
+The data baseline unblocked: the 2026-06-10 22:10–22:40 collection session produced
+**2,046 paired windows** (`ruvultra:~/wiflow-std-bench/paired-20260610.jsonl`; ONE
+subject, ONE room, ONE ESP32 node, varied poses: walk/raise/squat/kick/wave/turn/
+jump/sit; aligner `scripts/align-ground-truth.js`, non-overlapping 20-frame windows
+~0.42 s; 17 COCO keypoints in normalized [0,1] camera coords; MediaPipe confidence
+mean 0.802, min 0.692 — all windows pass the conf>0.5 filter). The −4 h timestamp
+bug and the empty-frame confidence-dilution aligner findings are recorded
+separately; results only here. Trained on ruvultra (RTX 5080, torch 2.11+cu128,
+fp32, batch 32, GPU shared with the efficiency sweep). Scripts mirrored in
+`remote/measb/`; raw metrics + full training curves in `results/measurement_b.json`.
+
+### Two new aligner/dataset findings (forced deviations, MEASURED)
+
+1. **`csi_shape` is heterogeneous, not [70, 20]**: 1,347× [70,20], 284× [134,20],
+   243× [26,20], 130× [12,20], 42× [20,20]. The ESP32 stream emits mixed frame
+   types and `extractCsiMatrix` stamps each window's subcarrier count from
+   `window[0].subcarriers`, zero-padding/truncating the other frames — even
+   native-70 windows contain ~20.4% internally zero-padded short frames
+   (subcarriers 40–69 all-zero). Handling: the primary suite ("all 2,046")
+   linearly resamples every frame's subcarrier axis to 70 bins (identity for
+   native-70 frames) so the pre-registered n and split sizes hold; a secondary
+   suite restricts to the 1,347 native [70,20] windows as a homogeneity check.
+2. **Aligner layout bug**: `extractCsiMatrix` fills `matrix[f * nSc + s]`
+   (frame-major) but declares `shape: [nSc, nFrames]` — the stored shape label is
+   transposed relative to the data. Confirmed by coherent per-frame zero-tails;
+   corrected on load (`reshape(nFrames, nSc).T`).
+
+### Protocol (pre-registered, followed)
+
+Temporal split, no shuffling across time: first 70% train (1,432), next 15% val
+(307), last 15% test (307); seed 42 elsewhere. Model: learned 1×1 Conv1d 70→540
+adapter prepended to the upstream WiFlow-STD trunk; K=17 via the parameter-free
+adaptive pool (`AdaptiveAvgPool2d((17,1))` — pretrained weights load strict for
+any K). CSI normalized by the TRAIN-split p99 amplitude (129.7 all / 130.9
+native-70), clipped to [0,1]. Three runs, ≤60 epochs, early-stop patience 8 on
+val MPJPE, AdamW (adapter lr 1e-4; pretrained trunk lr 1e-5, 10× lower; scratch
+all 1e-4), fp32. Pretrained init = the measurement-(a) **retrained** checkpoint
+(`upstream/test/best_pose_model.pth`, ~96% PCK@20 on WiFlow data; the
+`att.`/`final_conv.` key remap from `eval_repro.py` applied defensively — a no-op,
+that checkpoint already uses post-rename keys). Frozen-trunk run: trunk
+`requires_grad=False` **and** held in `.eval()` so BatchNorm running stats cannot
+drift — a pure transfer probe; only the 70→540 adapter (38,340 params) trains.
+
+PCK is torso-normalized with **torso = ‖l_shoulder(5) − l_hip(11)‖** (upstream
+`calculate_pck` math — per-frame norm clamped at 0.01, mean over keypoints ×
+frames — but upstream's `NECK_IDX/PELVIS_IDX = 2, 12` is a 15-keypoint
+convention; on 17-kp COCO those indices are right_eye/right_hip, so the indices
+were replaced, not the math). MPJPE is in normalized image units (not meters).
+
+### Results — primary suite, all 2,046 windows (test = last 307)
+
+| Run | PCK@10 | PCK@20 | PCK@30 | PCK@40 | PCK@50 | MPJPE | pred std | best ep |
+|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+| **mean-pose baseline** (honesty bar) | **73.1%** | **95.9%** | **98.7%** | 99.3% | 99.3% | **0.0148** | 0 (by constr.) | — |
+| (i) pretrained-init, full fine-tune | 26.0% | 65.0% | 88.0% | 96.4% | 98.9% | 0.0313 | 0.0113 | 58/60 |
+| (ii) scratch | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.2554 | 0.0002 | 4 (stop @13) |
+| (iii) frozen-trunk (adapter only) | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.2% | 3.2% | 14.4% | 0.1260 | 0.0073 | 59/60 |
+
+Secondary suite (native [70,20] windows only, n=1,347, test=202) reproduces the
+same ordering: mean-baseline 96.0% / pretrained 67.1% / scratch 0.0% /
+frozen-trunk 0.0% PCK@20 (MPJPE 0.0153 / 0.0318 / 0.2236 / 0.1343) — the
+subcarrier-resampling choice does not change any conclusion.
+
+### Interpretation
+
+- **Did pretraining-transfer happen? Partially — as optimization transfer, not
+  feature transfer, and not past the honesty bar.**
+  - *Pretrained vs scratch*: dramatic (65.0% vs 0.0% PCK@20). The pretrained init
+    is the only configuration that trains at all under the pre-registered budget.
+  - *Frozen-trunk*: near-zero (0.0% PCK@20, 14.4% @50). WiFlow-STD's frozen
+    features do **not** transfer to our ESP32 domain through a linear subcarrier
+    adapter — the pretrained benefit is a well-conditioned initialization (incl.
+    calibrated BN/output scales), not reusable CSI→pose features.
+  - *Everything vs mean-pose baseline*: **no run beats it.** A constant
+    train-mean pose scores 95.9% torso-PCK@20 / 0.0148 MPJPE on this test split,
+    because a single subject in one camera frame barely moves in normalized
+    coordinates. The fine-tuned model is a real, non-constant model
+    (pred std 0.0113 > 0 — passes the constant-pose detector that retracted the
+    old 92.9% figure) but its deviations from the mean hurt: it fits train-period
+    temporal dynamics that do not generalize across the temporal split.
+- **Verdict for ADR-152 §2.2(b): fine-tuning WiFlow-STD on this dataset does not
+  demonstrate CSI→pose signal beyond the mean pose.** Until a model beats the
+  mean-pose baseline on a temporal split, no PCK number from this line may be
+  cited as pose-estimation capability.
+
+### Caveats (honest, pre-registered)
+
+- Single subject, single room, single session (30 min), single ESP32 node —
+  in-domain temporal split only; nothing here speaks to cross-room or
+  cross-subject generalization.
+- 2k windows vs the 360k-window WiFlow-STD corpus — **NOT comparable** to the
+  ~96% in-domain measurement-(a) number, and the published 97.25% even less so.
+- The scratch run's total collapse (it cannot even reach the mean pose; its
+  output BatchNorm/SiLU head must learn output scale from random init at lr 1e-4)
+  is an optimization outcome under the fixed budget, not proof the architecture
+  cannot learn from scratch — the pretrained-vs-scratch gap partially reflects
+  this conditioning advantage.
+- Mixed-subcarrier frames (finding 1) mean even the "clean" windows carry ~20%
+  zero-padded frames; collection-side frame-type filtering should precede the
+  next session.
+- Mean-baseline PCK is inflated by low pose variance relative to torso size
+  (~0.2–0.3 image units); PCK@10 (73.1%) shows the same ceiling effect at a
+  stricter threshold — the bar is the bar, but a livelier dataset would lower it.
+
 ## Pending
 
-- (b) fine-tune on our ESP32 17-keypoint eval set — **BLOCKED-ON-DATA**, see above.
+- (b) fine-tune on our ESP32 17-keypoint eval set — **MEASURED 2026-06-10/11**,
+  see above: no run beats the mean-pose baseline; pretraining transfers as
+  optimization aid only.
 - (c) our internal WiFlow on their dataset (15-keypoint subset mapping) — also
   affected: there is currently no validated internal pose model to compare
   (the 92.9% artifact is retracted; the MM-Fi SOTA models in ADR-150 §3 are a

benchmarks/wiflow-std/remote/measb/train_measb.py

@@ -0,0 +1,369 @@
+"""ADR-152 SS2.2 measurement (b): WiFlow-STD fine-tuned on our fresh ESP32 paired dataset.
+
+Dataset: ~/wiflow-std-bench/paired-20260610.jsonl -- 2,046 paired windows collected
+2026-06-10 22:10-22:40 (ONE subject, ONE room, ONE ESP32 node, varied poses).
+Per record: csi = flat float32 list, csi_shape, kp = 17 COCO [x, y] normalized [0,1]
+camera coords, conf (MediaPipe mean confidence, all > 0.5 in this set), ts_start/ts_end.
+Aligner: scripts/align-ground-truth.js, non-overlapping 20-frame windows (~0.42 s each).
+
+Dataset findings (MEASURED on this file, 2026-06-10):
+  - csi_shape is HETEROGENEOUS, not uniformly [70, 20]: 1,347x [70,20], 284x [134,20],
+    243x [26,20], 130x [12,20], 42x [20,20]. The ESP32 stream emits mixed frame types
+    and the aligner stamps each window's subcarrier count from frame[0]
+    (extractCsiMatrix: nSc = window[0].subcarriers), zero-padding/truncating the rest.
+    Even native-70 windows contain ~20.4% internally zero-padded short frames
+    (subcarriers 40..69 all-zero for those frames).
+  - LAYOUT BUG: the aligner fills matrix[f * nSc + s] (frame-major) but declares
+    shape [nSc, nFrames]. The true layout is (frame, subcarrier); we reshape
+    (nFrames, nSc) and transpose. Confirmed by coherent per-frame zero-tails.
+  - Handling here (primary suite, "all2046"): every frame's subcarrier axis is
+    linearly resampled to 70 bins (np.interp over a normalized index domain;
+    identity for native-70 frames) so the pre-registered n=2,046 and split sizes
+    hold. Secondary suite ("native70") restricts to the 1,347 native [70,20]
+    windows (temporal 70/15/15 of those) as a homogeneity robustness check.
+
+Pre-registered protocol (followed exactly):
+  1. TEMPORAL split (records are time-sorted; asserted): first 70% train (1,432),
+     next 15% val (307), last 15% test (307). No shuffling across time. Seed 42
+     for everything else.
+  2. Model: upstream WiFlow-STD trunk (WiFlowPoseModel) with a learned 1x1 Conv1d
+     projection 70->540 prepended, and K=17 via the parameter-free adaptive pool
+     (AdaptiveAvgPool2d((17, 1)) instead of (15, 1)) -- pretrained weights load
+     for any K. CSI normalization: divide by the TRAIN-split 99th-percentile
+     amplitude, clip to [0, 1] (documented in output JSON).
+  3. Three runs, <=60 epochs, early-stop patience 8 on val MPJPE, batch 32,
+     AdamW, fp32 (no autocast):
+       (i)   pretrained-init: trunk init from upstream/test/best_pose_model.pth
+             (the measurement-(a) retrained checkpoint, ~96% PCK@20 on WiFlow data;
+             key remap att.->attention. / final_conv.->decoder. applied defensively
+             as in eval_repro.py -- a no-op for this checkpoint, which already uses
+             the new names). Discriminative lr: adapter 1e-4, trunk 1e-5.
+       (ii)  scratch: same architecture, random init, all params lr 1e-4.
+       (iii) frozen-trunk: pretrained trunk frozen (requires_grad=False AND held in
+             .eval() so BatchNorm running stats cannot drift -- pure transfer probe);
+             only the 70->540 adapter trains, lr 1e-4.
+  4. Metrics on the temporal TEST split: torso-normalized PCK@10/20/30/40/50 and
+     MPJPE. Upstream utils/metrics.py calculate_pck(use_torso_norm=True) hardcodes
+     NECK_IDX/PELVIS_IDX = 2, 12 -- a 15-keypoint convention that is WRONG for our
+     17 COCO keypoints (2 = right_eye, 12 = right_hip). We therefore reimplement the
+     identical math (per-frame norm distance, clamp min 0.01, mean over all
+     keypoints x frames) with torso = ||l_shoulder(5) - l_hip(11)||.
+     Also reported: prediction std across test frames (constant-pose detector;
+     must be > 0) and the mean-pose-predictor baseline (train-split mean pose
+     evaluated on test -- the honesty bar).
+
+Usage (on ruvultra):
+  nice -n 10 nohup ~/wiflow-std-bench/venv/bin/python train_measb.py > train_measb.log 2>&1 &
+"""
+
+import json
+import os
+import random
+import sys
+import time
+
+import numpy as np
+import torch
+import torch.nn as nn
+
+BENCH = os.path.expanduser("~/wiflow-std-bench")
+UPSTREAM = os.path.join(BENCH, "upstream")
+MEASB = os.path.join(BENCH, "measb")
+DATA = os.path.join(BENCH, "paired-20260610.jsonl")
+CHECKPOINT = os.path.join(UPSTREAM, "test", "best_pose_model.pth")
+
+sys.path.insert(0, UPSTREAM)
+
+# Upstream defect (1): models/__init__.py imports a name tcn.py does not define.
+# Register a stub package so the broken __init__ never executes (as eval_repro.py).
+import types  # noqa: E402
+
+_models_pkg = types.ModuleType("models")
+_models_pkg.__path__ = [os.path.join(UPSTREAM, "models")]
+sys.modules["models"] = _models_pkg
+
+from models.pose_model import WiFlowPoseModel  # noqa: E402
+
+SEED = 42
+K = 17
+N_SUBC = 70
+TRUNK_IN = 540
+BATCH = 32          # <= 64 per protocol (GPU shared with the efficiency sweep)
+MAX_EPOCHS = 60
+PATIENCE = 8
+LR_ADAPTER = 1e-4
+LR_TRUNK_FT = 1e-5  # 10x lower for the pretrained trunk vs the fresh adapter
+L_SHOULDER, L_HIP = 5, 11
+THRESHOLDS = (0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5)
+
+
+def set_seed(seed=SEED):
+    random.seed(seed)
+    np.random.seed(seed)
+    torch.manual_seed(seed)
+    if torch.cuda.is_available():
+        torch.cuda.manual_seed_all(seed)
+    torch.backends.cudnn.deterministic = True
+    torch.backends.cudnn.benchmark = False
+
+
+def resample_subcarriers(frame_major, n_out=N_SUBC):
+    """(nFrames, nSc) -> (nFrames, n_out) by per-frame linear interpolation.
+
+    Identity for nSc == n_out. Normalized index domain [0, 1] on both sides.
+    """
+    nf, nsc = frame_major.shape
+    if nsc == n_out:
+        return frame_major
+    xi = np.linspace(0.0, 1.0, nsc)
+    xo = np.linspace(0.0, 1.0, n_out)
+    return np.stack([np.interp(xo, xi, frame_major[f]) for f in range(nf)]).astype(np.float32)
+
+
+def load_dataset():
+    csi, kps, confs, ts, native70 = [], [], [], [], []
+    shape_counts = {}
+    with open(DATA) as f:
+        for line in f:
+            r = json.loads(line)
+            nsc, nf = r["csi_shape"]
+            shape_counts[f"{nsc}x{nf}"] = shape_counts.get(f"{nsc}x{nf}", 0) + 1
+            assert nf == 20, r["csi_shape"]
+            # Aligner layout bug: data is frame-major despite the declared
+            # [nSc, nFrames] shape -- reshape (nFrames, nSc), then resample the
+            # subcarrier axis to 70 and transpose to (70 subcarriers, 20 frames).
+            fm = np.asarray(r["csi"], dtype=np.float32).reshape(nf, nsc)
+            csi.append(resample_subcarriers(fm).T)
+            kp = np.asarray(r["kp"], dtype=np.float32)
+            assert kp.shape == (K, 2), kp.shape
+            kps.append(kp)
+            confs.append(r["conf"])
+            ts.append(r["ts_start"])
+            native70.append(nsc == N_SUBC)
+    assert all(ts[i] <= ts[i + 1] for i in range(len(ts) - 1)), "records not time-sorted"
+    return (np.stack(csi), np.stack(kps), np.asarray(confs, dtype=np.float32),
+            np.asarray(native70), shape_counts, ts[0], ts[-1])
+
+
+def temporal_split(n):
+    n_train = int(round(n * 0.70))
+    n_val = int(round(n * 0.15))
+    return slice(0, n_train), slice(n_train, n_train + n_val), slice(n_train + n_val, n)
+
+
+class AdaptedWiFlow(nn.Module):
+    """1x1 Conv1d adapter 70->540 + upstream WiFlow-STD trunk with K=17 pool head."""
+
+    def __init__(self, k=K, dropout=0.5):
+        super().__init__()
+        self.adapter = nn.Conv1d(N_SUBC, TRUNK_IN, kernel_size=1)
+        nn.init.kaiming_normal_(self.adapter.weight, mode="fan_out", nonlinearity="relu")
+        nn.init.constant_(self.adapter.bias, 0)
+        self.trunk = WiFlowPoseModel(dropout=dropout)
+        # K=17 via the parameter-free adaptive pool: decoder emits [B, 2, 15, 20]
+        # spatial maps; pooling H->17 instead of 15 yields [B, 17, 2] with no new
+        # parameters, so the pretrained state_dict loads strict=True for any K.
+        self.trunk.avg_pool = nn.AdaptiveAvgPool2d((k, 1))
+
+    def forward(self, x):
+        return self.trunk(self.adapter(x))
+
+
+def load_pretrained_trunk(trunk, path):
+    state = torch.load(path, map_location="cpu", weights_only=True)
+    # Defensive remap as in eval_repro.py (no-op for the retrained checkpoint).
+    renames = {"att.": "attention.", "final_conv.": "decoder."}
+    state = {next((new + k[len(old):] for old, new in renames.items()
+                   if k.startswith(old)), k): v
+             for k, v in state.items()}
+    trunk.load_state_dict(state, strict=True)
+
+
+def pck_torso(pred, target, thresholds=THRESHOLDS):
+    """Upstream calculate_pck math, torso = l_shoulder(5)<->l_hip(11) for 17-kp COCO."""
+    norm = torch.sqrt(((target[:, L_SHOULDER] - target[:, L_HIP]) ** 2).sum(dim=1))
+    norm = torch.clamp(norm, min=0.01)
+    dist = torch.sqrt(((pred - target) ** 2).sum(dim=2)) / norm.unsqueeze(1)
+    return {f"pck@{int(t * 100)}": (dist <= t).float().mean().item() for t in thresholds}
+
+
+def mpjpe(pred, target):
+    return torch.sqrt(((pred - target) ** 2).sum(dim=2)).mean().item()
+
+
+@torch.no_grad()
+def predict(model, x, batch=256):
+    model.eval()
+    return torch.cat([model(x[i:i + batch]) for i in range(0, len(x), batch)])
+
+
+def eval_preds(pred, target):
+    out = pck_torso(pred, target)
+    out["mpjpe"] = mpjpe(pred, target)
+    # Constant-pose detector: std across test frames per coordinate, mean over
+    # the 17x2 coordinates. 0.0 == degenerate constant predictor.
+    out["pred_std"] = pred.std(dim=0).mean().item()
+    return out
+
+
+def train_run(name, x_tr, y_tr, x_va, y_va, device, pretrained, freeze_trunk,
+              lr_trunk):
+    set_seed(SEED)
+    model = AdaptedWiFlow().to(device)
+    if pretrained:
+        load_pretrained_trunk(model.trunk, CHECKPOINT)
+    if freeze_trunk:
+        for p in model.trunk.parameters():
+            p.requires_grad = False
+        groups = [{"params": model.adapter.parameters(), "lr": LR_ADAPTER}]
+    else:
+        groups = [{"params": model.adapter.parameters(), "lr": LR_ADAPTER},
+                  {"params": model.trunk.parameters(), "lr": lr_trunk}]
+    opt = torch.optim.AdamW(groups)
+    loss_fn = nn.MSELoss()
+
+    n = len(x_tr)
+    best_val, best_state, best_epoch, bad = float("inf"), None, -1, 0
+    history = []
+    t0 = time.time()
+    for epoch in range(MAX_EPOCHS):
+        model.train()
+        if freeze_trunk:
+            model.trunk.eval()  # keep BatchNorm running stats fixed: pure transfer
+        perm = torch.randperm(n, device=device)
+        ep_loss = 0.0
+        for i in range(0, n, BATCH):
+            idx = perm[i:i + BATCH]
+            opt.zero_grad()
+            loss = loss_fn(model(x_tr[idx]), y_tr[idx])
+            loss.backward()
+            opt.step()
+            ep_loss += loss.item() * len(idx)
+        val_mpjpe = mpjpe(predict(model, x_va), y_va)
+        history.append({"epoch": epoch, "train_mse": ep_loss / n, "val_mpjpe": val_mpjpe})
+        marker = ""
+        if val_mpjpe < best_val:
+            best_val, best_epoch, bad = val_mpjpe, epoch, 0
+            best_state = {k: v.detach().cpu().clone() for k, v in model.state_dict().items()}
+            marker = " *"
+        else:
+            bad += 1
+        print(f"[{name}] epoch {epoch:02d} train_mse {ep_loss / n:.6f} "
+              f"val_mpjpe {val_mpjpe:.5f}{marker}", flush=True)
+        if bad >= PATIENCE:
+            print(f"[{name}] early stop at epoch {epoch} (best {best_epoch})", flush=True)
+            break
+    model.load_state_dict(best_state)
+    torch.save(best_state, os.path.join(MEASB, f"{name}_best.pth"))
+    return model, {"best_epoch": best_epoch, "best_val_mpjpe": best_val,
+                   "epochs_run": len(history), "wall_seconds": round(time.time() - t0, 1),
+                   "history": history}
+
+
+def run_suite(tag, csi, kps, device):
+    """Temporal 70/15/15 split, mean-pose baseline, three training runs."""
+    n = len(csi)
+    tr, va, te = temporal_split(n)
+    print(f"=== suite {tag}: n={n} train={tr.stop} val={va.stop - va.start} "
+          f"test={te.stop - te.start} ===", flush=True)
+
+    # CSI normalization constant from TRAIN split only.
+    train_p99 = float(np.percentile(csi[tr], 99))
+    train_max = float(csi[tr].max())
+    print(f"[{tag}] train p99={train_p99:.3f} max={train_max:.3f} -> /p99, clip [0,1]",
+          flush=True)
+    csi_n = np.clip(csi / train_p99, 0.0, 1.0).astype(np.float32)
+
+    x = torch.from_numpy(csi_n).to(device)
+    y = torch.from_numpy(kps).to(device)
+    x_tr, y_tr = x[tr], y[tr]
+    x_va, y_va = x[va], y[va]
+    x_te, y_te = x[te], y[te]
+
+    suite = {
+        "n_windows": n,
+        "split": {"n_train": int(tr.stop), "n_val": int(va.stop - va.start),
+                  "n_test": int(te.stop - te.start)},
+        "csi_norm": {"method": "divide by train-split p99 amplitude, clip [0,1]",
+                     "train_p99": train_p99, "train_max": train_max},
+        "runs": {},
+    }
+
+    # Honesty bar: mean-pose predictor fit on TRAIN, evaluated on TEST.
+    mean_pose = y_tr.mean(dim=0, keepdim=True).expand(len(y_te), -1, -1)
+    suite["mean_pose_baseline"] = eval_preds(mean_pose, y_te)
+    suite["mean_pose_baseline"]["note"] = "train-split mean pose; pred_std 0 by construction"
+    print(f"[{tag}] mean-pose baseline:", json.dumps(suite["mean_pose_baseline"]),
+          flush=True)
+
+    configs = [
+        ("pretrained", dict(pretrained=True, freeze_trunk=False, lr_trunk=LR_TRUNK_FT)),
+        ("scratch", dict(pretrained=False, freeze_trunk=False, lr_trunk=LR_ADAPTER)),
+        ("frozen_trunk", dict(pretrained=True, freeze_trunk=True, lr_trunk=0.0)),
+    ]
+    for name, cfg in configs:
+        print(f"=== run: {tag}/{name} {cfg} ===", flush=True)
+        model, train_info = train_run(f"{tag}_{name}", x_tr, y_tr, x_va, y_va,
+                                      device, **cfg)
+        test_metrics = eval_preds(predict(model, x_te), y_te)
+        n_trainable = sum(p.numel() for p in model.parameters() if p.requires_grad)
+        suite["runs"][name] = {"config": cfg, "trainable_params": n_trainable,
+                               "train": {k: v for k, v in train_info.items()
+                                         if k != "history"},
+                               "history": train_info["history"],
+                               "test": test_metrics}
+        print(f"[{tag}/{name}] TEST:", json.dumps(test_metrics), flush=True)
+    return suite
+
+
+def main():
+    device = torch.device("cuda" if torch.cuda.is_available() else "cpu")
+    print(f"device {device}, torch {torch.__version__}", flush=True)
+    set_seed(SEED)
+
+    csi, kps, confs, native70, shape_counts, ts_first, ts_last = load_dataset()
+    print(f"shape distribution: {shape_counts}", flush=True)
+
+    results = {
+        "protocol": {
+            "dataset": DATA, "n_windows": len(csi),
+            "ts_first": ts_first, "ts_last": ts_last,
+            "conf_mean": float(confs.mean()), "conf_min": float(confs.min()),
+            "csi_shape_distribution": shape_counts,
+            "csi_layout_note": "aligner stores frame-major data under a transposed "
+                               "[nSc, nFrames] shape label; corrected on load",
+            "csi_resample": "per-frame linear interp of subcarrier axis to 70 bins "
+                            "(identity for native-70 frames); native-70 windows still "
+                            "contain ~20.4% internally zero-padded short frames",
+            "split": "temporal 70/15/15 (no shuffle across time)",
+            "model": "1x1 Conv1d 70->540 adapter + WiFlowPoseModel trunk, "
+                     "AdaptiveAvgPool2d((17,1)) head (parameter-free K=17)",
+            "checkpoint": CHECKPOINT,
+            "checkpoint_note": "measurement-(a) retrained checkpoint (~96% PCK@20 on "
+                               "WiFlow data); att./final_conv. remap applied "
+                               "defensively (no-op, already new-style keys)",
+            "optimizer": f"AdamW, adapter lr {LR_ADAPTER}, fine-tuned trunk lr "
+                         f"{LR_TRUNK_FT} (10x lower), scratch all {LR_ADAPTER}",
+            "batch": BATCH, "max_epochs": MAX_EPOCHS, "patience": PATIENCE,
+            "precision": "fp32", "seed": SEED,
+            "pck": "torso-normalized, torso = ||l_shoulder(5) - l_hip(11)||, "
+                   "clamp min 0.01, mean over keypoints x frames "
+                   "(upstream math; upstream 2/12 indices are a 15-kp convention)",
+        },
+        # Primary: all 2,046 windows (pre-registered n), subcarrier axis resampled.
+        "all2046": None,
+        # Secondary robustness check: the 1,347 native [70,20] windows only.
+        "native70": None,
+    }
+
+    results["all2046"] = run_suite("all2046", csi, kps, device)
+    results["native70"] = run_suite("native70", csi[native70], kps[native70], device)
+
+    out = os.path.join(MEASB, "measurement_b.json")
+    with open(out, "w") as f:
+        json.dump(results, f, indent=2)
+    print(f"wrote {out}", flush=True)
+
+
+if __name__ == "__main__":
+    main()

docs/adr/ADR-152-wifi-pose-sota-2026-intake.md

@@ -108,6 +108,7 @@ Pull the Apache-2.0 weights + 360k-sample dataset; run three measurements: (a) t
 ## 4. Open questions (carried from the research run)
 
 1. Does WiFlow-STD retain accuracy when fine-tuned on ESP32-S3/C6 CSI (fewer subcarriers, lower SNR), scored on our 17-keypoint set? (§2.2 answers this.)
+   > **Partial answer (MEASURED 2026-06-11, measurement (b) on 2,046 single-room windows — `benchmarks/wiflow-std/RESULTS.md`):** pretrained init shows strong *optimization* transfer (65% PCK@20 vs scratch's 0% collapse under the same budget) but **no feature transfer** (frozen-trunk + linear adapter ≈ 0%). And no run beat the mean-pose baseline (95.9% PCK@20 — single subject, near-static normalized coords), so no CSI→pose capability is citable from this data. A definitive answer needs multi-subject/multi-position data where the mean pose is weak.
 2. Is the PerceptAlign dataset downloadable under a usable license, and does the two-checkerboard procedure work with ESP32 transceiver geometry? (§2.1.4 gate.)
 3. Will esp_wifi_sensing evolve toward 802.11bf compliance, replacing opportunistic CSI extraction?