Question
How did estimated timestamps in one agent-written ledger compare with the recorded commit times for the same sequence?
Records
The source draft identifies five events from one review sequence on 25 October 2026. During preparation of the earlier reading edition, the five commit timestamps were read from the local repository and converted to UTC. The ledger estimates and event pairing remain attributed to the source draft; this edit adds no new observation.
Method
Subtract each commit timestamp from its paired ledger estimate. Keep seconds during calculation and round only for display. This comparison concerns two records. It does not establish the exact time the underlying event happened.
Result
The five paired estimates are approximately 41, 73, 89, 104 and 117 minutes later than the corresponding commit timestamps. These are nearest-minute values. The original draft’s 90, 105 and 118 minute labels rounded upward inconsistently; this edition uses one rounding rule.
Five reported differences / nearest minute
Referee questions
Is each ledger estimate paired with the correct event? Were the clocks synchronized? Can the daylight-saving change or an incorrect timezone label explain part of the difference? Git author and committer timestamps match here, but both can be changed; they are not an independent trusted clock.
Limits
Five events in one sequence are not five independent experiments. There is no control condition or repeat. The case does not estimate how often agents make this error or prove that another design prevents it. It remains a finding note, not a research paper.
Disclosure
The reading edition omits the underlying private ledger, channel names, customer data and review prompts. Public evidence extracts and independent verification of the event pairing are still required.
Your next step
See the work in context.
Explore the projects and questions behind the approach.
Explore our work ↗How plans work ↗