Checking the harness¶
Every score here is measured against the optimum. That makes the optimum the one number nothing in an ordinary run would catch being wrong: a dynamic program with a mistaken recurrence moves the whole scale, and every task still reports a plausible-looking result.
One command exists for that:
It computes each dynamic program's analytic value and, separately, simulates the policy that same program emits. Two independent routes to one number; they have to agree within Monte Carlo error.
A dynamic program that quietly disagrees with its own policy is the failure this is built to catch, and it runs in CI on every push.
Why this is the check that matters¶
The rest of the suite tests behaviour that a wrong answer would visibly break — an environment that rejects an illegal action, a report that carries an interval. The optimum is different: it is the definition of the top of the scale, so nothing above it exists to compare against.
Two derivations that have to meet is the only way to check a number with no external reference. It is the same reason a published benchmark figure here is reproduced by a command in the repository rather than quoted from a run someone did once.