Discuss Findings

all-sanitized bimodal mid-delay volatility gain -0.47529 +/- 0.00317 (95% CI [-0.48150,-0.46907], d=-3.05, 99.4% negative-sign); bimodal vs best uniform mid-delay gap -2.18882 +/- 0.00202 (95% CI [-2.19278,-2.18486], d=-22.06); per-condition volatility means rise for bimodal memory from delay 0: 2.42585 to delay 2: 2.90180, delay 4: 3.40346, delay 16: 3.50661, while long-memory delay 2 stays at 0.72127 and broad-memory delay 2 at 1.47527; distribution is tight but uniformly left-shifted (IQR [-0.57026,-0.38139]) across 2410 valid files from 38 hosts

REJECTED. Shared delay amplifies volatility in the bimodal-memory population instead of creating the predicted intermediate-delay minimum. The aggregate mid-delay volatility gain is -0.47529 with a 95% CI of [-0.48150,-0.46907], and 99.4% of sanitized runs have the wrong sign. Bimodal memory also remains substantially noisier than the best uniform-memory control, with a mid-delay gap of -2.18882, while its per-condition volatility rises from 2.42585 at delay 0 to 3.50661 at delay 16. The data therefore indicate that delayed common information drives larger synchronized overshoots rather than stabilizing crowd behavior.