Update environment/README.md: difficulty wording and caveats

environment/README.md

@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ built + scored in real Docker containers: 29/29 (gold → reward 1, wrong answer
 ## Measured difficulty (honest)
 - Agentic 29: Claude Opus 5.5 (tools: bash+read) solved 29/29 envs, 145/145 attempts, byte-exact
   vs gold — that tier is warm-up level for a frontier agent; full table in EVAL_RESULTS-passk.md.
-- Open-weight baseline (local qwen3.8, single-shot): 62% on our cross-arch/library slice. On the separate private hard set (99 items, not in this pack), a separate 3-bit quantized `qwen3.8-flash-next-iq3_s` run scored 14/99 at pass@8 with temperature 0.7 and whole-reply normalized matching; that is calibration evidence, not a published band table or proof that each task sits in the RL mid-band. We calibrate per buyer model.
+- Open-weight baseline (local qwen3.8, single-shot): 24/39 = 62% on a cross-arch + library-identification slice (n=39, 3-bit quantized, temperature 0). On the separate private hard set (99 items, not in this pack), a separate local 3-bit-quantized open-weight run (text-only prompt with no binary/file access, no tools, single-turn, temperature 0.7, max_tokens=600, whole-reply normalized matching) scored 14/99 at pass@8; that is headroom evidence, not a published band table or proof that each task sits in the RL mid-band. A fixed 20-item agentic spot check found the sampled command-output/static-analysis families practice-level for a frontier agent with shell tools (40/40 attempts), so those families are being hardened before pilot use. We calibrate per buyer model.
 
 Datasheet + full evaluation results: https://huggingface.co/datasets/S3RL4/binary-reasoning-v1
 Canary for contamination checks: RE-Lab-brv-2026-10-29-8c1e4f7a