https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.29530

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1009670302979

https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2020/file/e4acb4c86de9d2d9a41364f93951028d-Paper.pdf

https://arxiv.org/html/2106.03354v3

https://luke-griffiths.github.io/non-neural-networks/

Machine B has now been fully rewritten to structures that are no longer a neural network. Everything it learned has been extracted from the model and given a new form. It doesn't even run on a GPU anymore.

Its just decision trees and explicit function now. Same origin, same behavior, wildly different implementation and appearance. It just looks like another program. Especially to a judge.

Every rule you wrote that specified "neural", not something more universal as "heuristic", has now been denied by the judge, as you do not have jurisdiction against the new thing.

This isn't some academic wordplay either. All machine implementable logic has infinitely many possible representations. If you specify your rule on appearance, not behavior, then the appearance will change and the behavior stays.