Record EgoSpeak three-level evaluation

manuscript/main/main.tex

@@ -328,6 +328,9 @@ configuration, trainable parameter counts, and inference latency.}
 
 We first retain dense future-activity evaluation for direct comparison with
 EgoSpeak, reporting AP at the 0.2--2.0~s horizons and their mean mAP.
+As a threshold-free diagnostic, we also report wearer OFF$\rightarrow$ON and
+ON$\rightarrow$OFF anticipation AP; these raw boundaries are timing proxies,
+not semantic EOT or INT labels.
 
 For dense-only models, behavioral evaluation is opportunity-conditioned and
 uses the model's original wearer-activity forecasts rather than treating them
@@ -403,7 +406,8 @@ verify identical targets, causal validity, and evaluation.}
 \begin{table}[t]
 \caption{Confirmatory EasyCom results. Entry and INT false-positive rates use
 the opportunity-conditioned activity score at matched recall $R=0.8$; E/I AP
-is the corresponding event-balanced opportunity AP.}
+is the corresponding opportunity AP. $\dagger$ denotes provisional
+LLM-assisted labels pending human review.}
 \label{tab:main}
 \centering
 \small
@@ -413,7 +417,7 @@ is the corresponding event-balanced opportunity AP.}
 Method & 0.2-s mAP $\uparrow$ & Mean mAP $\uparrow$
 & Entry FPR@$R=.8$ $\downarrow$ & INT FPR@$R=.8$ $\downarrow$ & E/I AP $\uparrow$\\
 \hline
-EgoSpeak reproduction       & \todo{--} & \todo{--} & \todo{--} & \todo{--} & \todo{--/--}\\
+EgoSpeak MiniROADA A+V      & 74.12 & 61.16 & \todo{--} & \todo{--} & $52.49/20.13^\dagger$\\
 Omni-3B frozen $G$          & \todo{--} & \todo{--} & \todo{--} & \todo{--} & \todo{--/--}\\
 Omni-3B matched PEFT        & \todo{--} & \todo{--} & \todo{--} & \todo{--} & \todo{--/--}\\
 $G+$local audio             & \todo{--} & \todo{--} & \todo{--} & \todo{--} & \todo{--/--}\\
@@ -425,6 +429,11 @@ Omni-7B scaling control     & \todo{--} & \todo{--} & \todo{--} & \todo{--} & \t
 \end{table}
 
 \textbf{Dense forecasting.}
+The EgoSpeak baseline reaches 74.12\% 0.2-s mAP and 61.16\% mean mAP; its raw
+wearer-onset/offset mean APs are 24.49/38.02\%. On provisional reviewed
+opportunities, ENTRY AP is 52.49\% versus 32.73\% prevalence, whereas INT AP is
+20.13\% versus 20.44\%; continuous wearer-score plots therefore do not alone
+establish semantic floor-yield selectivity.
 The proposed local AV adapter improves 0.2-s mAP from
 \todo{$X$ to $Y$} over the strongest matched baseline and improves
 mean mAP by \todo{$Z$ points}.