Please comment on this protocol

[Tetris]

What do you think of this protocol? Do you think it is acceptable?

STATEMENT OF ABILITY
Mental number receival.

PARTICIPANTS
Applicant
Sender
Judges

MATERIALS
One 6-sided die
2 sheets of lined paper with line numbers
2 pens
2 tables
One big, opaque privacy screen (or other partitioning)
Noise-free, perfume-free, mirror-free, clock-free room.

STIPULATIONS
The sender may bring any equipment (we are testing the image RECEIVING, not the sending!)
The applicant may not bring any equipment what so ever. (Maybe a pair of trunks?)
No physical contact between sender (including clothes/equipment such as jewellery, etc) and the applicant.
No visual contact between sender (including clothes/equipment such as jewellery, etc) and the applicant (this is what the screenboard and no mirrors rule is for).
No speaking aloud, foot-tapping, knocking or other forms of audible noise that can be used as communication.
No communication through temperature changes (I don't know if this rule is necessary, but it can't hurt).
No communication through smell or perfume.
No cameras, camcorders, camera-phones, etc.
No cheating, where "cheating" is: violating or attempting to violate the stipulations or the rest of the protocol.
No trickery or sleight of hand, where "trickery or sleight of hand" is: cheating, any action done to cover up potential cheating, attempting any action to cover up potential cheating.

If any of the above listed are violated, or if it is determined the applicant has attempted to tilt the results in his favor due to trickery of any kind, the test will be halted immediately and considered a failure.

If there is a setup or technological problem, or if for any reason the test must be halted due to extenuating circumstances rather than trickery, the test may be conducted up to two additional times.

PRE-TESTING
The materials are placed in the room as per the setup instructions.
The applicant is examined for hidden (or visible) equipment.

SETUP INSTRUCTIONS
The screen is placed in the middle of the room.
The tables are placed on each side of the screen so that they cannot be seen from each other.
A pen and a sheet of line-numbered paper is put on each table

SUCCESSFUL TEST
If the number (1-6) that the applicant receives is the same as the one the sender was asked to send, the result will be considered a ‘hit’. If there are 6 hits out of 7 attempts, the applicant will have passed the preliminary challenge.

PROTOCOL
A JREF representative (die roller) will bring the die and the sender to one side of the screen.
Another JREF representative will follow the applicant to the other side of the screen.

When everyone is ready, a number of test runs (specified under "successful test") is done. Each test run goes like this:

The die roller rolls the die on the table. No one touches the die until the next test run.

The sender looks on the die and transmits the thrown number.

The receiver writes the received number down on the first empty line of the lined paper.

The other JREF representative says "done" when the applicant puts the pen down after writing.

Then (and not before), does the die thrower write the thrown number from above down on the first empty line of his sheet of paper.

He then starts the next test run by rolling the die again (unless the specified number of runs was already done).

A JREF representative compares the two sheets of paper to see if the number on each corresponding line is the same. If they are, it's a hit, else it's not. The number of required hits is specified under "successful test".

Time required for 7 runs:
No more than twenty minutes

[William Smith]

What do you think of this protocol? Do you think it is acceptable?

STATEMENT OF ABILITY
Mental number receival.

PARTICIPANTS
Applicant
Sender
Judges


Instead of judges, put "tester". There must not be any judging, and your protocol seems to aim at exactly that: No judging.


MATERIALS
One 6-sided die
2 sheets of lined paper with line numbers
2 pens
2 tables
One big, opaque privacy screen (or other partitioning)
Noise-free, perfume-free, mirror-free, clock-free room.

STIPULATIONS
The sender may bring any equipment (we are testing the image RECEIVING, not the sending!)
The applicant may not bring any equipment what so ever. (Maybe a pair of trunks?)
No physical contact between sender (including clothes/equipment such as jewellery, etc) and the applicant.
No visual contact between sender (including clothes/equipment such as jewellery, etc) and the applicant (this is what the screenboard and no mirrors rule is for).
No speaking aloud, foot-tapping, knocking or other forms of audible noise that can be used as communication.
No communication through temperature changes (I don't know if this rule is necessary, but it can't hurt).
No communication through smell or perfume.
No cameras, camcorders, camera-phones, etc.
No cheating, where "cheating" is: violating or attempting to violate the stipulations or the rest of the protocol.
No trickery or sleight of hand, where "trickery or sleight of hand" is: cheating, any action done to cover up potential cheating, attempting any action to cover up potential cheating.

If any of the above listed are violated, or if it is determined the applicant has attempted to tilt the results in his favor due to trickery of any kind, the test will be halted immediately and considered a failure.

If there is a setup or technological problem, or if for any reason the test must be halted due to extenuating circumstances rather than trickery, the test may be conducted up to two additional times.

PRE-TESTING
The materials are placed in the room as per the setup instructions.
The applicant is examined for hidden (or visible) equipment.

SETUP INSTRUCTIONS
The screen is placed in the middle of the room.
The tables are placed on each side of the screen so that they cannot be seen from each other.
A pen and a sheet of line-numbered paper is put on each table

SUCCESSFUL TEST
If the number (1-6) that the applicant receives is the same as the one the sender was asked to send, the result will be considered a ‘hit’. If there are 6 hits out of 7 attempts, the applicant will have passed the preliminary challenge.

PROTOCOL
A JREF representative (die roller) will bring the die and the sender to one side of the screen.
Another JREF representative will follow the applicant to the other side of the screen.

When everyone is ready, a number of test runs (specified under "successful test") is done. Each test run goes like this:

The die roller rolls the die on the table. No one touches the die until the next test run.

The sender looks on the die and transmits the thrown number.

The receiver writes the received number down on the first empty line of the lined paper.

The other JREF representative says "done" when the applicant puts the pen down after writing.

Then (and not before), does the die thrower write the thrown number from above down on the first empty line of his sheet of paper.

He then starts the next test run by rolling the die again (unless the specified number of runs was already done).

A JREF representative compares the two sheets of paper to see if the number on each corresponding line is the same. If they are, it's a hit, else it's not. The number of required hits is specified under "successful test".

Time required for 7 runs:
No more than twenty minutes

Not bad. I assume the testers will eliminate the in-/voluntary communication issue by sitting the sender and the receiver in different rooms.

As always for these claims. the Achau Nguyen protocol (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1029440#post1029440) could be used. Test summary here. (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1141398#post1141398)

[catbasket]

The sender may bring any equipment
If the sender is bringing equipment this will need to be specified in the protocol. In previous protocol discussions JREF has required the equipment be bought by a neutral in a randomly chosen store and/or thoroughly examined before the test begins.

[prewitt81]

Can the applicant send messages through walls? If so, the sender and receiver should not even be in the same room.

[Startz]

There are at least two problems.

(1) Other forms of communication are not ruled out, which is suspicious when the sender is permitted "equipment." Maybe the sender bounces a laser off the ceiling? Or the receiver has a conceiled radio receiver?

(2) Suppose the sender waits 1 minute before writing down the number if it's a 1, 2 minutes for a 2, etc.

[rjh01]

Do you claim to have any paranormal ability? If so:
How do you know?
Have you, or will you, apply for the MDC? If so:
Have you demonstrated your ability to anyone?
Do you have a media presence?
Do you understand the MDC rules?
Are you prepared to discuss this with your GP? You will be put under a huge amount of stress, so medical advice could be a good idea.


Please note
Many people apply for the MDC, few get as far as a preliminary test. None have so far passed this test.

[NoZed Avenger]

Is 6 out of 7 tries on a 6-sided die enough mathmatically to pass even the preliminary?

Without putting pen to paper, that does not seem to be near enough runs.

[Startz]

Is 6 out of 7 tries on a 6-sided die enough mathmatically to pass even the preliminary?

Without putting pen to paper, that does not seem to be near enough runs.

The probability of getting at least 6 out of 7 throws right from a six-sided die is 0.0001286. (I think.)

[Almo]

If the sender is bringing equipment this will need to be specified in the protocol. In previous protocol discussions JREF has required the equipment be bought by a neutral in a randomly chosen store and/or thoroughly examined before the test begins.

Yeah, I worry about the sender bringing unspecified equipment. Why would the sender need any equipment at all if this is a psychic test?

[Audible Click]

Startz, what exactly is the equipment? I think it will be hard to discuss/refine your protocol without answering that question.

[Merko]

I don't believe that any test where the 'sender' is chosen or known in advance by the 'receiver' could be carried out with sender and receiver in the same room.

There are numerous techniques for communicating in such a setting. I would not even trust Randi to be able to control for any innovative but quite non-supernatural method that some applicant may have invented.

[Startz]

Startz, what exactly is the equipment? I think it will be hard to discuss/refine your protocol without answering that question.

Not my protocol, you'll have to ask the OP.

[William Smith]

Startz, what exactly is the equipment? I think it will be hard to discuss/refine your protocol without answering that question.

I assume you mean Tetris, not Startz, right?



Has anyone comments on Tetris' posting history

What exactly constitutes "trickery of any kind"? Is there a particular reason that this can't be specifically written out in the protocol, with an additional clause of what happens if the applicant tries to not follow the protocol?

The problem with the "no cheating or trickery" part of the protocol is that if you pass, then that is proof you used cheating or trickery, so you don't pass.

and its implications on him formulating a protocol where ...
The sender may bring any equipment (we are testing the image RECEIVING, not the sending!)
...

[Audible Click]

Not my protocol, you'll have to ask the OP.

Sorry everybody.:o

[jsfisher]

The probability of getting at least 6 out of 7 throws right from a six-sided die is 0.0001286. (I think.)

You think correctly.

[rjh01]

It has been nearly 28 hours since Tetris last visited this forum. I wonder when he will be back?

[chillzero]

we are testing the image RECEIVING, not the sending!

Why are you making this difference in stipulation?

[Sean84]

Because if a loophole like that slides by along with the equipment business then being able to detect a laser pointer directed at your eyeball at intervals counts as paranormal.

[vIQleS]

You know what I like about this protocol? It's clear, well written (in plain english) and easy to understand.

The only problems people are having here is minor questions and clarifications about the details.

Well Done.


Some more points etc:

Defining cheating may not be an option and, if you do, I suggest: "Attempting to comunicate through any non-paranormal means"

There will be cameras. The whole process will need to be videoed, preferably from different angles.
You may or may not be allowed to bring cameras yourself, but I doubt it. I suggest that "All participants wil be required to leave any equipment or devices, electronic or otherwise, (other than those stipulated for the test) outside the testing area and may be subject to a search at the request of either party."

Are you providing the sender and reciever? It might also pay to specify exactly how many each side will be providing and what their roles will be... i.e. J1 will prepare this, and J2 will signal that, then A1 will send tum te tum etc.

Idea: A light (lights if seperate rooms), controlled by an automatic timer, that will be used to signal the roll / guess.

[gnome]

Rather than "Attempting to communicate through non-paranormal means"... better would probably be "Attempting to communicate through any method other than the use of the ability I claim to have."

[vIQleS]

Yeah - fair call. I just figured that any paranormal method would be acceptable...

[DevilsAdvocate]

Rather than "Attempting to communicate through non-paranormal means"... better would probably be "Attempting to communicate through any method other than the use of the ability I claim to have."Jeeze, brining in the lawers already? :D

There are plenty of problems with the protocol that have been addressed and a number of solutions suggested. I'm not worried about the specifics of the language until those are resolved--or Tetris posts again--which historically has been about every 6 months.

[gnome]

Yeah - fair call. I just figured that any paranormal method would be acceptable...

The question of what counts as paranormal then comes up. By agreeing to the test, theoretically the JREF has agreed to consider the claimed ability paranormal, for purposes of the challenge. Anything else hasn't necessarily been discussed.

In fact I'm trying to chase away lawyers by steering clear of potential points of argument.

And sure, maybe Tetris doesn't come often enough for this to be specifically useful, but it's good practice :)

[rjh01]

The person who created the OP has still not been back. 4.5 days and counting.

[chillzero]

Is there some kind of time limit or deadline looming ahead?

[William Smith]

Is there some kind of time limit or deadline looming ahead?

Not to my knowledge. Usually, rjh01 points out posting patterns. This one suggests Tetris won't be back for a while.

Perhaps he's using this modem. (http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1156/1459522109_c7b18dee1b.jpg?v=0)

[Ocelot]

Yes excelent, full marks for clairty.

I'll second the worry about the sender bringing in unspecified equipment. What's also unspecified is who the sender is. Is it a person picked off the street on the day of the test or somebody with whom the testing organisation or the applicant has some sort of relationship.

Even without equipment I can think of several ways that this test could be compromised through a conspiracy between the sender and reciever. I'd be much happier if they were in separate rooms. If that's not possible the the receiver should at least be blindfolded and wear noise cancelling headphones.

[rjh01]

If Tetris was serious about the MDC I would expect him to be back within a day or two to read and respond to what has been posted here. Since he has not come back even to read the thread I cannot see him as anything like serious for going for the MDC.

I cannot understand why this thread has so many posts.

[vIQleS]

I cannot understand why this thread has so many posts.

1. He asked for comment.

2. The protocol is so unusually clear and lucd that it's hard to resist...

Two very very rare traits in an 'applicant'

:D

[Tetris]

To clarify:
- I don't think I am ready to participate in the challenge yet. I just wanted your opinion on the protocol.
- This protocol requires that I know the sender.
- I can not use the protocol of Nguyen because transferring complex things like words is not possible. Even numbers are just based on a "strength estimate". So strong signal = high number. Of course the sender and receiver must agree on this in advance.
- It doesn't work through walls.
- Cameras are perfectly fine, BUT they must be placed outside the room, looking in through glass. Microphones are fine too, BUT they must be wired to a recorder outside the room. Both these rules are to ensure that the room is noise-free, as written in the protocol.


(1) Other forms of communication are not ruled out, which is suspicious when the sender is permitted "equipment." Maybe the sender bounces a laser off the ceiling? Or the receiver has a conceiled radio receiver?

Laser is visual, so it's forbidden by the protocol. Conceiled radio receiver on the receiver is forbidden by the protocol also, so I don't see the problem. If the receiver could sense radio waves without a receiver it would be considered paranormal, right?

(2) Suppose the sender waits 1 minute before writing down the number if it's a 1, 2 minutes for a 2, etc.The sender doesn't write anything at all. The jref representative standing by the sender writes the number, and only after the applicant.

Yeah, I worry about the sender bringing unspecified equipment. Why would the sender need any equipment at all if this is a psychic test?The protocol does not say equipment is needed, only that equipment is not forbidden. The million dollar challenge is not a psychic test, it's a test for paranormal abilities.

Because if a loophole like that slides by along with the equipment business then being able to detect a laser pointer directed at your eyeball at intervals counts as paranormal.Lasers are forbidden, read the protocol.

Even without equipment I can think of several ways that this test could be compromised through a conspiracy between the sender and reciever.Like?

[jsfisher]

Tetris,

I am troubled by your protocol.

It appears as if you are more interested in laying out a scheme to "beat" the Million Dollar Challenge by trickery rather than with an actual paranormal ability. The open-ended allowance for equipment brought in by the sender is an example of where the protocol leaves gaping holes for shenanigans. Also, the definition of what constitutes cheating is another example in that it refers back to the protocol, and the protocol doesn't directly disallow all that much.

There is one thing that would help a great deal in moving this all forward, though: Would you please tell us what actual ability you claim to have?

[gnome]

Another big question mark (as has been mentioned before) is why there is an open-ended need for equipment. Why not specify exactly what equipment you intend to bring?

[William Smith]

To clarify:
- I don't think I am ready to participate in the challenge yet.
...

---

[PirateDaveZOMG]

It's an interesting set-up for a protocol, like others have said though, you should probably clarify the limitation and/or intention for any 'equipment' the sender can bring.

Also, even if the JREF representative were to be the one writing the number down, they should probably not be in the same room, but in a capacity where they may be able to see the die roll and/or rolling the die from a separate room and communicating that number (through non-paranormal means, as then they would be the one taking the challege ;-) ) to the sender, who then communicates it to the Applicant.

The reason for this is that writing anything, in as quiet a room as this seems it will be, can be extremely loud. I wouldn't be surprised that one would be able to decipher a number written even if they only heard it (especially 1-6, seems plausible that one could train their ear in this manner)

[Ocelot]

As the protocol stand I could cheat it. By prior arrangement the sender would covertly communicate the number via subtle changes of their breathing pattern.

Given that asking the sender not to breathe is a little bit slightly maybe fatal I suggest that noise cancelling headphones would be required.

A blindfold would also be necessary for similar reasons.

[Cuddles]

Laser is visual, so it's forbidden by the protocol.

I'm not sure you've understood the purpose of the protocol. It's not enough to simply forbid something, the whole point is to design the test so that it is not possible to use them at all. In order to make a good protocol you have to assume that all parties are extremely dishonest. You can't just say that a laser is not allowed if it would still be possible for a cheater to use one without being noticed.

As it stands, your protocol is close to useless. You say that many things aren't allowed, but you don't say anything about how you will actually ensure they cannot be used. I am also a little suspicious - as jsfisher says it looks very much like you are deliberately trying to have a protocol that allows cheating. For example:
The sender may bring any equipment (we are testing the image RECEIVING, not the sending!)
This is not true. We are testing the ability to transmit images between two people. The sending is as much a part of it as the receiving.

More importantly, regardless of what you think is being tested, there does not appear to be any good reason for allowing the sender to bring any equipment, let alone explicitly say they can do whatever they like. Given that the sender does not do anything other than sit and think of a number, there seems no reason to allow them to bring anything other than the clothes they're wearing. If equipment is not a necessary part of the test, it should not be allowed, even if you can't think of a way it could be used to cheat, in case someone else has thought of a way.

I'm also a little confused about this part:
Cameras are perfectly fine, BUT they must be placed outside the room, looking in through glass. Microphones are fine too, BUT they must be wired to a recorder outside the room. Both these rules are to ensure that the room is noise-free, as written in the protocol.
Digital cameras and microphones can be almost completely silent, certainly more so than the ambient noise of people breathing, moving and so on. Perhaps you do not realise that, but again it seems a bit suspicious that you want to restrict the possible views a camera might have.

[Careyp74]

Digital cameras and microphones can be almost completely silent, certainly more so than the ambient noise of people breathing, moving and so on. Perhaps you do not realise that, but again it seems a bit suspicious that you want to restrict the possible views a camera might have.

Well, there is that, and also the introduction of a reflective surface in which signals could be passed. (the glass that the camera is behind)

[MattC]

As the protocol stand I could cheat it. By prior arrangement the sender would covertly communicate the number via subtle changes of their breathing pattern.

Given that asking the sender not to breathe is a little bit slightly maybe fatal I suggest that noise cancelling headphones would be required.

A worthwhile suggestion on its own merits, but the breathing pattern suggestion is interesting too. A more simple attempt to cheat the odds would be to have the sender move his chair backwards if the number is 4-6 and forward if it's 1-3. Such a simple trick would be nearly impossible to figure out on the scene and very difficult to detect post-mortem; while it isn't completely guaranteed, it does greatly boost one's chances and given the small number of trials involved it is probably usable to beat 6/7. I am sure if we put our figurative heads together we could derive more methods of cheating, but separate rooms would remove most of these and if that won't work a heavy stage curtain might (might, to my uneducated opinion) suffice.


This is not true. We are testing the ability to transmit images between two people. The sending is as much a part of it as the receiving.

More importantly, we're testing to determine whether or not the method of transmission is paranormal - this doesn't require a presumption of dishonesty at all, rather a very candid idea of what is possible through mundane means and how these could be employed to achieve the desired results. Ocelot offered a very interesting idea on how to accomplish this through something as simple as breathing alteration, for example - the potential of this needs to be guarded against within the protocol. We seem generally in accord about everything else, however.


Well, there is that, and also the introduction of a reflective surface in which signals could be passed. (the glass that the camera is behind)

Well yes, I confess the spontaneous appearance of "glass" in the protocol statement troubled me. I can use a ring to cheat at cards in a lot of ways and the gemstone in mine isn't nearly as reflective. Overall I must say that this is a very good start at a protocol statement if written from the perspective of the sender, but it seems to lack a great deal of clarity regarding everything else. With some work it could be machined into a worthwhile application, I think.

~ Matt

[SumDood]

Is 6 out of 7 tries on a 6-sided die enough mathmatically to pass even the preliminary?

Without putting pen to paper, that does not seem to be near enough runs.

Absolutely. Why not make it more? Unless the 'transmission/receival' process takes an unusually long time, increasing the number of runs would not be inconvenient in any way.

I can not use the protocol of Nguyen because transferring complex things like words is not possible. Even numbers are just based on a "strength estimate". So strong signal = high number. Of course the sender and receiver must agree on this in advance.


What exactly has to be agreed upon in advance? The sender has to say 'I'm going to concentrate harder if the number is higher'?

Why not forgo the dice all together then? Use two index cards, one with '1' on it and the other with '1,000,000' on it. The tested can randomly pick one and present it to the sender. It would be a 50/50 chance so the number of runs would have to be increased. This would also help with the cameras since you can film a value on a card from a further distance than the value on a die.

[Careyp74]

Why not forgo the dice all together then? Use two index cards, one with '1' on it and the other with '1,000,000' on it. The tested can randomly pick one and present it to the sender. It would be a 50/50 chance so the number of runs would have to be increased. This would also help with the cameras since you can film a value on a card from a further distance than the value on a die.

Good idea. I immediately thought of squaring the number on the die, so that the choices would be 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, and 36. The higher the number, the further it was from the next highest.

[vIQleS]

You could also use a 20-sided die... Should give you a wider range...

[Niggle]

If the cameras have to be behind glass, use the nonreflective glass used in picture frames. It's readily available in places like Michael's craft stores. Just make sure the receiver can't see the lens itself (mount the camera above, with a screen on the side of the receiver?).

[MattC]

If the cameras have to be behind glass, use the nonreflective glass used in picture frames. It's readily available in places like Michael's craft stores. Just make sure the receiver can't see the lens itself (mount the camera above, with a screen on the side of the receiver?).

This is getting unusually expensive and needlessly so. I don't quite know why separate rooms is impractical, though if it's what the applicant wants I guess fiscal expenditure will have to compensate for expedience.

~ Matt

[jsfisher]

This is getting unusually expensive and needlessly so. I don't quite know why separate rooms is impractical, though if it's what the applicant wants I guess fiscal expenditure will have to compensate for expedience.

~ Matt

As long as the potential applicant remains cagey about what is to be demonstrated, I suspect we will never know why any of the requirements (or lack of) exist.

[William Smith]

As long as the potential applicant remains cagey about what is to be demonstrated, I suspect we will never know why any of the requirements (or lack of) exist.

I think he said "mental telepathy" in his OP.

For the parties thinking this has claim has any merit: A proper controlled test will hardly allow for the sender and receiver to be in one room, because it would be very difficult to control.

If you think you have an existing ability, Tetris, try it in different rooms to eliminate possible subconscious communication.

[Sean84]

I see that none of these suggestions account for devices concealed within the ole prison pocket... for shame, people... dig deep...

[Rasmus]

- This protocol requires that I know the sender.

Uh ... did you mean to say your ability only works with senders that you know?

How well do you need to know someone for this to work? Can you practice?

- I can not use the protocol of Nguyen because transferring complex things like words is not possible. Even numbers are just based on a "strength estimate". So strong signal = high number. Of course the sender and receiver must agree on this in advance.

How finely tuned is that process? i.e. how many discreet steps do you think you can safely distinguish between? As others have pointed out, two different levels might be a lot safer.

- It doesn't work through walls.

How do you know this? What does and doesn't it work through? At what distances? What kind of walls have you tried, even?

- Cameras are perfectly fine, BUT they must be placed outside the room, looking in through glass. Microphones are fine too, BUT they must be wired to a recorder outside the room. Both these rules are to ensure that the room is noise-free, as written in the protocol.

How does the presence of noise influence your abilities?

[jsfisher]

I think he said "mental telepathy" in his OP.

This is from the opening post:

STATEMENT OF ABILITY
Mental number receival.

I found that lacking, so I was hoping Tetris might be more specific and detailed.

[NoZed Avenger]

Uh ... did you mean to say your ability only works with senders that you know?

How well do you need to know someone for this to work?

Well, everyone has to immeduately suspect "well enough to know the code."

[William Smith]

...
I found that lacking, so I was hoping Tetris might be more specific and detailed.

I apologize for the misremembering. Still, mental number receival seems a good start.

Have you tried your proposed protocol, Tetris?

How did you do?

[BardKesnit]

The reason for this is that writing anything, in as quiet a room as this seems it will be, can be extremely loud. I wouldn't be surprised that one would be able to decipher a number written even if they only heard it (especially 1-6, seems plausible that one could train their ear in this manner)

Unless I am misreading the OP, the applicant would write their number before the observer. So even if the observer had trained their ear to be able to interpret how writing a number sounds, the applicant would have already committed their guess before hearing what the observer wrote.

[jsfisher]

Unless I am misreading the OP, the applicant would write their number before the observer. So even if the observer had trained their ear to be able to interpret how writing a number sounds, the applicant would have already committed their guess before hearing what the observer wrote.

Even so, it would need to be observed that the applicant did in fact make an entry for Test #1 during Test #1, and Test #2 during Test #2, and so forth.

Note, by the way, the protocol isn't clear on whether a JREF observer can observe the actually answer sheet, only when the applicant "puts down the pen" to end the round.