fix(gemini): recover sub-0.85 corner sparkles via top-K fusion selection

The 256->512 detection-search widening (v0.8) let a large, low-gradient
shape match outrank a genuine mid-size corner sparkle whose raw NCC sits
below the 0.85 corner-promote gate, so `identify` read `unknown` on Gemini
images that v0.7.2 caught (reporter osachub: scale-48 sparkle on light
bedding -- true sparkle spatial 0.775 / grad 0.960 / fusion 0.676, but the
size-weighted argmax locked onto a decoy at spatial 0.628 / grad 0.036).

detect_watermark now keeps the top-K (_SELECT_TOPK=3) size-weighted
candidates (NMS-deduped) plus the corner-promote candidate, scores each by
full fusion (spatial+gradient+variance) via the extracted _grad_var_scores
helper, and selects the highest -- the gradient term lifts the true sparkle
over the decoy. Ranking by the SIZE-WEIGHTED score (not a raw-NCC argmax)
preserves tiny-patch suppression: a raw-NCC argmax re-admitted 16-18px
content false positives (14/65 doubao + 4/11 jimeng visible images). Top-K
adds zero flips on the doubao/jimeng corpora and leaves the 495-image Gemini
set unchanged (479 detected) while recovering the reporter's image at 0.676.

- _grad_var_scores: gradient/variance scoring factored out of detect_watermark
- confidence = best_fused (drop the duplicated fusion recompute)
- tests: rename test_promotion_is_what_rescues_it ->
  test_size_weighted_search_alone_traps_on_the_decoy (corner-promote is no
  longer the sole rescue path); add a deterministic regression test mirroring
  the real spatial/grad signature
- docs: module-internals.md detector section + CLAUDE.md mechanism map

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

docs/module-internals.md

@@ -71,6 +71,8 @@ module.
 
 **Detection localization (issue #36):** `detect_watermark`'s global multi-scale NCC search applies a size weight (`(scale/96)**0.5`) that suppresses tiny-patch false positives but can let a larger, mediocre match (e.g. a bright collar in a portrait) outrank a small, near-perfect sparkle in the corner — so a faint sparkle on a busy background scored below threshold and read as clean (the regression osachub reported from widening the search window 256px->512px between v0.7.2 and v0.8.8). `_corner_promote` adds a bottom-right-corner raw-NCC pass on top of the global search: a match with raw NCC >= `_CORNER_PROMOTE_NCC` 0.85 that beats the global pick overrides it (it only ever replaces a lower-fidelity pick, so it cannot weaken an existing detection), rescuing the buried sparkle without reverting the wider window. The corner side is **relative-clamped** (`_CORNER_PROMOTE_FRAC` 0.20 of the short side, clamped to `[_CORNER_PROMOTE_MIN` 96, `_CORNER_PROMOTE_MAX` 384`]`): a fixed 256px is a true corner on a large image but covers ~70% of a small portrait, where a real photo raw-matches the star at ~0.81 (relative tightening drops that worst case to ~0.69, while the upper clamp stops the corner ballooning on huge images where a real photo reached ~0.83 at 512px). The 0.85 gate sits midway between the worst real-photo corner match (~0.78 across native + downscaled negatives) and a genuine faint sparkle (~0.93), so promotion adds true detections with zero corpus false positives (Gemini's sparkle sits ~60-160px from the corner at fixed margins, covered by the [96, 384] band at every measured size). Regression-guarded by `test_gemini_engine.py::TestCornerPromotion`.
 
+**Top-K fusion selection (osachub follow-up 2026-06-12):** `_corner_promote`'s 0.85 raw-NCC gate still missed a class the 256->512 widening exposed — a genuine MID-scale sparkle whose raw NCC sits *below* 0.85 but is buried by a LARGER, low-fidelity decoy that wins the size weight. The reporter's image (a scale-48 sparkle on light bedding) measured spatial 0.775 / grad 0.960 / fusion 0.676 at the true sparkle, but the size-weighted argmax instead locked onto a decoy at spatial 0.628 / grad 0.036 (fusion 0.325) — so `identify` read `unknown` on v0.8-0.11 where v0.7.2 (256px window) had caught it at 0.676. Fix: `detect_watermark` now keeps the **top-`_SELECT_TOPK` (3)** size-weighted candidates (NMS-deduped by location) plus the corner-promote candidate, scores EACH by the full fusion (spatial+gradient+variance) via the extracted `_grad_var_scores` helper, and selects the highest — the gradient term (the discriminator a contrast-invariant spatial NCC lacks) lifts the true sparkle over the decoy. Critically, selection ranks by the SIZE-WEIGHTED score, NOT raw NCC: a raw-NCC argmax (tried first) re-admitted the exact tiny-patch (scale 16-18) false positives the size weight exists to suppress — it flagged 14/65 doubao + 4/11 jimeng visible-corpus images (non-Gemini content) as Gemini sparkles. Top-K keeps tiny-patch suppression intact: a coincidental 16px match never ranks in the size-weighted top-K, so widening selection added **zero** flips on the doubao/jimeng corpora and left the 495-image Gemini set unchanged (479 detected, both before and after) while recovering the reporter's image. Regression-guarded by `test_gemini_engine.py::TestCornerPromotion::test_low_gradient_decoy_loses_to_high_gradient_corner_sparkle` (mirrors the real spatial/grad signature via a monkeypatched scan) and `test_size_weighted_search_alone_traps_on_the_decoy`.
+
 **Square-image residual misses are NOT fixable by lowering the detector threshold (measured + REJECTED 2026-06-11):** osachub (#36 follow-up) reported the corner-promote still misses Gemini sparkles on Google **square (1:1)** outputs. Reproduced on the spaces corpus: of 330 square Google-C2PA images, 140 score below the identify 0.5 threshold, and visual review confirmed a real class -- faint white sparkles on dark/textured/colored backgrounds (raw NCC 0.46-0.73, below the 0.85 promote gate) landing at fusion conf 0.41-0.47. A margin-gated promote (promote when raw NCC >= 0.50 AND `_core_ring_margin` >= 40) rescued 32/33 confirmed misses at an apparent 0 FP, but that 0 was a **measurement artifact** -- the negative set was the margin<40 misses, which a margin>=40 gate excludes by construction. On an honest 518-image non-Google pool the same gate fired on **~174 (≈33%)**, visually content (screenshots, Chinese "AI生成" Doubao/Jimeng text marks, logos, bright textures), not sparkles. Adding an achromatic-core constraint (`chroma <= 15`) did not separate them either (kept 15/33 POS, 41 NEG still firing). Root cause is the documented contrast-invariant-NCC wall: a faint sparkle on a busy background is indistinguishable from a bright/ornate content corner at the (shape-NCC, brightness-margin, core-chroma) feature level.
 
 **Conclusion: keep the 0.85 corner gate; do NOT add a margin/chroma-gated lower promote.**