NQH-TCS Mk. X v4.2.2 — Frozen-Champion Multi-Model Computational Robustness Audit with Full-Frame Approved Design Visualization

NQH-TCS Mk. X v4.2.2 is the final frozen computational research release of candidate 717749, developed as a hybrid airborne-ultrasound and air-jet mid-air haptic concept. The purpose of this release is to preserve the final computational candidate, the underlying multi-model robustness audit, the uncertainty and extrapolation analysis, the approved visual representation, and the integrity records required for reproducibility and independent review. FROZEN DESIGN Candidate: 717749 Commanded interaction distance: 0.150 m Ultrasonic aperture: approximately 0.5056 m Estimated phased-array elements: 12,547 Acoustic electrical input: approximately 189.91 W Nominal modeled acoustic output: approximately 132.70 W Transducer efficiency parameter: approximately 69.88% Air-jet nozzles: 12 Single-nozzle diameter: approximately 10.98 mm Total air mass flow: approximately 0.05989 kg/s Jet velocity: approximately 43.78 m/s Nominal modeled total system power: approximately 374.61 W SCIENTIFIC AUDIT The candidate was frozen before the final v4.2 robustness audit. No optimization, mutation, or candidate reselection was performed during that audit. Six alternative physical-transfer model families were evaluated: 1. V41_REFERENCE2. ULTRASOUND_DERATED3. FREE_JET_SPREAD4. CONSERVATIVE_JET5. JOINT_TRANSFER_DERATING6. SEVERE_EXTRAPOLATION_CHECK Each family was evaluated under four stress modes: NOMINALCONSERVATIVEADVERSARIALCORRELATED_EXTREME Each family/mode combination used 300,000 Monte Carlo trials, for a total of 7,200,000 frozen-design trials. PRIMARY COMPUTATIONAL RESULTS Primary acoustic scenario: 112 dB Predeclared strict-system target: >= 60% Predeclared firm-system target: >= 30% Ensemble worst strict-system pass fraction: 84.9197% Lower 95% Monte Carlo sampling bound for the worst strict result: 84.7916% Ensemble worst firm-system pass fraction: 7.3490% Lower 95% Monte Carlo sampling bound for the worst firm result: 7.2556% Model families satisfying both declared targets: 4 of 6 Lowest tested family/mode median modeled force: 0.036880 N Lowest tested family/mode P05 modeled force: 0.007552 N The strict tactile-system objective survived all six tested model families. Firm-force robustness did not survive all six model families, demonstrating that >= 0.100 N firm-force performance remains sensitive to uncertain force-transfer assumptions. SCIENTIFIC INTERPRETATION The value of this release is not an all-pass result. The audit deliberately includes stronger derating and extrapolation models capable of falsifying the firm-force requirement. Four of six model families retained both declared targets. Two stronger transfer-derating families did not. This distinction is preserved in the archive rather than optimized away. Accordingly, the strongest supported computational conclusion is: Candidate 717749 demonstrates comparatively robust lower-force tactile-system performance across the tested computational model families, while firm-force performance remains structurally sensitive to assumptions governing acoustic and air-jet force transfer. APPROVED VISUAL REPRESENTATION Version 4.2.2 includes the exact approved silver/platinum-haired human-facing visual model in full-frame form. The image is preserved as a conceptual design and intended-use visualization. It does not represent an experimental participant, measured tactile response, human exposure testing, clinical testing, or safety validation. SCIENTIFIC BOUNDARY This archive reports computational predictions under explicitly defined mathematical models and probability distributions. Monte Carlo pass percentages represent performance inside those assumptions. They are not experimentally measured probabilities of real-world device success. The archive does not establish: experimental device validation; human safety; clinical safety; regulatory approval; load-bearing free-space solidity; a new macroscopic quantum force; Quantum Zeno force generation; Higgs-field manipulation; or any other experimentally unverified physical mechanism. Future physical validation would require calibrated measurements of acoustic pressure fields, delivered force, jet propagation and interception, focal resolution, electrical power, thermal behavior, tracking latency, acoustic exposure, repeatability, and human-factors response. The work is presented as independent computational engineering research and in the spirit of peaceful, professional, and non-competitive scientific participation.