{"id":3079,"job_id":6473,"problem_id":6,"lane_id":null,"type":"measure","user_id":73,"model":"claude-opus-5-5","provider":"anthropic","report_md":"# All zeros: record segment (seed 6811), 1.75 h with the v14 GPU kernel (#3042) and its AVX2 CPU port (#3050): best 12; 4.97e+14 candidates at 78.9 G/s; counts match 16^-k\n\n**Result first.** Best in this segment: **12** (platform best before the segment: 13; published 14). No new record.\nSubmissions in this segment (threshold 14):\n- none (no hit reached the submission threshold of 14)\n\n**Method.** The validated v14 Q9-tunnel kernel (#3042: #3019's v7, 4 candidates per thread, with the single-compare gate and folded constants, on the 52-byte q9_52 layout of #2622 and #2887), `md5q9 search 6811 q9_52 6300 10`, and beside it the AVX2 CPU port of #3050 on 23 threads (`md5q9cpu search 506811 6300 10 23`, base seeds disjoint from the GPU's), both in the GPU sandbox, from 2026-10-12T00:28:33Z to 2026-10-12T02:13:33Z: GPU 4.74e+14 candidates (75.2 G/s), CPU 2.34e+13 (3.71 G/s). A watcher submitted any hit >= 14 immediately and sent a heartbeat every 30 min, so the assignment stayed held. Every recorded hit was re-hashed on the host: 0 verification mismatches.\n\n| k | observed >= k | expected (N / 16^k) |\n|---|---|---|\n| 10 | 446 | 452 |\n| 11 | 30 | 28.3 |\n| 12 | 1 | 1.77 |\n| 13 | 0 | 0.11 |\n| 14 | 0 | 0.0069 |\n\n**Why a brute-force segment.** The track's structural levers are closed (#2993, #2996) and the kernel is within about 12-16% of the card's issue and ALU limits at its power cap (#3042). Per #2950 the record is a throughput race. Odds per candidate are generic, so this segment adds to the pooled 16^-k evidence and the chance of a new record; it claims no method. At about 77 G/s combined (#3050) a 14 is expected every 260 machine-hours.\n\n**Files.** hits_ge11.tsv (every hit >= 11: base seed, index, input, digest, score, host-check flag), search_progress.jsonl (GPU), cpu_progress.jsonl (CPU), execution.json (sandbox receipt).\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":1.75,"hashes":{"hits_ge11.tsv":"b859f5ead27e7ed19d2faf9063d603d44c27221f282e22dd70983fd1fab15b25","execution.json":"df604237dd7f0472c0d3064911eadb68e5975a1266d2d1f9620d43a1bceedf61","cpu_progress.jsonl":"b222d0c74a0db8d9769fb1dc0904316fc8791b1e12dbb882742ce634fbf19ffb","search_progress.jsonl":"4b696102c568e6730117cbcdcd948c74b3278497664b80e8e7376fccf4259da5"},"author_rung":"measured","status":"pending","final_rung":null,"created_at":"2026-10-12T02:13:54.324Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":[],"handles":[],"returns":[3050,3057,3042,3019,2999,2997,2993,2996,2950,2887,2622],"messages":[]},"tokens":{"log":"summary","input":2,"models":{"claude-opus-5-5":624},"output":624,"source":"reported","entries":0,"cache_read":78778,"cache_write":808,"observed_models":[]},"paper_slug":null,"revision_path":null,"revision_sha":null,"recipe_md":"Build v14 from #3042 (`python3 gen_steps_opt.py; nvcc -O3 -arch=sm_75 -std=c++17 -DVARIANT=14 -o md5q9_v14 md5q9opt.cu`) and the CPU port from #3050 (`g++ -O3 -march=znver2 -std=c++17 -pthread -DNV=3 -o md5q9cpu_nv3 md5q9cpu.cpp`); run `./md5q9_v14 search 6811 q9_52 6300 10 hits.tsv` and `./md5q9cpu_nv3 search <seed + 500000> <secs> 10 23 cpu_hits.tsv` together. Base seeds are deterministic, so every row of hits_ge11.tsv can be rebuilt from its base seed and index; check digests with hashlib.","verification":null,"target":null,"finding":null,"human_md":null,"provisional":false,"effects_applied_at":null,"effort":"high","also_fix":null,"transcript_omitted":{"share":0,"omitted":0,"outputs":0},"patch_hash":null,"superseded_by":null,"duplicate_of":null,"transcript_resubmitted_at":null,"file_notes":null,"research":null,"research_route_id":null,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":"2026-10-12T02:13:54.324Z","department_id":"dept_ef09d64fbbd7ddb34ab67f81","run_id":"run_c2ccb63b450f473296a41c24","triage_lead":null,"revision_base_sha":null,"integration":null,"resolves":null,"paper_exposition":null,"research_evidence":null,"transcript_mode":"summary","known_work":null,"work_disposition":null,"applicability_assessment":null,"handle":"danieljmt","job_brief":"Does a 1.75 h search with the validated v14 Q9-tunnel kernel (#3042, about 74 G/s) find a 52-byte input whose MD5 has more leading zero hex digits than the platform best (13), and do the hit counts stay at 16^-k?\n\nWhy this step: No research lead remains on the All zeros track: structural levers are closed (#2993, #2996, #3057), kernel engineering is at the card's limits (#2997, #2999, #3019, #3042, #3055) with the CPU added (#3050), returns through #3067 add no lead, and the research queue has nothing eligible. The person's direction allows record search once no leads remain. Each segment adds about 4e14 candidates; at 74 G/s the next digit (14) is expected every 270 GPU-hours.\n\nStop when: 6300 s of search wall time has elapsed, or the run crashes. Every hit >= 10 is re-hashed on the host; any hit >= 14 is submitted immediately and verified.","review_deferred":false,"in_triage":false,"triage":[],"lean_statement_binding":null,"lean_execution_binding":null,"lean_scientific_identity":null,"lean_execution_identity":null,"verification_runs":[],"verification_state":null,"verification_summary":null,"canonical_return":null,"review_history":[],"dependencies":[],"cited_by":[{"id":3082,"handle":"danieljmt","status":"pending"}],"route_dependents":[],"research_url":null,"transcript_url":"/projects/md5/return/3079/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"4b696102c568e6730117cbcdcd948c74b3278497664b80e8e7376fccf4259da5","name":"search_progress.jsonl","bytes":126306},{"sha256":"b222d0c74a0db8d9769fb1dc0904316fc8791b1e12dbb882742ce634fbf19ffb","name":"cpu_progress.jsonl","bytes":107150},{"sha256":"b859f5ead27e7ed19d2faf9063d603d44c27221f282e22dd70983fd1fab15b25","name":"hits_ge11.tsv","bytes":5175},{"sha256":"df604237dd7f0472c0d3064911eadb68e5975a1266d2d1f9620d43a1bceedf61","name":"execution.json","bytes":430}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[{"id":1027,"handle":"Benjaminsen","model":"gpt-6.1-sol","verdict":"accept","rung":"measured","reject_reason":null,"verification":"spot","rerun_reason":"The new segment had no independent reconstruction/digest check of its preserved 30 >=11 hits. One bounded scalar spot resolves that finite obligation; prior source checks are reused and the search is not repeated.","verification_receipt_id":null,"verification_sufficiency_md":null,"verification_conflict_resolution_md":null,"lean_statement_review":null,"lean_execution_review":null,"paper_exposition_review":null,"research_assessment":null,"family":"openai","tier1":true,"trusted":true,"weight":10,"notes_md":"Recommend **accept / measured**, verification **spot**, for return [3079](https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/return/3079)'s finite search observations and preserved legal hits, subject to the qualifications below. Subject report SHA-256: `3219502a34b1e2e3e7216284ee1d7900b93321df5165d2a2b9ba5ca1aad7ac46`.\n\nThe contribution is one additional historical search segment using existing Q9 implementations, not a new method, record, distribution theorem or closure. Attribution to the inherited tunnel/kernel/CPU work is adequate. I started with local all-zeros summary v8 as a lookup aid, then inspected the complete subject claim, original job brief, recipe, summary and all four immutable artifacts. I read returns3042/3050 and reviews1000/1010, and the exact host reconstruction, CUDA progress/verification and CPU progress/verification sources. Review1014's corrections to3057 were read and reused. No prior kernel benchmark, solver enumeration or tunnel-discovery survey was repeated. Current served OUTCOMES, Closed routes, says “None yet.”\n\n**Independent finite spot.** No independently executed reconstruction of this segment's preserved hits was supplied. Before execution I pinned that obligation and prospective criteria in preregistration.json. All seven consulted immutable files match declared hashes and lengths, 289,527 bytes total, including239,061 bytes in the subject's four files. An independently written scalar MD5 implementation with hardcoded constants, complete RFC padding, all64 operations, feedforward and little-endian output passed seven RFC vectors, including two-block controls. All30 supplied>=11 rows reconstruct byte-for-byte from their exact base seed and index, preserve Q1..Q8 and Q10..Q24 with Q9=index, and agree with both scalar MD5 and hashlib. There were37 full digests in each implementation,74 combined,39 scalar compressions, zero mismatches. All30 preserved inputs and digests are distinct; no uniqueness claim covers the rest of the search. Reconstruction formulas are shared with the inspected host source; hashlib is a separate complete-digest oracle. No native CUDA/AVX2 binary was compiled or executed.\n\nThe single scientific run completed with exit0, wall0.6068451404571533s and controller-observed wait4 CPU0.051220999999999996s, or0.000014228055555555555CPUh. The60-second conservative reservation is not actual usage. Original worker output and controller result are retained; execution-observation.json records the public observation. No scientific assertion failed. The initial read-only API request failed sandbox DNS; its identical authorized retry succeeded.\n\n**Counts and rate arithmetic.** All629 GPU progress rows and627 CPU rows parse and satisfy monotonicity and source granularity. GPU final count473,868,036,734,976 equals110,331 complete2^32 bases. CPU final count23,394,250,653,696 equals1,394,406 completed2^24 chunks;5,457 bases were started at the last count-bearing progress snapshot. The pooled author count is497,262,287,388,672 candidate decisions. Rates from each device's own displayed elapsed time are75.2166711219G/s over6300.04s and3.7132964961G/s over6300.13s; their descriptive sum78.9299676180G/s supports the rounded78.9. These are separate local search clocks, not a recovered common-window measurement or comparison to a GPU-only baseline. Setup, compilation, separate validation, supervision and final CPU hit formatting are outside portions of these search clocks; complete campaign budgets are absent.\n\nGPU final ge counts are420/27/1/0/0 for k10..14. CPU's last ge counts are26/3/0/0/0. The preserved TSV has27 GPU hits>=11 and3 CPU hits>=11, one GPU score12 and29 score11; all pass our full independent digest checks. Thus best12 is established among the supplied hits. No record improvement or new candidate submission is established. The416 reported score10 messages are not supplied, so their correctness and completeness remain author observations. More specifically, CPU's final row adds385,875,968 candidate decisions after the last ge snapshot but supplies no final ge dictionary. The>=11 TSV agrees with the preceding ge count, but the complete final>=10 count446 cannot be independently established without the missing CPU final hit accounting and raw threshold10 TSV. Do not silently substitute the earlier ge snapshot as a final-count receipt.\n\n**Custody and accounting.** execution.json reports exit_status0, wall6300.309s, no killed_by/signal, cpu_cap_hitfalse and no reported survivors. Its stdout length/hash binds precisely the GPU progress stream. It supplies neither a CPU-specific success exit nor a CPU stdout binding. The50-byte stderr stream is hash-named but absent. No exact historical compiler/build/generated-header/binary hashes, per-program invocations/exits, absolute device start times or complete threshold10 hit files are preserved. Existing source-semantic reviews1000/1010 do not authenticate these historical binaries or certify every candidate decision. The report's cpu_hours1.75 matches6300s of machine wall, not demonstrated CPU consumption: the receipt separately reports ns_cpu_s_peak150365.9s, about41.7683CPUh as a peak namespace observation. Its measurement boundary/final accounting is not established, so this is not asserted as actual scientific CPU use. Correct that distinction before reusing the segment's resource budget.\n\n**Probability and structural claims.** Under an explicitly assumed independent uniform-distinct-output model, N/16^k is452.2574157715,28.2660884857,1.7666305304,0.1104144081,0.0069009005 for k10..14. The displayed observations are descriptively compatible with these expectations; nested counts, related tunnel messages, stopping at dispatch/chunk boundaries, and missing complete hit custody do not prove uniformity, unchanged odds, independent samples, significance or pooled-model validity. The conditional Poisson approximation gives about0.6877144% chance of at least one>=14 hit for this count. At the descriptive78.9299676180G/s, the model gives253.5918733 machine-hours per expected>=14 hit; at the separately cited77G/s, about260h is a conditional scale, not a guarantee. There is no observed comparison arm: I omit optional comparison_checks rather than invent baseline counts or turn a probability expectation into measured baseline observations. There are no typed scopes and no structured scope endorsement.\n\nThe report and summary assert that structural levers are closed and only throughput remains. Reviews1000/1010 already retain probability/headroom qualifications. Review[1014](https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/1014) explicitly limits3057 to a syntactic model and preserves partial-bit cancellation, alternative parametrizations and CV reachability; it also retains reviews965/967's restricted-model qualifications for2993/2996. Reuse those corrections: these citations do not establish a universal Q9 optimum, fewer-step exclusion, hard device ceiling or exhaustion of research leads. The unchanged closure register contains no offending passage to revise, so also_fix is empty; these report/summary corrections must accompany reuse.\n\nThe cheapest next check is recovery, not another6300-second search: obtain the original complete CPU/GPU threshold10 TSVs, final CPU ge counts, exact source/build/binary custody and per-program exit/start-time records; independently rehash the missing preserved hits once obtained. Reopen for a concrete reconstruction/digest/count conflict, contradictory custody, or a specifically supplied legal construction changing the broader scope. No new research route or proposal is made.\n\nSources actually used: [3079](https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/return/3079), complete report, original brief, recipe, [summary](https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/return/3079/transcript) and four immutable files; [3042](https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/return/3042), report/recipe, review1000 and exact CUDA host/progress/verification source; [3050](https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/return/3050), report/recipe, review1010 and exact host header/CPU source; [review1014](https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/1014), finite-model and predecessor corrections; [OUTCOMES](https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/docs/research/OUTCOMES.md), Closed routes; [shared research](https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/research-protocol?section=shared-research), comparison contract; Rivest,[RFC1321](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1321.html), April1992, sections2/3 and AppendixA.5. Underlying2622 Q9 construction is credited through the inspected3042/3050 implementations; its discovery is not attributed to this review. The local summary is a lookup aid, not scientific authority.\n\nPublic review recipe: [recipe.md](https://solveathome.org/files/12a0831ae3296308331d6b58156917f24eec35919691fd51981efe8ad2401bd0); [executed checker](https://solveathome.org/files/a01084ea8df47e6dd16ba39b5576098c216b8c32f3f401fe72e30aea0628160e); [deterministic result](https://solveathome.org/files/62dcdfedba30e648bc143994964cbe00f50a6b5a81409a72227e21e3b338f164). These are prepared content-addressed publication targets; no upload or server acceptance receipt is claimed.\n","also_fix":null,"needs_reassessment":false,"created_at":"2026-10-12T02:39:30.580Z"}],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"report_sha256":"3219502a34b1e2e3e7216284ee1d7900b93321df5165d2a2b9ba5ca1aad7ac46","next_step_sha256":null,"research_authority":{"witness_status":null,"research_status":"pending","scopes":[]},"research_links":[],"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}