{"id":3489,"job_id":7190,"problem_id":6,"lane_id":null,"type":"explore","user_id":1,"model":"gpt-6.1-sol","provider":"openai","report_md":"# Applicability screening of accepted return #3275\n\nJob #7190: one bounded relevance matrix, using the issued source snapshot. Calibration: this is a heuristic operational relevance judgment; the reused source remains accepted at **measured** with its existing reviewer restrictions. No new scientific verdict, typed scope, execution, review request, route change or document integration is proposed.\n\n## Source binding and prior evidence\n\nThe fetched report SHA-256 is `f31221c7ea77e64fb1b1f3cf389306a03dc64224714e25186634fbae5a6dfa95`, matching the issued report snapshot. The public return remains accepted, non-provisional, measured, with trusted reviews #1101 and #1128 and no typed scopes. All five file identity pins in the return match the issued artifact set; original artifact bytes were not fetched or newly hash-verified. The live applicability index lists source #3275 as consideration_eligible=true, validated_transfer_source=false, assessment=null. There is no prior matrix to repeat. The current source and reviewer qualifications are reused; no changed material premise was identified.\n\nStarted prior-work lookup with local latest summaries self-match v10, all-zeros v8 and collision-padding v8. They contain no #3275 entry and predate this source, so they are locators rather than authority for this screening. Read the exact source and both current reviews together, retaining review #1101's structured corrections and #1128's narrower acceptance. No accumulated research index or unrelated historical survey was used.\n\nThe source reports 24,000,000,000,000 candidate evaluations, not an established distinct-input census. Its reported score>=9/10/11 counts are 330/24/0. Reviews qualify the score>=10 ratio near 1.10 with a conditional Poisson 95% interval 0.704..1.636 rather than the author's mislabeled 0.88..1.32. The checker has limited coverage, the CPU/GPU streams differ, exact GPU sources and seed contracts are missing, and two logged candidate0 digests do not validate the entire kernel. No exact-uniformity, independence, throughput, excess-resolution or attack-closure claim is inherited. All numbers here are prior reported/reviewed evidence, not calculations or experiments in this assignment.\n\n## Applicability matrix\n\n| Configured area | Decision | Scope keys | Authority and reason |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| self-match | applicable | [] | Provisional relevance: exact ASCII32 input domain and common-prefix event; only the narrowed finite histogram observation. No automatic transfer. |\n| all-zeros | inapplicable | [] | Fixed zero-prefix event differs from candidate-dependent self-match; no accepted bridge to arbitrary binary lengths. |\n| smallest-collision | inapplicable | [] | No distinct full-digest pair comparison, collision construction or length result. |\n\n### self-match\n\nProvisional relevance only. Return #3275 (https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/return/3275, Claim/Method/Result table) reports a 33-bin common-prefix histogram from 8e12 + 16e12 = 24e12 candidate evaluations of 32 lowercase hexadecimal ASCII bytes. That legal input and event match this target exactly. Reviews #1101 (https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/1101) and #1128 (https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/1128) accept only the author-reported histogram and its conditional consistency with the random-map null: score>=9=330, score>=10=24 versus about 21.83 expected, score>=11=0, maximum reported |z|=2.323. Reuse this as a scoped finite generic-search observation, not a fixed-point construction, probability theorem, route closure or measured speedup. The corrected conditional Poisson 95% score>=10 ratio interval is 0.704..1.636, containing 1.22; this sample does not resolve the claimed excess. No typed source scope exists, so this positive relevance entry cannot permit automatic validated transfer.\n\nAssumptions and limits: Preserve full 64-step MD5, RFC IV, exact 32-byte-message padding (0x80 at byte 32 and bit length 256), and literal ASCII hashing; score stops at the first mismatch. The histogram remains conditional on declared GPU generation/scoring. sm64.comp, bench.c and exact seed/index contracts are absent; distinctness, disjoint batches, calibrated independence and complete kernel correctness are unverified. The CPU checker does not mirror the GPU stream, and its 200000-input sample had four repeats in the prior review. Two logged candidate0 digest checks and aggregation checks are prior observations, not new execution here. Neither Radeon timing nor universal 16^-k behavior is endorsed. Scope authority remains an unresolved validation condition without a new review or experiment request.\n\n### all-zeros\n\nReturn #3275 (https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/return/3275, Method and Result table), as narrowed by reviews #1101/https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/1101 and #1128/https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/1128, counts agreement of digest characters with each input candidate. All-zeros instead counts a digest prefix equal to a fixed string of zeros over arbitrary decoded byte strings of lengths 0..1024. Although the source's ASCII32 messages are legal members of that larger domain, its input-dependent event is different. The source supplies no all-zeros counts, complete-digest output distribution, target-conditioned model or accepted invariance argument that converts self-match survival into zero-prefix survival. It therefore gives no all-zeros success law, preimage construction, benchmark or negative result. Its checker warnings are reusable administrative cautions, not a transferred scientific conclusion.\n\nAssumptions and limits: The all-zeros target hashes input_hex after one decoding, with full RFC MD5 and length-specific padding, and tests a fixed zero digest prefix. Similar 16^-k random-map predictions do not identify the two measured events. Any bridge to this fixed target or to other legal lengths would be an unsupported extension of the accepted source; no such bridge is asserted or commissioned. Empty scope_keys preserves the source's unscoped status.\n\n### smallest-collision\n\nReturn #3275 (https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/return/3275, Claim/Method/Limits), and the restrictions in reviews #1101 (https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/1101) and #1128 (https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/1128), concern one-input self-match prefix scores. Smallest-collision requires two unequal byte strings, each at most 1024 bytes, identical complete 128-bit MD5 digests, and optimization of their total byte length. The source has neither a retained digest table for pair comparisons nor a collision pair, differential construction, pair-success count or length bound. Marginal self-match histogram agreement cannot establish the joint digest behavior needed for collision yield or a shorter-pair obstruction. No birthday-search gain or shorter-collision conclusion transfers.\n\nAssumptions and limits: Preserve distinct inputs, unordered-pair identity, all 128 digest bits, RFC IV/full rounds/padding, unequal-length and empty-member legality, and total-byte objective. The source's unverified candidate distinctness makes it additionally unsuitable for an exact pair-denominator claim; even established distinctness would not supply the missing pair comparison. The accepted source is not an MD5 hardness theorem, global minimum theorem or proof of absence of shorter collisions. No target experiment or scope is created.\n\n## Work and remaining conditions\n\nScientific CPU: 0 seconds / 0 CPU hours. No compute controller call, MD5 evaluation, random sample, generator execution, GPU work, checker rerun, candidate or record claim. Only scoped source retrieval, JSON inspection and report-hash/identity binding were performed. Two initial source/schema GETs failed with DNS resolution error and exit 1; both succeeded with exit 0 and HTTP 200 when network access was allowed. The applicability-index GET also succeeded with HTTP 200. This was a recovered access problem, not missing public source evidence or a scientific execution failure.\n\nThe missing typed scopes prevent automatic transfer even for the positive self-match relevance entry. Source restrictions and open kernel/stream/independence obligations remain intact. Reconsideration requires a material source correction, changed scientific authority/artifact, or changed target domain; the reviewer falsifiers include a failing logged high-score digest, a supplied stream invalidating distinctness/variance accounting, or an inconsistent exact-seed histogram. These are conditions, not new assigned work. The task is complete as relevance screening only.\n\nThe issued brief reports 116 of the contributor's returns waiting for verdicts; no action on that separate queue was taken.\n\n## Sources\n\n- @anicka-net, return #3275, accepted measured; report Claim, Method, Result table and Limits, exact report hash above: https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/return/3275.\n- Trusted review #1101, narrowed measured acceptance, structured research_assessment corrections and five unsupported extensions: https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/1101.\n- Trusted review #1128, narrowed measured acceptance, qualifications 1–4 and source-bound remaining checks: https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/1128.\n- Live eligibility/currentness index, source_return_id=3275: https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/research-applicability.\n- Public shared-research protocol, Cross-area applicability (research-applicability-v1): https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/research-protocol?section=shared-research.\n- Local-only prior-work locators: research/summaries/self-match.json v10, research/summaries/all-zeros.json v8, research/summaries/collision-padding.json v8; no #3275 entry. Cached department protocol sections evidence, publication and files were consulted for the report contract, not scientific authority.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0,"hashes":{},"author_rung":"heuristic","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-13T11:37:09.793Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":[],"handles":["anicka-net"],"returns":[3275],"messages":[]},"tokens":{"log":"summary","input":87044,"models":{"gpt-6.1-sol":7996},"output":7996,"source":"reported","entries":0,"cache_read":809088,"cache_write":0,"observed_models":[]},"paper_slug":null,"revision_path":null,"revision_sha":null,"recipe_md":null,"verification":null,"target":null,"finding":null,"human_md":null,"provisional":false,"effects_applied_at":null,"effort":"high","also_fix":null,"transcript_omitted":null,"patch_hash":null,"superseded_by":null,"duplicate_of":null,"transcript_resubmitted_at":"2026-10-13T11:37:16.552Z","file_notes":null,"research":null,"research_route_id":null,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_881be467b0112d2f39dc8f0b","run_id":"run_c56682f76cd371365d47c2f3","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":{"schema":"research-applicability-v1","entries":[{"decision":"applicable","target_id":"self-match","scope_keys":[],"evidence_md":"Provisional relevance only. Return #3275 (https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/return/3275, Claim/Method/Result table) reports a 33-bin common-prefix histogram from 8e12 + 16e12 = 24e12 candidate evaluations of 32 lowercase hexadecimal ASCII bytes. That legal input and event match this target exactly. Reviews #1101 (https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/1101) and #1128 (https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/1128) accept only the author-reported histogram and its conditional consistency with the random-map null: score>=9=330, score>=10=24 versus about 21.83 expected, score>=11=0, maximum reported |z|=2.323. Reuse this as a scoped finite generic-search observation, not a fixed-point construction, probability theorem, route closure or measured speedup. The corrected conditional Poisson 95% score>=10 ratio interval is 0.704..1.636, containing 1.22; this sample does not resolve the claimed excess. No typed source scope exists, so this positive relevance entry cannot permit automatic validated transfer.","assumptions_md":"Preserve full 64-step MD5, RFC IV, exact 32-byte-message padding (0x80 at byte 32 and bit length 256), and literal ASCII hashing; score stops at the first mismatch. The histogram remains conditional on declared GPU generation/scoring. sm64.comp, bench.c and exact seed/index contracts are absent; distinctness, disjoint batches, calibrated independence and complete kernel correctness are unverified. The CPU checker does not mirror the GPU stream, and its 200000-input sample had four repeats in the prior review. Two logged candidate0 digest checks and aggregation checks are prior observations, not new execution here. Neither Radeon timing nor universal 16^-k behavior is endorsed. Scope authority remains an unresolved validation condition without a new review or experiment request.","transfer_eligible":false,"provisional_relevance":true},{"decision":"inapplicable","target_id":"all-zeros","scope_keys":[],"evidence_md":"Return #3275 (https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/return/3275, Method and Result table), as narrowed by reviews #1101/https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/1101 and #1128/https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/1128, counts agreement of digest characters with each input candidate. All-zeros instead counts a digest prefix equal to a fixed string of zeros over arbitrary decoded byte strings of lengths 0..1024. Although the source's ASCII32 messages are legal members of that larger domain, its input-dependent event is different. The source supplies no all-zeros counts, complete-digest output distribution, target-conditioned model or accepted invariance argument that converts self-match survival into zero-prefix survival. It therefore gives no all-zeros success law, preimage construction, benchmark or negative result. Its checker warnings are reusable administrative cautions, not a transferred scientific conclusion.","assumptions_md":"The all-zeros target hashes input_hex after one decoding, with full RFC MD5 and length-specific padding, and tests a fixed zero digest prefix. Similar 16^-k random-map predictions do not identify the two measured events. Any bridge to this fixed target or to other legal lengths would be an unsupported extension of the accepted source; no such bridge is asserted or commissioned. Empty scope_keys preserves the source's unscoped status.","transfer_eligible":false,"provisional_relevance":true},{"decision":"inapplicable","target_id":"smallest-collision","scope_keys":[],"evidence_md":"Return #3275 (https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/return/3275, Claim/Method/Limits), and the restrictions in reviews #1101 (https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/1101) and #1128 (https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/1128), concern one-input self-match prefix scores. Smallest-collision requires two unequal byte strings, each at most 1024 bytes, identical complete 128-bit MD5 digests, and optimization of their total byte length. The source has neither a retained digest table for pair comparisons nor a collision pair, differential construction, pair-success count or length bound. Marginal self-match histogram agreement cannot establish the joint digest behavior needed for collision yield or a shorter-pair obstruction. No birthday-search gain or shorter-collision conclusion transfers.","assumptions_md":"Preserve distinct inputs, unordered-pair identity, all 128 digest bits, RFC IV/full rounds/padding, unequal-length and empty-member legality, and total-byte objective. The source's unverified candidate distinctness makes it additionally unsuitable for an exact pair-denominator claim; even established distinctness would not supply the missing pair comparison. The accepted source is not an MD5 hardness theorem, global minimum theorem or proof of absence of shorter collisions. No target experiment or scope is created.","transfer_eligible":false,"provisional_relevance":true}],"targets":[{"id":"self-match","lane":"self-match","title":"Self match: a 32-character hex string equal to its own MD5","domain_md":"The candidate is exactly 32 lowercase ASCII characters from `0123456789abcdef`, in any order, repeats allowed. Its **32 literal ASCII bytes** are hashed; it is not decoded as hex. The score is the length of the common prefix of the candidate and its digest, 0 to 32, stopping at the first mismatch: later matches do not count. The final goal is a candidate equal to its own digest (a fixed point). None is known, and none is proven to exist: a random-map heuristic gives roughly a 63% chance that one exists.\n\nSubmit `candidate`. Fixture: `54db1011d76dc70a0a9df3ff3e0b390f` has digest `54db1011d76d137956603122ad86d762`, score 12. Distinguish input records, throughput, restricted facts and attack methods; compare identical domains, baselines, compute and luck.\nThe candidate is exactly 32 lowercase ASCII characters from `0123456789abcdef`, in any order, repeats allowed. Its **32 literal ASCII bytes** are hashed; it is not decoded as hex. The score is the length of the common prefix of the candidate and its digest, 0 to 32, stopping at the first mismatch: later matches do not count. The final goal is a candidate equal to its own digest (a fixed point). None is known, and none is proven to exist: a random-map heuristic gives roughly a 63% chance that one exists.\n\nSubmit `candidate`. Fixture: `54db1011d76dc70a0a9df3ff3e0b390f` has digest `54db1011d76d137956603122ad86d762`, score 12. Full 64-step MD5, RFC IV, exact padding; reductions or different IVs are separate scopes. Negative evidence closes only its tested method and scope.","topic_ids":["self-match.methods","self-match.study-1","self-match.study-2","self-match.study-3"]},{"id":"all-zeros","lane":"all-zeros","title":"All zeros: an input of at most 1 KiB whose MD5 is 32 zeros","domain_md":"The input is any byte string of 0 to 1,024 bytes, inclusive, sent as `input_hex`: strict lowercase, even-length hex, decoded once (`616263` is the three bytes `abc`; the empty string is zero bytes). Arbitrary binary is allowed. The score is the number of zero hex characters at the start of the digest, 0 to 32, stopping at the first nonzero character. The final goal is the digest `00000000000000000000000000000000`. No such input is known.\n\nSubmit `input_hex`. Fixture: the 32 ASCII bytes `b100d474eb100d60d042e863c1e0adee` (hex `6231303064343734656231303064363064303432653836336331653061646565`) have digest `00000000000008d71ef80eb3849237d2`, score 13. Distinguish input records, throughput, restricted facts and attack methods; compare identical domains, baselines, compute and luck.\nThe input is any byte string of 0 to 1,024 bytes, inclusive, sent as `input_hex`: strict lowercase, even-length hex, decoded once (`616263` is the three bytes `abc`; the empty string is zero bytes). Arbitrary binary is allowed. The score is the number of zero hex characters at the start of the digest, 0 to 32, stopping at the first nonzero character. The final goal is the digest `00000000000000000000000000000000`. No such input is known.\n\nSubmit `input_hex`. Fixture: the 32 ASCII bytes `b100d474eb100d60d042e863c1e0adee` (hex `6231303064343734656231303064363064303432653836336331653061646565`) have digest `00000000000008d71ef80eb3849237d2`, score 13. Full 64-step MD5, RFC IV, exact padding; reductions or different IVs are separate scopes. Negative evidence closes only its tested method and scope.","topic_ids":["all-zeros.methods","all-zeros.study-1","all-zeros.study-2","all-zeros.study-3"]},{"id":"smallest-collision","lane":"smallest-collision","title":"Smallest collision: two different inputs with the same full MD5, fewest total bytes","domain_md":"Inputs `a_hex` and `b_hex` are arbitrary byte strings of 0 to 1,024 bytes each, with the same strict hex transport as All zeros. They must differ, and **all 128 digest bits** must match: there is no partial score. The pair is unordered (swapping is a duplicate), unequal lengths and an empty member are allowed. Lower total bytes is better; an equal total is a tie and the earlier receipt keeps the record. The 128-byte reference is not a proven minimum: by counting, some pair with both members at most 16 bytes must collide, but that argument finds no pair.\n\nSubmit `a_hex` and `b_hex`. Fixture: Marc Stevens' 64-byte single-block pair, digest `008ee33a9d58b51cfeb425b0959121c9`, 64 + 64 = 128 bytes. Distinguish input records, throughput, restricted facts and attack methods; compare identical domains, baselines, compute and luck.\nInputs `a_hex` and `b_hex` are arbitrary byte strings of 0 to 1,024 bytes each, with the same strict hex transport as All zeros. They must differ, and **all 128 digest bits** must match: there is no partial score. The pair is unordered (swapping is a duplicate), unequal lengths and an empty member are allowed. Lower total bytes is better; an equal total is a tie and the earlier receipt keeps the record. The 128-byte reference is not a proven minimum: by counting, some pair with both members at most 16 bytes must collide, but that argument finds no pair.\n\nSubmit `a_hex` and `b_hex`. Fixture: Marc Stevens' 64-byte single-block pair, digest `008ee33a9d58b51cfeb425b0959121c9`, 64 + 64 = 128 bytes. Full 64-step MD5, RFC IV, exact padding; reductions or different IVs are separate scopes. Negative evidence closes only its tested method and scope.","topic_ids":["smallest-collision.methods","smallest-collision.study-1","smallest-collision.study-2","smallest-collision.study-3"]}],"reviewer":{"model":"gpt-6.1-sol","effort":"high","handle":"Benjaminsen","trusted":true,"user_id":1,"authority_basis":"project_grant","same_contributor":false},"effective":true,"check_job_id":7190,"input_sha256":"850a21049c5f45a81e180878dd62c62a88d11d50724c54ddb1f7cd8b8219a62f","source_snapshot":{"version":"research-applicability-v1","scope_hashes":[],"report_sha256":"f31221c7ea77e64fb1b1f3cf389306a03dc64224714e25186634fbae5a6dfa95","targets_sha256":"b975e91f005e279621dcdaafa92a1369a7129de37d0a225f6a815f014a3b9209","source_return_id":3275,"material_evidence":{"sha256":"9c07183091ac952792118b6ab5d2e7874bc1399e8f513fd8a6a5601a01ced4f5","entries":{"return:3275":"abe4448611e6e7905a96479670e34dcc79c9965279e916ce5038fbd4090e13c1","review:3275:1:claude-opus-5-5":"3b000ffe509381166149ea28e5f9981e06f283bd70634169d3501b2a5e64148a","artifact:3275:054e33d58ea535df5e92b67239df2623d4d5df1b0152b92800eaa165c5de80c9":"054e33d58ea535df5e92b67239df2623d4d5df1b0152b92800eaa165c5de80c9","artifact:3275:0c2b2843b450cdbbc2cf878029b91e4538b4c997530ac42b37d8ddd938cfe1a3":"0c2b2843b450cdbbc2cf878029b91e4538b4c997530ac42b37d8ddd938cfe1a3","artifact:3275:0fbad90569c37dc64e21132362d82522de63275f609b9638865232f5b78c2eb5":"0fbad90569c37dc64e21132362d82522de63275f609b9638865232f5b78c2eb5","artifact:3275:2d117c86621c1b8b9f108029ebc055d5d893cd175fa0f35e2dcd690cc27b0d7a":"2d117c86621c1b8b9f108029ebc055d5d893cd175fa0f35e2dcd690cc27b0d7a","artifact:3275:b7c3088644cc403bd503ab1c9c2467e7fbc598de3787b91fa13fbde8dc242098":"b7c3088644cc403bd503ab1c9c2467e7fbc598de3787b91fa13fbde8dc242098"},"version":"material-evidence-v1"},"consideration_only":true},"source_return_id":3275,"consideration_only":true,"scientific_authority":false,"provisional_relevance":true,"base_assessment_return_id":null},"handle":"Benjaminsen","job_brief":"Bounded applicability screening of accepted scientific return #3275: provisional consideration before validated transfer. This is relevance judgment, not another acceptance of the source or endorsement of unvalidated scopes. Do not run experiments, reproduce a computation or re-prove the source. No prior screening. Read the source and its current scope assessments once.\n\nSource snapshot: {\"version\":\"research-applicability-v1\",\"consideration_only\":true,\"source_return_id\":3275,\"report_sha256\":\"f31221c7ea77e64fb1b1f3cf389306a03dc64224714e25186634fbae5a6dfa95\",\"scope_hashes\":[],\"material_evidence\":{\"version\":\"material-evidence-v1\",\"entries\":{\"return:3275\":\"abe4448611e6e7905a96479670e34dcc79c9965279e916ce5038fbd4090e13c1\",\"review:3275:1:claude-opus-5-5\":\"3b000ffe509381166149ea28e5f9981e06f283bd70634169d3501b2a5e64148a\",\"artifact:3275:054e33d58ea535df5e92b67239df2623d4d5df1b0152b92800eaa165c5de80c9\":\"054e33d58ea535df5e92b67239df2623d4d5df1b0152b92800eaa165c5de80c9\",\"artifact:3275:0c2b2843b450cdbbc2cf878029b91e4538b4c997530ac42b37d8ddd938cfe1a3\":\"0c2b2843b450cdbbc2cf878029b91e4538b4c997530ac42b37d8ddd938cfe1a3\",\"artifact:3275:0fbad90569c37dc64e21132362d82522de63275f609b9638865232f5b78c2eb5\":\"0fbad90569c37dc64e21132362d82522de63275f609b9638865232f5b78c2eb5\",\"artifact:3275:2d117c86621c1b8b9f108029ebc055d5d893cd175fa0f35e2dcd690cc27b0d7a\":\"2d117c86621c1b8b9f108029ebc055d5d893cd175fa0f35e2dcd690cc27b0d7a\",\"artifact:3275:b7c3088644cc403bd503ab1c9c2467e7fbc598de3787b91fa13fbde8dc242098\":\"b7c3088644cc403bd503ab1c9c2467e7fbc598de3787b91fa13fbde8dc242098\"},\"sha256\":\"9c07183091ac952792118b6ab5d2e7874bc1399e8f513fd8a6a5601a01ced4f5\"},\"targets_sha256\":\"b975e91f005e279621dcdaafa92a1369a7129de37d0a225f6a815f014a3b9209\"}\nDeclared non-witness scopes with their existing authority: []\nConfigured areas: [{\"id\":\"self-match\",\"title\":\"Self match: a 32-character hex string equal to its own MD5\",\"lane\":\"self-match\",\"topic_ids\":[\"self-match.methods\",\"self-match.study-1\",\"self-match.study-2\",\"self-match.study-3\"],\"domain_md\":\"The candidate is exactly 32 lowercase ASCII characters from `0123456789abcdef`, in any order, repeats allowed. Its **32 literal ASCII bytes** are hashed; it is not decoded as hex. The score is the length of the common prefix of the candidate and its digest, 0 to 32, stopping at the first mismatch: later matches do not count. The final goal is a candidate equal to its own digest (a fixed point). None is known, and none is proven to exist: a random-map heuristic gives roughly a 63% chance that one exists.\\n\\nSubmit `candidate`. Fixture: `54db1011d76dc70a0a9df3ff3e0b390f` has digest `54db1011d76d137956603122ad86d762`, score 12. Distinguish input records, throughput, restricted facts and attack methods; compare identical domains, baselines, compute and luck.\\nThe candidate is exactly 32 lowercase ASCII characters from `0123456789abcdef`, in any order, repeats allowed. Its **32 literal ASCII bytes** are hashed; it is not decoded as hex. The score is the length of the common prefix of the candidate and its digest, 0 to 32, stopping at the first mismatch: later matches do not count. The final goal is a candidate equal to its own digest (a fixed point). None is known, and none is proven to exist: a random-map heuristic gives roughly a 63% chance that one exists.\\n\\nSubmit `candidate`. Fixture: `54db1011d76dc70a0a9df3ff3e0b390f` has digest `54db1011d76d137956603122ad86d762`, score 12. Full 64-step MD5, RFC IV, exact padding; reductions or different IVs are separate scopes. Negative evidence closes only its tested method and scope.\"},{\"id\":\"all-zeros\",\"title\":\"All zeros: an input of at most 1 KiB whose MD5 is 32 zeros\",\"lane\":\"all-zeros\",\"topic_ids\":[\"all-zeros.methods\",\"all-zeros.study-1\",\"all-zeros.study-2\",\"all-zeros.study-3\"],\"domain_md\":\"The input is any byte string of 0 to 1,024 bytes, inclusive, sent as `input_hex`: strict lowercase, even-length hex, decoded once (`616263` is the three bytes `abc`; the empty string is zero bytes). Arbitrary binary is allowed. The score is the number of zero hex characters at the start of the digest, 0 to 32, stopping at the first nonzero character. The final goal is the digest `00000000000000000000000000000000`. No such input is known.\\n\\nSubmit `input_hex`. Fixture: the 32 ASCII bytes `b100d474eb100d60d042e863c1e0adee` (hex `6231303064343734656231303064363064303432653836336331653061646565`) have digest `00000000000008d71ef80eb3849237d2`, score 13. Distinguish input records, throughput, restricted facts and attack methods; compare identical domains, baselines, compute and luck.\\nThe input is any byte string of 0 to 1,024 bytes, inclusive, sent as `input_hex`: strict lowercase, even-length hex, decoded once (`616263` is the three bytes `abc`; the empty string is zero bytes). Arbitrary binary is allowed. The score is the number of zero hex characters at the start of the digest, 0 to 32, stopping at the first nonzero character. The final goal is the digest `00000000000000000000000000000000`. No such input is known.\\n\\nSubmit `input_hex`. Fixture: the 32 ASCII bytes `b100d474eb100d60d042e863c1e0adee` (hex `6231303064343734656231303064363064303432653836336331653061646565`) have digest `00000000000008d71ef80eb3849237d2`, score 13. Full 64-step MD5, RFC IV, exact padding; reductions or different IVs are separate scopes. Negative evidence closes only its tested method and scope.\"},{\"id\":\"smallest-collision\",\"title\":\"Smallest collision: two different inputs with the same full MD5, fewest total bytes\",\"lane\":\"smallest-collision\",\"topic_ids\":[\"smallest-collision.methods\",\"smallest-collision.study-1\",\"smallest-collision.study-2\",\"smallest-collision.study-3\"],\"domain_md\":\"Inputs `a_hex` and `b_hex` are arbitrary byte strings of 0 to 1,024 bytes each, with the same strict hex transport as All zeros. They must differ, and **all 128 digest bits** must match: there is no partial score. The pair is unordered (swapping is a duplicate), unequal lengths and an empty member are allowed. Lower total bytes is better; an equal total is a tie and the earlier receipt keeps the record. The 128-byte reference is not a proven minimum: by counting, some pair with both members at most 16 bytes must collide, but that argument finds no pair.\\n\\nSubmit `a_hex` and `b_hex`. Fixture: Marc Stevens' 64-byte single-block pair, digest `008ee33a9d58b51cfeb425b0959121c9`, 64 + 64 = 128 bytes. Distinguish input records, throughput, restricted facts and attack methods; compare identical domains, baselines, compute and luck.\\nInputs `a_hex` and `b_hex` are arbitrary byte strings of 0 to 1,024 bytes each, with the same strict hex transport as All zeros. They must differ, and **all 128 digest bits** must match: there is no partial score. The pair is unordered (swapping is a duplicate), unequal lengths and an empty member are allowed. Lower total bytes is better; an equal total is a tie and the earlier receipt keeps the record. The 128-byte reference is not a proven minimum: by counting, some pair with both members at most 16 bytes must collide, but that argument finds no pair.\\n\\nSubmit `a_hex` and `b_hex`. Fixture: Marc Stevens' 64-byte single-block pair, digest `008ee33a9d58b51cfeb425b0959121c9`, 64 + 64 = 128 bytes. Full 64-step MD5, RFC IV, exact padding; reductions or different IVs are separate scopes. Negative evidence closes only its tested method and scope.\"}]\n\nFor each area return applicability_assessment:{source_return_id:3275,input_sha256:\"850a21049c5f45a81e180878dd62c62a88d11d50724c54ddb1f7cd8b8219a62f\",entries:[{target_id,decision:\"applicable|inapplicable|unresolved\",scope_keys:[<declared source keys; [] when the accepted report has no typed scope>],evidence_md,assumptions_md}]}. Cite source evidence and explain the possible bridge or mismatch with each area's exact domain. Missing scope authority is an unresolved validation condition, not a demand for another full review or experiment. Applicability remains provisional unless every referenced scope satisfies the existing exact scientific authority rules; only validated entries can be transferred automatically. Preserve the claim's original scope; an extension is unresolved until ordinary scientific review. An unresolved entry is a recorded gap, not an instruction for a new experiment. Submit no new scientific claims, artifacts, review request or route changes in this administrative screening. Record existing evidence even when every area is inapplicable. GET <project>/research-applicability is the live index; OUTCOMES document integration is separate.","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":[],"route_dependents":[],"research_url":null,"transcript_url":"/projects/md5/return/3489/transcript","files":[],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"report_sha256":"9750663adca7e292bc7949861ce0e745dda1cd5d6cbf4cc5f018269ce2cc0815","next_step_sha256":null,"research_authority":{"witness_status":null,"research_status":"recorded","scopes":[]},"research_links":[],"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}