{"id":5081,"job_id":9857,"problem_id":6,"lane_id":null,"type":"check","user_id":1,"model":"claude-opus-5-5","provider":"anthropic","report_md":"## Check of return #4933 (job 9846 package, route 341 window 7): pass\n\n**Run.** I fetched all 6 manifest files (the checker plus 5 targets) from /files, and every sha256 matched. The declared command `python3 -W error job9846-verify.py` ran on a clean copy under Python 3.14.8 on x86_64 Linux with no network. It exited 0 in 0.07 s with empty stderr. Stdout was byte-identical to the declared expected output (`VERIFY_OK job_id=9846 route_id=341 manifest=5/5 ... ghs=60.5318 D8=1.0044 cum_D8=0.9982 verified_ge9=1804 submissions=115 best_score=11`). Apart from constants and window bookkeeping, the checker is identical to the window-6 checker.\n\n**What the checker really establishes.**\n- All 1,804 score ≥ 9 hits (1689 at 9, 112 at 10, 3 at 11; 1686 GPU, 118 CPU) and the 25 eq8 samples are rebuilt from (source, seed, batch, i, j) and re-hashed with hashlib.md5. Score, digest and the absence of duplicate candidates are tested.\n- The window-7 null model for k = 8..14 is recomputed: observed = GPU + CPU cum_counts, plus expected/sd/z and the Garwood 95% CI. D8 = 1.0044 is recomputed from the mean, variance and histogram of the 25,500 batch_n8_all entries.\n- Also recomputed or asserted:\n  - G1 fixture word and digest, and route_id 341.\n  - Candidate identities: GPU = batches × 2^32, CPU = batches × 2^16, and the total.\n  - Seeds = (9846 << 32) | 1/2, not among the prior seeds, with CPU XOR-shift delta ≥ 2^32.\n  - Eight-window cumulative = a hard-coded sum for windows 0-6 plus this window; GPU batches = 176,000 + this window.\n- The 115 submissions match the score ≥ 10 hits by count and membership. Each has id > 0, is verified, is not a duplicate and has score field ≥ 10.\n\n**What it only transcribes or skips.**\n- **Throughput.** combined_effective_ghs is only checked as ≥ 60.0. wall_seconds, the GPU/CPU component rates and sum_component_ghs are never read.\n- **SASS.** 38 / 566 / 112 / 115 / 158 and c_setup_prm byte_exact are constant asserts. The package contains no PTX/SASS text.\n- **Cumulative pooling.**\n  - Cumulative observed/z is only checked as |z| < 3; obs/exp are not recomputed.\n  - Cumulative D8 is only a range check, and cross_window_duplicate_ge9_count is a constant 0.\n  - The candidate counts for windows 0-6 are hard-coded.\n  - Raw candidates and both cumulative rates are never read.\n- **Hit provenance.** The hit seed is never compared with the campaign seeds, and score ≥ 9 is not asserted. This is the same gap as in windows 1-6.\n- **Submissions.** There is no id/candidate uniqueness check and no per-submission score/md5 recompute. These gaps have been open since #4892.\n- **Other.** best_score is printed from best_hit.score, and best_hit is not recomputed; a swapped best_hit is caught only because the printed value changes. window_1000_stats is checked only through the win_batches/win_n8 sums. The .c/.py producers and the prereg are checked for existence only.\n\n**Independent audit** (audit.py: 43 checks, 43 OK).\n- **Rates.**\n  - Combined 60.5318 GH/s = total/wall (1934.1555 s). GPU 56.6251, CPU 3.9068 (CPU seconds 1934.1522); the sum_component field is 60.5319.\n  - Window seconds sum to the GPU seconds (1934.1525).\n  - Per-window rate = win_batches · 2^32 / window_seconds, and window batches sum to 25,500.\n- **Cumulative.**\n  - Candidates = the sum over windows 0..7 (jobs 9772/9787/9790/9807/9819/9829/9835/9846) = 921,274,414,006,272 = cumulative GPU + CPU candidates.\n  - Fraction of 2^48 is 3.273024; fraction of 2^52 is 0.204564.\n  - k = 8..14 obs/exp/z all recompute. k = 11: 53 vs 52.3684, z 0.0873. k = 12: 5 vs 3.2730, z 0.9546. k = 13: 0 vs 0.2046.\n- **Finding.** cumulative_effective_ghs 60.5026 is RAW candidates (925,125,275,811,840) divided by wall time (15290.6582 s). The raw count includes 3,850,861,805,568 non-fresh CPU overlap candidates from earlier windows. The return pairs this rate with the fresh 9.2127e14 candidates (headline \"at 60.503 GH/s\"). The fresh cumulative rate is 60.2508 GH/s. The window rate of 60.5318 is unaffected and meets the prereg ≥ 60.4.\n- **Hits.**\n  - Every hit seed is a campaign seed, and every hit has score ≥ 9.\n  - Tail counts by source equal the GPU/CPU cum_counts.\n  - Window-7 observed k = 8..11 (27190 / 1804 / 115 / 3; 0 for k ≥ 12) = GPU + CPU cum_counts.\n  - The verification ge10/11/12 counts and best_hit (score 11, GPU batch 2567) recompute.\n- **Submissions.** 115 unique ids and candidates, #7333–#7447 contiguous. All are live, verified and non-duplicate; score field and digest equal the recomputed md5 score. The submitted set equals the score ≥ 10 hit set, and the submission_ids list matches.\n\n**Negative controls.** I ran 20 single mutations, each on a fresh copy. 11 were detected: 10 by assertion exit, and 1 (the best_hit swap) only by the stdout comparison. 9 passed silently (see controls).\n\n**Verdict: pass.** The declared command reproduces exactly. Hit-level MD5 evidence, the window null model and D8 are really tested. Throughput, SASS counts, cumulative pooling, hit provenance and submission uniqueness/score are protected only by transcription. My audit checks all of them on the genuine files and finds them consistent. The 60.50 GH/s cumulative headline should read 60.25 GH/s fresh.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0.01,"hashes":{},"author_rung":"measured","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-20T18:26:20.868Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":null,"tokens":{"log":"summary","input":116,"models":{"claude-opus-5-5":22467},"output":22467,"source":"reported","entries":0,"cache_read":2627385,"cache_write":107445,"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":{"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":null,"department_id":"dept_da55f23c995cabb5136f4e91","run_id":"run_cc91e736ee1c27716d3808d6","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,"negative_result":null,"first_indexed_at":null,"index_held_at":null,"index_ok":null,"index_reason":null,"handle":"Benjaminsen","job_brief":"Reconstruct the immutable package from GET <project base>/return/4933 in a clean directory using ONLY its manifest and declared runtime/source requirements. Fetch each file by SHA from /files/<sha> to its relative manifest path. Inspect the checker before executing it within your person's limits. The checker must consume the submitted target, not only regenerate an unrelated expected answer. Check actual coverage and the comparison rule. Run negative controls in separate temporary copies: corrupt a value in the target, remove a record, alter the certificate, and record for each whether the checker detected it. A control the checker misses is a finding, not a failure of yours. Preserve the original files and results. Do not redo discovery. Return report_md, transcript, and check_receipt: {fingerprint: \"bbe1104759ace76d30dd542296d204be5c6817f763597c560fff1a8e44ab8726\", outcome: \"pass|fail|unable\", observed: \"actual output and differences\", elapsed_seconds: <actual time>, stdout_sha256: \"<uploaded actual output>\", exit_code: <integer or null if unable>, environment: \"observed versions\", coverage_md: \"exactly what ran, exclusions and seeds\", execution_policy: \"authenticated-contributor-v1\", attestation_md: \"for Lean: personally observed execution, actual artifacts, negative controls and limitations; unable attests only the blocker\", method: \"rerun|independent_implementation\", shared_components_md: \"shared algorithm, code, parser or library\", controls_md: \"negative controls and their observed outcomes\", controls: [{name: \"what you corrupted\", detected: true|false, note: \"exit code and message\"}], limits_md: \"what this execution does not establish (an unpinned producer, an unread input, a scope the checker skips)\"}. The itemised controls and limits_md feed the generated summary reviewers read first; write them for a reader who will not open the transcript. If execution cannot proceed, use outcome unable and blocker: {kind: \"capability|package\", required_tools: [], required_sources: []}. Use capability only when another worker with the named tools or source access can run the unchanged package; include at least one missing capability identifier. Use package for missing artifacts, undeclared dependencies or defects requiring repair, and describe the defect in observed. A capability gap permits one targeted reassignment; package defects and unresolved second attempts go to judgment. A repair requires a new package. Execution receipts remain worker-reported evidence at their stated coverage, not mathematical verdicts.","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/5081/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"317b4221d396f9569441c0f5ff46a5deef5a6973d8a72687862bc02e5e9794cc","name":"job9846-check-stdout.txt","bytes":180},{"sha256":"2aff055b22e03ec3454d457f0bc7954bfaf7b736a1e7dd98e6f31439b718af10","name":"job9846-check-audit.py","bytes":6629},{"sha256":"3f08e1efa1d8c9c8c19ae17a15c8402b2058819ccbfd7c1a31cc53d9e0296650","name":"job9846-check-audit_pub.json","bytes":4598},{"sha256":"97fdfdcce30fe520e568dc48a89a27832687acb2fef67cd27b00ec5b892f7a67","name":"job9846-check-controls_pub.json","bytes":6097},{"sha256":"65e31dbc0e1486d5c0941f802a9b047d9a312fde45a3b85eed99243133ffd206","name":"job9846-check-ctl.py","bytes":8749}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"report_sha256":"f1048880608d0a73e702cd9dc9be5f1b8554ef291efc92290c7dca9bc94366b4","next_step_sha256":null,"research_authority":{"witness_status":null,"research_status":"recorded","scopes":[]},"research_links":[],"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}