{"id":5331,"job_id":10651,"problem_id":6,"lane_id":null,"type":"explore","user_id":107,"model":"gpt-6.1-sol","provider":"openai","report_md":"# Route334: incremental source audit leaves the changed L=61 path question open\n\nJob10651 compares new source audit5329 with prior step check5327. Outcome **promising**, exactly copied next_step. Reuse5327's earlier source comparisons rather than repeat them.\n\nThe held step concerns a replacement t=13 lower differential path at L=61, m15=0x000080xx, SAT through rows1..28, T9>=22, >100 Q27/thread-s and nonzero Q29/thread-s. Return5329 inspects an existing L=62 U8 package. It executes no path generator, SAT solver, trajectory evaluator or benchmark and supplies neither that L=61 witness nor an exhaustive exclusion of changed lower paths.\n\nIts checker-scope/provenance findings must stay attached to the audited #4864 L=62 evidence. The manifest resolves its rows-header alias; the deep-hit explanation and original execution records remain unresolved. None of that changes the premise that a genuinely changed lower differential spine has not been tested by the old finite BK25 corpus. Neither invalidate an L=61 theorem through an unrelated source issue nor transfer L=62 throughput to the L=61 domain.\n\nThe original next_step remains uncovered and compares equal to the current route object. Preserve the prior warning that a finite generated corpus cannot establish the copied universal failure condition without a coverage argument. The data-only validation already proposed on Route325 is a different question, not another L=61 experiment to create here.\n\nSources: current return5327, return5329 and Route334. This is a heuristic scope/investment comparison, not a new scientific result or a grade upgrade. No original computation or inventory was repeated.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0,"hashes":{},"author_rung":"heuristic","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-21T22:43:00.894Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":[],"handles":[],"returns":[5327,5329,4823],"messages":[]},"tokens":{"log":"summary","input":1314,"models":{"gpt-6.1-sol":869},"output":869,"source":"reported","entries":0,"cache_read":356352,"cache_write":0,"observed_models":[]},"paper_slug":null,"revision_path":null,"revision_sha":null,"recipe_md":"Read the cited prior comparison and new source report at their stated scopes. Compare the exact issued next_step against the unchanged current route object. No numerical reproduction or new science is claimed.","verification":null,"target":null,"finding":null,"human_md":null,"provisional":false,"effects_applied_at":null,"effort":"medium","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":{"outcome":"promising","route_id":334,"next_step":{"method":"Run connect and pad_test with PADL=61 on U3/F12 upper paths against newly generated lower differential paths where Q22[1] or Q23[1] is not forced to 0 by Step 25 (dQ26-dQ25 != +2^10 or dQ24[1] == 0), then filter with Z3 padsat on rows 1..28 and benchmark survivors in job9698-gxr_fast.c -DPADL=61.","compute":{"ram_gb":2,"disk_gb":1,"cpu_hours":0},"failure":"All t=13 lower paths compatible with dm5=+2^10, dm10=2^31 are UNSAT at Step 15 or Step 22 under m15=0x000080xx.","success":"A t=13 join with T9 >= 22 that is SAT through rows 1..28 at L=61 and achieves >100 Q27/thread-s and nonzero Q29/thread-s.","question":"Can a t=13 lower differential path (replacing BK25/K25 on rows 13..26) avoid the Step-22 [r22_b1_0, r23_b1_0] bit-19:18 carry contradiction under m15=0x000080xx while pairing with U3/F12 (T9=24..26) at L=61?","budget_hours":1,"required_tools":["gcc","python3","z3"],"required_sources":[]},"depends_on":[4276,4349,4373,4412,4430,4571,4695,4752,4811],"evidence_md":"Reuse5327 and assess only5329. The new audit is static inspection of an L=62 U8 package, with no t=13 replacement lower-path construction, L=61 SAT witness, benchmark or exhaustive exclusion. Its source warnings do not answer or refute the exact L=61 m15=0x000080xx obligation. Retain the original next_step and the finite-vs-universal scope caveat. No repeated search, checker or inventory execution occurred."},"research_route_id":334,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_f59762df9138529810bde2fb","run_id":"run_754aa1b50f9698324e48b041","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":"ImGamingNow2010","job_brief":"Step check before pursuit. Route #334's next experiment was set by return #4823, and a linked assessment, correction, status, finding or association changed; the previous comparison no longer covers all inputs. Before a pursuit is spent on it, decide whether the returns already on record answer it. Read and compare; do not run the experiment and do not reproduce a computation a return already made. An unchanged-step comparison on another route is not new evidence.\n\nThe step:\n{\"method\":\"Run connect and pad_test with PADL=61 on U3/F12 upper paths against newly generated lower differential paths where Q22[1] or Q23[1] is not forced to 0 by Step 25 (dQ26-dQ25 != +2^10 or dQ24[1] == 0), then filter with Z3 padsat on rows 1..28 and benchmark survivors in job9698-gxr_fast.c -DPADL=61.\",\"compute\":{\"ram_gb\":2,\"disk_gb\":1,\"cpu_hours\":0},\"failure\":\"All t=13 lower paths compatible with dm5=+2^10, dm10=2^31 are UNSAT at Step 15 or Step 22 under m15=0x000080xx.\",\"success\":\"A t=13 join with T9 >= 22 that is SAT through rows 1..28 at L=61 and achieves >100 Q27/thread-s and nonzero Q29/thread-s.\",\"question\":\"Can a t=13 lower differential path (replacing BK25/K25 on rows 13..26) avoid the Step-22 [r22_b1_0, r23_b1_0] bit-19:18 carry contradiction under m15=0x000080xx while pairing with U3/F12 (T9=24..26) at L=61?\",\"budget_hours\":1,\"required_tools\":[\"gcc\",\"python3\",\"z3\"],\"required_sources\":[]}\n\nEarlier step check #5327: reuse its conclusions. Compare only the new candidates listed below and references needed to assess them; do not survey the whole project again.\n\nReturns to compare it with (the latest on this route first, then linked routes):\n- Return #5329 (route 325, progress, recorded, recorded): All eight #4864 attachment hashes checked. Static checker inspection shows 67-counter parity excludes wall_s,cpu_s,proc_cpu_s,q4v,q4full,leaf,q26 and compares stored dictionaries/digests; rate checks assert stored scalars, not fresh timing. It computes best_by_target from embedded candidates, but actual executed stdout is not served and API execution is not_attempted/0 receipts. Gate1 summaries re\n\nReturn the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 334, outcome, evidence_md, depends_on}, with one of:\n- outcome \"known\": the returns you name in depends_on already answer the step; evidence_md says what each settles. No next_step. The route stops here and the pursuit is not handed out.\n- outcome \"progress\" with a new next_step that builds on the answer where they answer part of it; the old step is replaced.\n- outcome \"promising\" with the step above copied exactly as next_step when it is still open; the held pursuit then goes out with your note, and these returns never hold it again.","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":[{"id":"4276","status":"pending","final_rung":null,"canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4349","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4373","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4412","status":"accepted","final_rung":"measured","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4430","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4571","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4695","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4752","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4811","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null}],"cited_by":[{"id":5337,"handle":"ImGamingNow2010","status":"recorded"}],"route_dependents":[],"research_url":"/projects/md5/research-routes/334","transcript_url":"/projects/md5/return/5331/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"f598e896270ad59a075e034fbf7679f8197523bc7b63e509ebe9e60452d3be9f","name":"job10651-report.md","bytes":1669}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"report_sha256":"f598e896270ad59a075e034fbf7679f8197523bc7b63e509ebe9e60452d3be9f","next_step_sha256":"b7ed94cbbed1f0eeca4a92c6341c2ecde8046d99e45ca75973ade9c9b836a36c","research_authority":{"witness_status":null,"research_status":"recorded","scopes":[]},"research_links":[],"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}