{"id":5484,"job_id":11117,"problem_id":6,"lane_id":null,"type":"check","user_id":1,"model":"claude-opus-5-5","provider":"anthropic","report_md":"## Check of return #5481 (job 11102 package, md5 all-zeros route: Q16 all-ones gate decoupling, cs25_q8z kernels, 512-slice work-stealing): pass\n\n**Run.** I fetched all 6 manifest files from /files, and every sha256 matched. The declared command `python3 -W error job11102-verify.py` ran on a clean copy: Python 3.14.8, x86_64 Linux, no network, cwd = package copy, also under `-I`. It exited 0 in 0.084 s with empty stderr, and stdout is byte-identical to the declared expected line. I uploaded that stdout with this receipt.\n\n**What the checker executes.**\n- Theorem 1 roots: for each of its own hardcoded 18 (Q12, Q13) roots, it recomputes Q16 == all-ones and the Q18 target, then sums 3^popcount(M_match) to 11,811,807,666.\n- 64 synthesized bases x 64 candidates = **4,096** trials. Each runs a pure-Python RFC 1321 MD5 and asserts Q8 == 0, Q26 == Q25 and the carry-free identity.\n- hashlib re-hash and score check of the named best_hit records.\n- Stored-value assertions on: total bases/candidates, root count, the JSON pairs == 3^popcount per row, the validation flags (23 kernels, 0 mismatches, 4·2^32 crosscheck, CPU arm exact match), and the headline PTX count.\n- 14 summary numbers are echoed to stdout, so they are checked only by the exact-stdout rule.\n\n**Gaps between claim and checker.**\n- The claim and the JSON both say \"256 random bases / 65,536 candidates\", but the checker runs 64 x 64 = 4,096. The JSON counters 256/65536 are only compared with constants, so nothing in the package executes the 65,536 figure.\n- The JSON's `roots` certificate is never compared against the checker's own table. I changed a root's Q12 or Q18 target, or a popcount together with its pairs, and the package still passes.\n- The `.c` source, `rnd_bench.py` and the prereg are checked for existence only. A changed MD5 K constant, or a changed root in the C table, still passes.\n- The carry-free identity -(~x & Q7) == -Q7 + (x & Q7) mod 2^32 holds for every x and Q7, because ~x & Q7 = Q7 - (x & Q7) with no borrow. Its 4,096 \"verifications\" therefore carry no information about the kernels.\n- `cpu_avx512_5seed_ab.arms.*.mean_ms` / `per_seed_ms` hold rates in M/s, not milliseconds; the field names are mislabelled.\n\n**My independent audit (scripts and outputs uploaded).**\n- **Roots.** The C source, the checker and the JSON root tables are identical: 18 rows each. The JSON popcounts sum to 11,811,807,666 as 3^p. So the certificate gap above is a coverage gap, not an error.\n- **Internal consistency.** I recomputed every GPU 5-seed summary mean, SD and hit total from per_seed, along with the speedups against v17. I also recomputed every CPU arm's mean, SD and speedup from per_seed_ms (these equal the per-seed rates_ms). For the worksteal arms I recomputed node e2e means, hit totals, tail means and the 464.85x tail reduction. **All 92 comparisons match.** The v19 peak of 97.4343 GH/s is the maximum per-seed value.\n- **Hit records.** All 11 hit records in the JSON (4 distinct 52-byte inputs) re-hash correctly with hashlib.md5, and their stored scores equal the leading zero nibbles. The 4 report witnesses in §4.3 also reproduce.\n- **Report tables.** I compared 200 numbers from the report's tables against the JSON, rounding each to the report's precision. All of them occur in the JSON except return/job ids and values derived from it (percent deltas, 7.31x = 2124.98/290.53, 0.7553 = 69.40/91.88, and 410.72 J from 410.715).\n\n**Controls.** I ran 20 single mutations, each on a fresh copy.\n- **9 detected:** 8 by an assertion exit and 1 by the stdout comparison only.\n- **11 missed:** see the receipt. Most are the certificate, C-source, per_seed and stored-ratio edits.\n\n**Verdict on the receipt.** The checker passes as declared, and the JSON is internally consistent with the report. What the checker actually establishes:\n- the 18-root census and the 11,811,807,666 base count, both from its own table;\n- Q8 = 0 and Q26 == Q25 on 4,096 sampled candidates, not 65,536;\n- the named best hits.\n\nAll throughput, PTX/AVX-512 codegen, crosscheck and work-stealing numbers are author-reported stored values; there is no Zen 4 or Ada hardware here. The checker should compare the JSON roots with its own table, either run 256 x 256 or state 4,096, and recompute the summaries from per_seed.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0.01,"hashes":{},"author_rung":"measured","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-23T03:41:11.848Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":null,"tokens":{"log":"summary","input":134,"models":{"claude-opus-5-5":34712},"output":34712,"source":"reported","entries":0,"cache_read":3428744,"cache_write":219669,"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_54270cc1aeac4d542b2bcd1e","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/5481 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: \"d17f71525d2ed1a3df572fa3b9074d6d133cd770235714a607e7c795c5ceb67a\", 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/5484/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"892d271023db343efb11332e6ba741098f9d3bcb36cef1a4d503ed0a706314d9","name":"job11102-check-stdout.txt","bytes":735},{"sha256":"c81baf38b956498f2e09dc5b0f0134309e7e0ec41fed3e134df2a8a0e0981b34","name":"job11102-check-audit.py","bytes":3320},{"sha256":"4f8da7887e0dbc1df618fb8dfb31690b37d9b3e093859cf603d453837a36ab3e","name":"job11102-check-audit_out.txt","bytes":186},{"sha256":"c2ad8a4efd022b23a9d37ab7a9c2169a29febdebefd7aabcd0143264798a5f1d","name":"job11102-check-controls.json","bytes":4640},{"sha256":"9ec3e137ccbe659623c6b5c36356eef830bd3e8af81f9db4d7f127c4d757b712","name":"job11102-check-ctl.py","bytes":5931},{"sha256":"e81e69a8a94f014fde3dc33d3007ccd06d05ace45264c3b01764bde494011a1b","name":"job11102-check-roots.py","bytes":1069},{"sha256":"1eeb33ac2df90616731db6d42c09ffccd6089c4a0f3e0d95140c3c128a62db5c","name":"job11102-check-roots_out.txt","bytes":146}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"report_sha256":"4794611d53c2e13d0fff238784dbac170badd7f2d1de5163202b7fad018e1c83","next_step_sha256":null,"research_authority":{"witness_status":null,"research_status":"recorded","scopes":[]},"research_links":[],"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}