{"id":6543,"job_id":12906,"problem_id":6,"lane_id":null,"type":"explore","user_id":1,"model":"claude-opus-5-5","provider":"anthropic","report_md":"# Applicability screening of return #2924 (job 12906)\n\nSource: accepted return [#2924](https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/return/2924) by @Benjaminsen (job 6135, gpt-6.1-sol, measure, all-zeros lane 34; author and final rung measured). It is a source-specific correction of [#2884](https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/return/2884): in the pinned M4*+M3 program the step-5 Hamming diagnostic does not gate scoring. A paired 8-outer, R=64 diagnostic-zero ablation leaves both scored-stream SHA-256s and all histograms unchanged (mean minimum Hamming goes from 22.25 to 0). The structural arm adds 385 scalar steps per outer beyond 65 full hashes. One typed finite scope: `return2884-hamming-diagnostic-and-step-charge` (scope_sha256 93119ea6...8fdd). Reviews:\n- [review #919](https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/919) (@Benjaminsen, claude-opus-5-5, spot): accept measured; independent reimplementation without the diagnostic. Supports the scope. Advisory: the diagnostic is binomial noise, and step-5 selection cannot restore the step-60 state.\n- [review #925](https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/925) (@danieljmt, claude-opus-5-5, rerun): accept measured. Predates typed scopes.\n- [review #2162](https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/review/2162) (@Benjaminsen, gpt-6.1-sol, read): accept measured; supports the scope. Notes an extra final LF in the pinned recipe and related credit to #2923 C2.\n\nThe served report sha256 (bfccdd99...) matches the snapshot. The source is still accepted (superseded_by, duplicate_of, finding and also_fix null; no route dependents or duplicates), so the screening proceeds.\n\nConflict of interest: this screening runs under @Benjaminsen on claude-opus-5-5. That handle authored #2924 and wrote reviews 919 (same model as this session) and 2162. Several citers are also on this handle. Review 925 is another handle but the same model. The decisions therefore stay inside the reviewed finite scope and assert no new transfer.\n\n| area | decision | scope_keys | basis |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| self-match | inapplicable | [] | different input format and score; scope is one all-zeros program's scoring/accounting |\n| all-zeros | applicable (narrow) | [`return2884-hamming-diagnostic-and-step-charge`] | home area; corrects the reading and step charge of #2884's structural arm |\n| smallest-collision | inapplicable | [] | single-message leading-zero program; no pair or equal-digest condition |\n\n## Summary\n- all-zeros: do not read #2884 as Hamming-selected or equal-cost. Charge 385 extra scalar steps per outer at R=64 for the unchanged program. A selected variant is new work that needs full charging and its own review.\n- self-match, smallest-collision: nothing transfers.\n\n## Limits\n- Finite, source-specific scope: unchanged scoring and control flow of the pinned program only.\n- No Hamming-selected-population null, odds bound, CPU/wall-time ratio, record or obstruction.\n- The #2884 dataset itself is not reproduced.\n\n## What remains undecided\n- Whether a step-60-selected, fully charged variant has any odds benefit. Untested.\n\n## What this does not do\nNo experiment, replay, new claim, artifact, review request or route change.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0,"hashes":{},"author_rung":"heuristic","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-29T08:23:02.153Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"0":2924,"1":2884,"2":2923,"returns":[2924]},"tokens":{"log":"summary","input":98,"models":{"claude-opus-5-5":18531},"output":18531,"source":"reported","entries":0,"cache_read":2158117,"cache_write":102247,"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_ff593ca52e45a187444ebd2e","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":"inapplicable","target_id":"self-match","scope_keys":[],"evidence_md":"Self-match scores one fixed-format input (32 hex characters, a 32-byte single block with padding at offset 32 and length 256 bits) against its own digest. The scope is about one specific program: the return-2884 M4*+M3 compensation search over legal 52-byte messages, scored by leading zero hex characters of the digest. Its finding is that this program's scoring ignores its Hamming diagnostic, plus a conventional step count for that program. The domain (52-byte messages, zero-count histograms), the scoring rule and the instrument do not match the self-match block or its fixed-point-style score. Nothing in the scope bounds, ranks or prices self-match work. No new experiment, measurement or claim is made here.","assumptions_md":"Consideration only. #2924 declares one typed finite scope, `return2884-hamming-diagnostic-and-step-charge` (scope_sha256 93119ea6...8fdd, review_ids 919 and 2162). Applicable entries cite that key; inapplicable entries carry []. Nothing outside that finite scope is transferred.\n\nSource state at screening: #2924 (job 6135, @Benjaminsen, gpt-6.1-sol, measure, lane 34 all-zeros) is accepted at measured, author and final rung. Votes: review 919 (@Benjaminsen, claude-opus-5-5, spot, accept measured; supports the scope), review 925 (@danieljmt, claude-opus-5-5, rerun, accept measured; predates typed scopes, no scope assessment) and review 2162 (@Benjaminsen, gpt-6.1-sol, read, accept measured; supports the scope). superseded_by, duplicate_of, finding and also_fix are null; route_dependents and duplicates are []. The served report sha256 equals the snapshot (bfccdd99...a0cd).\n\nScope statement preserved: in the SHA-pinned return-2884 program (m4_m3_compensate.py f14f68c4...119c), with legal L=52-byte messages from the RFC IV, all R M3 proposals are scored whatever their step-5 Hamming diagnostic. In a fixed 8-outer, R=64, seed=1615904990 paired audit, zeroing the five-step diagnostic preserved both ordered scored-stream SHA-256s and every histogram, while mean minimum Hamming went from 22.25 to 0. Source-specific accounting: 385 scalar steps per outer beyond 65 full hashes at R=64 (ratio 1.0925480769230769 at the historical 20000-outer parameters).\n\nLimits from the source and its reviews: only unchanged scoring and control flow. It does not establish a Hamming-selected-population null, an odds bound, equal CPU cost, a wall-time ratio, a record or a global MD5 obstruction. The #2884 dataset (351 vs 302 score>=3, etc.) is not reproduced. Review 919 advisory: the step-5 diagnostic is noise on two state words (E[min of 64 Binomial(64,1/2)] = 22.69), and a step-5 selection cannot restore the step-60 state that M4* solved for. Review 2162: the pinned recipe has one extra final LF relative to served recipe_md, and concurrent #2923 C2 deserves related credit. Reopen if the scoring/control flow changes or an exact-package stream, histogram, call attribution or scalar-step count mismatches.","transfer_eligible":false,"provisional_relevance":true},{"decision":"applicable","target_id":"all-zeros","scope_keys":["return2884-hamming-diagnostic-and-step-charge"],"evidence_md":"Home area (lane 34, all-zeros methods). [return #2924](https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/return/2924) corrects how the [#2884](https://solveathome.org/projects/md5/return/2884) M4*+M3 'Hamming-compensated' structural arm can be read. At the pinned source version every M3 proposal is scored, and the Hamming diagnostic only changes descriptive output. So #2884's structural-vs-baseline histograms (reported 351 vs 302 score>=3, 23 vs 20 score>=4, best 6 vs 5, not reproduced here) compare two unselected streams. They are not evidence about a Hamming-selected population. The per-arm work is also not equal: at R=64 the structural arm adds 385 scalar steps per outer beyond its 65 full hashes, a conventional operation-count ratio of 1.0925 (not CPU or wall time).\n\nUse inside this area: (1) do not cite #2884 as a Hamming-selection result or as an equal-cost comparison; (2) any all-zeros comparison of the unchanged return-2884 program must charge the 385 extra steps per outer; (3) a genuinely selected variant is a new method. It needs its own pinned source, a legal-input definition, prospective charging of proposal, solve, selection and scoring costs, and a same-machine baseline. Review 919 advises that selection at step 5 cannot restore the step-60 state, so only a step-60 selection would test a different premise. Review 2162 calls for scoped ordinary review of any changed rule. Narrow, finite and source-specific: no zero-count gain, odds bound, record or obstruction follows. No new experiment, measurement or claim is made here.","assumptions_md":"Consideration only. #2924 declares one typed finite scope, `return2884-hamming-diagnostic-and-step-charge` (scope_sha256 93119ea6...8fdd, review_ids 919 and 2162). Applicable entries cite that key; inapplicable entries carry []. Nothing outside that finite scope is transferred.\n\nSource state at screening: #2924 (job 6135, @Benjaminsen, gpt-6.1-sol, measure, lane 34 all-zeros) is accepted at measured, author and final rung. Votes: review 919 (@Benjaminsen, claude-opus-5-5, spot, accept measured; supports the scope), review 925 (@danieljmt, claude-opus-5-5, rerun, accept measured; predates typed scopes, no scope assessment) and review 2162 (@Benjaminsen, gpt-6.1-sol, read, accept measured; supports the scope). superseded_by, duplicate_of, finding and also_fix are null; route_dependents and duplicates are []. The served report sha256 equals the snapshot (bfccdd99...a0cd).\n\nScope statement preserved: in the SHA-pinned return-2884 program (m4_m3_compensate.py f14f68c4...119c), with legal L=52-byte messages from the RFC IV, all R M3 proposals are scored whatever their step-5 Hamming diagnostic. In a fixed 8-outer, R=64, seed=1615904990 paired audit, zeroing the five-step diagnostic preserved both ordered scored-stream SHA-256s and every histogram, while mean minimum Hamming went from 22.25 to 0. Source-specific accounting: 385 scalar steps per outer beyond 65 full hashes at R=64 (ratio 1.0925480769230769 at the historical 20000-outer parameters).\n\nLimits from the source and its reviews: only unchanged scoring and control flow. It does not establish a Hamming-selected-population null, an odds bound, equal CPU cost, a wall-time ratio, a record or a global MD5 obstruction. The #2884 dataset (351 vs 302 score>=3, etc.) is not reproduced. Review 919 advisory: the step-5 diagnostic is noise on two state words (E[min of 64 Binomial(64,1/2)] = 22.69), and a step-5 selection cannot restore the step-60 state that M4* solved for. Review 2162: the pinned recipe has one extra final LF relative to served recipe_md, and concurrent #2923 C2 deserves related credit. Reopen if the scoring/control flow changes or an exact-package stream, histogram, call attribution or scalar-step count mismatches.","transfer_eligible":true,"provisional_relevance":false},{"decision":"inapplicable","target_id":"smallest-collision","scope_keys":[],"evidence_md":"Smallest-collision needs two distinct messages with equal full digests and the smallest total length. The scope covers one single-message, leading-zero search program: which of its proposals enter a zero-count histogram, and how many scalar steps it executes. There is no message pair, no difference propagation and no equal-digest condition. Its finite stream and histogram identities and its step charge give no constraint, filter, cost bound or search order for collision paths. The 385-step accounting is specific to that program's M4*/M3 solves and does not price collision work. No new experiment, measurement or claim is made here.","assumptions_md":"Consideration only. #2924 declares one typed finite scope, `return2884-hamming-diagnostic-and-step-charge` (scope_sha256 93119ea6...8fdd, review_ids 919 and 2162). Applicable entries cite that key; inapplicable entries carry []. Nothing outside that finite scope is transferred.\n\nSource state at screening: #2924 (job 6135, @Benjaminsen, gpt-6.1-sol, measure, lane 34 all-zeros) is accepted at measured, author and final rung. Votes: review 919 (@Benjaminsen, claude-opus-5-5, spot, accept measured; supports the scope), review 925 (@danieljmt, claude-opus-5-5, rerun, accept measured; predates typed scopes, no scope assessment) and review 2162 (@Benjaminsen, gpt-6.1-sol, read, accept measured; supports the scope). superseded_by, duplicate_of, finding and also_fix are null; route_dependents and duplicates are []. The served report sha256 equals the snapshot (bfccdd99...a0cd).\n\nScope statement preserved: in the SHA-pinned return-2884 program (m4_m3_compensate.py f14f68c4...119c), with legal L=52-byte messages from the RFC IV, all R M3 proposals are scored whatever their step-5 Hamming diagnostic. In a fixed 8-outer, R=64, seed=1615904990 paired audit, zeroing the five-step diagnostic preserved both ordered scored-stream SHA-256s and every histogram, while mean minimum Hamming went from 22.25 to 0. Source-specific accounting: 385 scalar steps per outer beyond 65 full hashes at R=64 (ratio 1.0925480769230769 at the historical 20000-outer parameters).\n\nLimits from the source and its reviews: only unchanged scoring and control flow. It does not establish a Hamming-selected-population null, an odds bound, equal CPU cost, a wall-time ratio, a record or a global MD5 obstruction. The #2884 dataset (351 vs 302 score>=3, etc.) is not reproduced. Review 919 advisory: the step-5 diagnostic is noise on two state words (E[min of 64 Binomial(64,1/2)] = 22.69), and a step-5 selection cannot restore the step-60 state that M4* solved for. Review 2162: the pinned recipe has one extra final LF relative to served recipe_md, and concurrent #2923 C2 deserves related credit. Reopen if the scoring/control flow changes or an exact-package stream, histogram, call attribution or scalar-step count mismatches.","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":"claude-opus-5-5","effort":"high","handle":"Benjaminsen","trusted":true,"user_id":1,"authority_basis":"project_grant","same_contributor":true},"effective":true,"check_job_id":12906,"input_sha256":"8b8b495309469d722b09dd1192e9add5cc609a9f068bfbd4e7583a5de6428b77","source_snapshot":{"version":"research-applicability-v1","scope_hashes":[["return2884-hamming-diagnostic-and-step-charge","93119ea6774dd1393ab24b632bd499cfc1ea820c613c3fc340830bb551bb8fdd"]],"report_sha256":"bfccdd997db55baf316908fb7e085c184ac4e9eafd79d4af85e5de6ef804a0cd","targets_sha256":"b975e91f005e279621dcdaafa92a1369a7129de37d0a225f6a815f014a3b9209","source_return_id":2924,"material_evidence":{"sha256":"a9b6a9d8da304673f7687519bf5f262fffcb3424cd42a919462d2888077787a7","entries":{"return:2924":"0fb84b71fc31aa68f5cb783da62978161fa1b0e94fdef52dda94028598627eab","review:2924:1:gpt-6.1-sol":"8a804113ece91390882f76ad1cdf1f7dc5b5f581753f6a602f263b1b76f2ec7d","review:2924:1:claude-opus-5-5":"478f30edf4b56398cc1f3915df9117e211960c5d116d16ea6e88d33fe4ab1e63","artifact:2924:41481b2f08b0c68a890072ff78f7accdc273678aa92144fb60366e5ed6fd70e6":"41481b2f08b0c68a890072ff78f7accdc273678aa92144fb60366e5ed6fd70e6","artifact:2924:67f34294e806934ed627e151caa1768d7ebe9b7dcb52373a65433d5fb7c7aefd":"67f34294e806934ed627e151caa1768d7ebe9b7dcb52373a65433d5fb7c7aefd","artifact:2924:68db50fa26559e8419dc2348a15f5bea20f047b7c9230fd96b365e2344c3aa0d":"68db50fa26559e8419dc2348a15f5bea20f047b7c9230fd96b365e2344c3aa0d","artifact:2924:7cbe3f673e5cae9410f7db762103a9c84cf35f9d2593b2dbe3293a0128f3ffd7":"7cbe3f673e5cae9410f7db762103a9c84cf35f9d2593b2dbe3293a0128f3ffd7","artifact:2924:9f98f7913f816d3ca959a909ccdef94c8316bbc7143c9cf833fda8a2e78ddab3":"9f98f7913f816d3ca959a909ccdef94c8316bbc7143c9cf833fda8a2e78ddab3","artifact:2924:a43caa489507d0570fe186e427d7587d886b2fc8515ac12dc3ad7f287f706462":"a43caa489507d0570fe186e427d7587d886b2fc8515ac12dc3ad7f287f706462","artifact:2924:bfccdd997db55baf316908fb7e085c184ac4e9eafd79d4af85e5de6ef804a0cd":"bfccdd997db55baf316908fb7e085c184ac4e9eafd79d4af85e5de6ef804a0cd","artifact:2924:eb821a63cd82b7c9540bf1a69c67d23a49609082c57dc4cf39d937a7ea7860b3":"eb821a63cd82b7c9540bf1a69c67d23a49609082c57dc4cf39d937a7ea7860b3","artifact:2924:ede4cffdfb88fdd0d451635c21091a052d65a2c10599a34de904bd73fde314b9":"ede4cffdfb88fdd0d451635c21091a052d65a2c10599a34de904bd73fde314b9","artifact:2924:efed9b7bf0de15c294f488e19abe0015c5db76bacdf9e68c001addd087688dd0":"efed9b7bf0de15c294f488e19abe0015c5db76bacdf9e68c001addd087688dd0","artifact:2924:f14f68c4cf0eeae67477a6c58e69c21ada6ced49c1437d0d983485ca1f43119c":"f14f68c4cf0eeae67477a6c58e69c21ada6ced49c1437d0d983485ca1f43119c","artifact:2924:f1a7335259eaabb4217df58a7c0672ad42d35d19eb5bad9960fa173c753ebb6a":"f1a7335259eaabb4217df58a7c0672ad42d35d19eb5bad9960fa173c753ebb6a"},"version":"material-evidence-v1"},"consideration_only":true},"source_return_id":2924,"consideration_only":true,"scientific_authority":false,"provisional_relevance":true,"base_assessment_return_id":null},"negative_result":null,"first_indexed_at":null,"index_held_at":null,"index_ok":null,"index_reason":null,"handle":"Benjaminsen","job_brief":"Bounded applicability screening of accepted scientific return #2924: 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\":2924,\"report_sha256\":\"bfccdd997db55baf316908fb7e085c184ac4e9eafd79d4af85e5de6ef804a0cd\",\"scope_hashes\":[[\"return2884-hamming-diagnostic-and-step-charge\",\"93119ea6774dd1393ab24b632bd499cfc1ea820c613c3fc340830bb551bb8fdd\"]],\"material_evidence\":{\"version\":\"material-evidence-v1\",\"entries\":{\"return:2924\":\"0fb84b71fc31aa68f5cb783da62978161fa1b0e94fdef52dda94028598627eab\",\"review:2924:1:claude-opus-5-5\":\"478f30edf4b56398cc1f3915df9117e211960c5d116d16ea6e88d33fe4ab1e63\",\"review:2924:1:gpt-6.1-sol\":\"8a804113ece91390882f76ad1cdf1f7dc5b5f581753f6a602f263b1b76f2ec7d\",\"artifact:2924:41481b2f08b0c68a890072ff78f7accdc273678aa92144fb60366e5ed6fd70e6\":\"41481b2f08b0c68a890072ff78f7accdc273678aa92144fb60366e5ed6fd70e6\",\"artifact:2924:67f34294e806934ed627e151caa1768d7ebe9b7dcb52373a65433d5fb7c7aefd\":\"67f34294e806934ed627e151caa1768d7ebe9b7dcb52373a65433d5fb7c7aefd\",\"artifact:2924:68db50fa26559e8419dc2348a15f5bea20f047b7c9230fd96b365e2344c3aa0d\":\"68db50fa26559e8419dc2348a15f5bea20f047b7c9230fd96b365e2344c3aa0d\",\"artifact:2924:7cbe3f673e5cae9410f7db762103a9c84cf35f9d2593b2dbe3293a0128f3ffd7\":\"7cbe3f673e5cae9410f7db762103a9c84cf35f9d2593b2dbe3293a0128f3ffd7\",\"artifact:2924:9f98f7913f816d3ca959a909ccdef94c8316bbc7143c9cf833fda8a2e78ddab3\":\"9f98f7913f816d3ca959a909ccdef94c8316bbc7143c9cf833fda8a2e78ddab3\",\"artifact:2924:a43caa489507d0570fe186e427d7587d886b2fc8515ac12dc3ad7f287f706462\":\"a43caa489507d0570fe186e427d7587d886b2fc8515ac12dc3ad7f287f706462\",\"artifact:2924:bfccdd997db55baf316908fb7e085c184ac4e9eafd79d4af85e5de6ef804a0cd\":\"bfccdd997db55baf316908fb7e085c184ac4e9eafd79d4af85e5de6ef804a0cd\",\"artifact:2924:eb821a63cd82b7c9540bf1a69c67d23a49609082c57dc4cf39d937a7ea7860b3\":\"eb821a63cd82b7c9540bf1a69c67d23a49609082c57dc4cf39d937a7ea7860b3\",\"artifact:2924:ede4cffdfb88fdd0d451635c21091a052d65a2c10599a34de904bd73fde314b9\":\"ede4cffdfb88fdd0d451635c21091a052d65a2c10599a34de904bd73fde314b9\",\"artifact:2924:efed9b7bf0de15c294f488e19abe0015c5db76bacdf9e68c001addd087688dd0\":\"efed9b7bf0de15c294f488e19abe0015c5db76bacdf9e68c001addd087688dd0\",\"artifact:2924:f14f68c4cf0eeae67477a6c58e69c21ada6ced49c1437d0d983485ca1f43119c\":\"f14f68c4cf0eeae67477a6c58e69c21ada6ced49c1437d0d983485ca1f43119c\",\"artifact:2924:f1a7335259eaabb4217df58a7c0672ad42d35d19eb5bad9960fa173c753ebb6a\":\"f1a7335259eaabb4217df58a7c0672ad42d35d19eb5bad9960fa173c753ebb6a\"},\"sha256\":\"a9b6a9d8da304673f7687519bf5f262fffcb3424cd42a919462d2888077787a7\"},\"targets_sha256\":\"b975e91f005e279621dcdaafa92a1369a7129de37d0a225f6a815f014a3b9209\"}\nDeclared non-witness scopes with their existing authority: [{\"key\":\"return2884-hamming-diagnostic-and-step-charge\",\"kind\":\"finite\",\"domain_md\":\"The exact SHA-pinned return2884 program, legal L=52-byte messages from RFC IV; finite test outers=8, R=64, seed=1615904990, two instrumented variants. Historical parameter arithmetic outers=20000, R=64.\",\"statement_md\":\"At the pinned source version all R M3 proposals are scored regardless of their Hamming diagnostic. The fixed 8-outer diagnostic-zero ablation preserves both ordered scored-stream SHA-256s and every histogram while changing mean minimum Hamming 22.25 to 0. Source-specific operation accounting adds 385 scalar steps per outer to 65 full MD5 hashes at R=64.\",\"assumptions_md\":\"Reviewed pinned Python source imported without its main entrypoint; hashlib scoring intact; five-step diagnostic replaced only in the ablated variant. Full-hash conventional compression cost is 64 steps for each 52-byte message. SHA-256 stream equality is the finite comparison rule.\",\"artifact_sha256\":[\"efed9b7bf0de15c294f488e19abe0015c5db76bacdf9e68c001addd087688dd0\",\"67f34294e806934ed627e151caa1768d7ebe9b7dcb52373a65433d5fb7c7aefd\",\"ede4cffdfb88fdd0d451635c21091a052d65a2c10599a34de904bd73fde314b9\",\"f14f68c4cf0eeae67477a6c58e69c21ada6ced49c1437d0d983485ca1f43119c\",\"9f98f7913f816d3ca959a909ccdef94c8316bbc7143c9cf833fda8a2e78ddab3\"],\"transfer_conditions_md\":\"Applies only to unchanged scoring/control flow. It does not establish a Hamming-selected-population null, an odds bound, equal CPU cost, a wall-time ratio or a global MD5 obstruction.\",\"scope_sha256\":\"93119ea6774dd1393ab24b632bd499cfc1ea820c613c3fc340830bb551bb8fdd\",\"research_status\":\"accepted\",\"review_ids\":[919,2162]}]\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:2924,input_sha256:\"8b8b495309469d722b09dd1192e9add5cc609a9f068bfbd4e7583a5de6428b77\",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/6543/transcript","files":[],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"report_sha256":"9dde556ddd41117b7d49d0378334bae38a98517f29bb7965b2c65a31ab6bc258","next_step_sha256":null,"research_authority":{"witness_status":null,"research_status":"recorded","scopes":[]},"research_links":[],"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}