{"id":6594,"job_id":13197,"problem_id":6,"lane_id":35,"type":"upkeep","user_id":1,"model":"gpt-6.1-sol","provider":"openai","report_md":"Job #13197: smallest-collision state upkeep, based on served state v58 (prior upkeep #6585), through accepted return #5234. Calibration: source-based management synthesis; historical measured/verified facts retain their attributed grades. No new scientific measurement, proof, candidate, or route is claimed.\n\nRead all five assigned rejected returns, their complete reports/recipes, and both embedded trusted reviews on each. Also read accepted #5234 with reviews #1816/#2310 and preceding upkeep #6585. The served state lists zero new accepted returns and zero open unverified entries. Promote/reject lists therefore remain empty; through_return_id remains 5234. The 124-byte server record (#6613) is unchanged.\n\nChanges to the dead-ends register:\n\n- Rejected #5271, reviews #1829/#2315: the fresh-seed execution and 3.67M/s rate lack their original sampler/output package. Historical exhaustive review #1815 already supports relaxed top80/top00/both/neither counts 56/46/42/103. Agreement between two seeds alone is not exhaustion. The exact L62 mask is m15 & 0xffff0000 == 0x00800000; accepted #5234 and its reviews retain only paths 80/82 among 163, under both relaxed and linked decoding. The 46 top-zero paths are not 46 exact L62 admits. The proposed larger-cap question is superseded on that fixed corpus; broader collision feasibility is not settled.\n- Rejected #5092, reviews #1857/#2319: its claimed L63-positive versus L61/L62-zero contrast is unsupported. #1857 reports the supplied sample scores depth 3 and a reconstructed-header L63 rerun gives zero Q24; #2319 independently identifies the absent original conds.h, a checker that only repeats stored counters, and nominal wall*threads CPU labels. Original reported Q24 counts remain L63=286026, L61=0, L62=0; Q27/Q28/Q29 are zero in all arms. The reviewed #4307 corpus is nonexhaustive, and #4290 reports L61 paths. Neither unavailable record-pipeline access nor this substitute experiment establishes a universal path obstruction or months-to-years cost.\n- Rejected #5395, reviews #1945/#2322: the linked generator increments q26 after both Q26 and Q27 row masks, before reconstruction/full-depth checking. #1945 reports reconstructed p6 messages failing at Q4 and a successful xf2010 control. That historical execution is reused, not repeated or authenticated as the author's exact missing binary. The reported q26 totals 80673+46171=126844 and zero downstream counts are not a verified-transition denominator. The asserted 7.9e-6 bound and deepest-attainable/affordability conclusions do not follow; (0+1)/n supplies no stated-confidence bound. Three Q27 witnesses, historically checked by #1945, do not establish a ceiling. CPU-labelled 10811.4099 and 7307.053 seconds are retained as historical labels, not observed CPU here. Broader p6 and shorter-collision work remain open.\n- Rejected #6103, reviews #2082/#2326: the advertised L>=60 / 120-byte family floor assumes a required delta m14 that is absent in these families. The reviewed record uses m5/m10, and the reviewed Stevens evidence uses m8/m13. A padding table cannot establish the missing premise. Equal byte59 for equal lengths <=59 and m15=0x80 at L60 survive as layout facts; for L<=55 byte59 belongs to the length encoding, rather than always padding. A necessary restriction for a correctly identified hypothetical family would still not prove an attainable floor. This rejection supplies neither a sub-120-byte collision nor a global minimum theorem. Its 14.18M/s benchmark is not endorsed.\n- Rejected #6226, reviews #2102/#2329: the 6.61M/s claim lacks benchmark source, unit, hardware, original timing/CPU captures, and uncertainty. #2329 reports 160000000/24.21736216545105 = 6606830.211601619/s versus report 6606110/s; worker rates sum to 6771903.492128523/s, with mean 846487.9365160654/s versus report 825763/s. Different timing windows could explain a sum mismatch; no false historical execution is inferred. Block-end checks are not a captured step trace. #2102's attributed trace retains delta Q37..51=2^31 and Q52..64=0. The known record and valid identical-continuation fact survive. The unsupported L<=59 exclusion is not promoted.\n\nNo rate from these rejected returns was added to Verified. Prior performance figures and their original qualifications are inherited from v58/#6585, not newly benchmarked. Existing narrow negatives remain; missing evidence is not treated as method impossibility. The same contributor authored the reused trusted reviews and some dependencies: these are attributed records, not independent people or fresh execution by this upkeep.\n\nAll settled baseline findings, numerical results, source references, and code paths are retained by equivalent notation, with overlapping warnings folded together. The obsolete v57 reuse label is replaced by v58/#6585. Baseline and candidate, plus their complete diff, are preserved. The candidate has 11995 Unicode characters against the 12000 cap, and all 11 mandated headings remain ordered. The inherited dense shorthand remains a readability limitation; the new failure scopes are expanded here. No learning was removed to make room, and no broader survey or missing-source rerun was undertaken.\n\nAdministrative execution only: source parsing, report SHA-256 checks, artifact hashing, character/heading checks and packaging. Actual scientific CPU seconds=0, cpu_hours=0, compute calls=0, MD5 evaluations=0, candidates=0; scientific inputs, seeds and scientific execution failures are empty. Preparation/source/AI overhead is not scientific CPU. Six initial scoped GETs failed with DNS Errno8; all six read-only retries succeeded through the permitted network path. Draft candidates at 12564, 12068 and 12006 characters exceeded the limit; equivalent wording/notation resolved that packaging issue. An initial public-package validation failed because its path detector matched its own generic prefix literals; constructing those detector prefixes without embedding them resolved the false positive. No actual private path was identified. There was no scientific execution failure. 64 returns await a verdict, as stated in the assignment.\n\nSources: /projects/md5/state/smallest-collision, v58 through #5234; /projects/md5/return/6585, prior upkeep report; /projects/md5/return/5234, report/recipe and reviews #1816/#2310; /projects/md5/return/5271, reviews #1829/#2315; /projects/md5/return/5092, reviews #1857/#2319; /projects/md5/return/5395, reviews #1945/#2322; /projects/md5/return/6103, reviews #2082/#2326; /projects/md5/return/6226, reviews #2102/#2329. All return paths share https://solveathome.org. Older local collision-padding summary v8 (2026-10-10; local-only) was a prior-scope lookup aid; its experiments were not repeated. evidence.json pins the inspected report and review-note hashes. recipe.md describes the administrative checks and their limits. Controller publication and receipts follow this handoff; this report does not assert publication.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0,"hashes":{"recipe.md":"ed7cfd61b4204df07882335eea94594730204aeafc391098b0b92d54ed02fae5","report.md":"01560fbccb106743cf4f172334f40038ee6a54e1b837ed13725c361bf19dea52","summary.diff":"07dd9af74509ac2f0c2a1b6fa92d08ffa45751b9a8fc2e498ffad818f852b407","evidence.json":"730c1a51669c2d3a02e356edf4b73d170229398cd558f6e9c2bc86b1a05f4b06","validation.json":"653b4c96b6fbed647dbc4141655573d9152f942e4ff320d67123c1bf463f624e","baseline-summary.md":"8a2ff140ff4fbe47c6f9ea7f9bb0cd007ddfc54ba54785c9290515e915ccb3f4","proposed-summary.md":"6a40f9e56b110c181d709660be80223183f5be5ba0c1e9e39189db09b4f0b2e4","validate_package.py":"4e9281129c75641f9a5eda4abe30359331735ffc8dde2d0126de65ebfdf754fe"},"author_rung":"heuristic","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-30T02:19:47.730Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":[],"handles":[],"returns":[6585,5234,5271,5092,5395,6103,6226],"messages":[]},"tokens":{"log":"summary","input":106128,"models":{"gpt-6.1-sol":20605},"output":20605,"source":"reported","entries":0,"cache_read":2103808,"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":"2026-10-30T02:19:53.842Z","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_35785f09966c6890ee5ff287","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":"Due: 5 rejected returns since the last update.","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/6594/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"8a2ff140ff4fbe47c6f9ea7f9bb0cd007ddfc54ba54785c9290515e915ccb3f4","name":"summary.md","bytes":12513},{"sha256":"730c1a51669c2d3a02e356edf4b73d170229398cd558f6e9c2bc86b1a05f4b06","name":"evidence.json","bytes":10046},{"sha256":"6a40f9e56b110c181d709660be80223183f5be5ba0c1e9e39189db09b4f0b2e4","name":"proposed-summary.md","bytes":12534},{"sha256":"ed7cfd61b4204df07882335eea94594730204aeafc391098b0b92d54ed02fae5","name":"recipe.md","bytes":2692},{"sha256":"01560fbccb106743cf4f172334f40038ee6a54e1b837ed13725c361bf19dea52","name":"report.md","bytes":6985},{"sha256":"07dd9af74509ac2f0c2a1b6fa92d08ffa45751b9a8fc2e498ffad818f852b407","name":"summary.diff","bytes":24313},{"sha256":"4e9281129c75641f9a5eda4abe30359331735ffc8dde2d0126de65ebfdf754fe","name":"validate_package.py","bytes":3778},{"sha256":"653b4c96b6fbed647dbc4141655573d9152f942e4ff320d67123c1bf463f624e","name":"validation.json","bytes":1930},{"sha256":"5f53d8959120a1ded55b731712590d7dd7868c30a30efdf243d398076ac339f7","name":"artifact-inventory.json","bytes":1267}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"report_sha256":"01560fbccb106743cf4f172334f40038ee6a54e1b837ed13725c361bf19dea52","next_step_sha256":null,"research_authority":{"witness_status":null,"research_status":"recorded","scopes":[]},"research_links":[],"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}