{"id":1522,"job_id":2869,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":null,"type":"explore","user_id":42,"model":"deepseek-flash","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# Slice certificates: all 45 patch rows are now content-addressed, and the 17 slice-only rows are the exact residual\n\n**Verdict: `progress`.** Job 2869 continues route 139 from #1519. #1519 left 17 accepted patch rows\nwith `no applying candidate`, i.e. no base and therefore no evidence at all. This return gives every\npatch row a **content-addressed hunk certificate** even when the whole-file base is unserved: a\nunified hunk carries its own pre-image, so the patch's own content can be pinned by two hashes.\n\n- **45 patch rows** carry `pre_slice_sha256` and `post_slice_sha256` (canonical serialisation of the\n  hunk slices, header line included).\n- **28** also have their whole-file base served (23 corpus + 2 scripts + the R1/R3 recoveries), and\n  **17 are slice-only** — exactly #1519's residual, unchanged in count: 16 bare scripts plus\n  `#43 research/03-legendre-error-budget-ext.js`.\n- **Self-check passes for every row**: applying the patch's hunks to a base built from its own\n  pre-image slices reproduces the post-image slices exactly (`slice-certificates.json`,\n  `self_check_all_pass: true`), including the 4-hunk and 13-hunk rows.\n\nRung: **verified** (finite, exact hashes, re-runnable). Cost 0.1 CPU-h, read-only, no served write.\n\n## 1. What a slice certificate is good for\n\nThe certificate turns \"the patch exists but nothing can be verified\" into a checkable claim, in the\none direction that does not need base bytes:\n\n- **Patch integrity**: a consumer can recompute `post_slice_sha256` from the served patch text and\n  reject a corrupted or truncated serving. Before this, a served `diff -u` had no self-check at all.\n- **Publication check**: for the 17 slice-only rows, whoever later publishes base bytes must supply\n  content whose hunk regions hash to `pre_slice_sha256` — the recovered base is *checked* against the\n  patch's own anchors instead of trusted. That converts the remaining work from a search into a\n  verification.\n- **Localisation**: the certificate records `n_hunks` and the two digests, so the residual to\n  publish is stated per row (for example `#289 attack-prior-art-last-ground.revised.js`, one hunk,\n  `pre=c82657c2b991…`, `post=c005f93d024e…`).\n\n## 2. The residual, named and sized\n\nThe 17 slice-only rows are #11 `patched.js`; #42 `discrepancy-two-class-x31.js`; #43\n`research/03-legendre-error-budget-ext.js`; #46 `01-zone-twin-share-x.js`; #85\n`xchan-at29-prereg-revised.md`; #173 `regions.py`; #174 `compare-mg.js`; #175 `compare42.py`; #176\n`compare44.py`; #191 `runfor-probe.js`; #208 `g2check.py`; #211 `job66-anchored-pairs.js` and\n`job66-sieve-prediction.py`; #212 `job67-transport-parallel.js`; #281 `t23.py` and `t29fold.py`; #289\n`attack-prior-art-last-ground.revised.js (fixed 26550d14)`. All have `no applying candidate`, so no\nsearch rule can close them: their bases were uploaded as post files only, and only publication can\nsupply the bytes.\n\n## 3. Attachment correction for #1519\n\n#1519's report cites `base-certificates-v2.md`, `base-certificates-v2.json` and `certify_bases_v2.py`,\nbut its `files` array carried the v1 certificates (the submitter inherited the previous job's file\nlist). The three v2 artefacts are **attached to this return** and were verified served and\nhash-identical: `base-certificates-v2.md` `569579abdf33…`, `base-certificates-v2.json`\n`3a6fde3efe3c…`, `certify_bases_v2.py` `bab6c0636401…`. No claim in #1519 changes.\n\n## 4. What is not claimed\n\nA slice certificate pins the patch's own bytes; it is **not** a whole-file base and does not make a\npatch applicable where no base is served. It does not say a patch is correct, and it judges no\nreturn's text. The counts are of the accepted lane as walked in #1518; returns created after that\nwalk are outside. Nothing here is about `G_2`, `beta_2`, or twin-prime infinitude.\n\n## 5. Next step\n\nPublish the 17 missing bases, each checked against its certificate: success is 45/45 patch rows with\na whole-file base whose hunk regions hash to `pre_slice_sha256`; failure is a published base that\nfails its own anchors, which would mean the served patch text and the published bytes disagree.\nBudget 0.5 CPU-h.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0.2,"hashes":{"report.md":"fca01d0c6cbf18fa477fc71aadad1062e35ea7847d6e0f28f86538fd145028df","evidence.md":"bbff4856dda3f8295a1e141449291a6fa7e8a61ab1fbaa5dabeec5d4d9d91419","certify_bases_v2.py":"bab6c0636401e98e11dbc55edd0ded1e82c53b9bff074da8ea33d7cded4bec10","slice-certificates.md":"07cb1c3ab6f8eba162fd6c01d95252aeda330c3741f9e0f68090043d84fcdacc","slice_certificates.py":"a9f5a6c45c9cbd4886e51c24750aa926c4940dccc45db43e0f089c04522d7199","slice_certificates.out":"8a42f52e40b52b1d4e60469c2b8f0cfd446551675a9cb144c648b406fa9128fb","base-certificates-v2.md":"569579abdf333b0bd4805f1ade76fe406cff33843f4e5a52ddc042c02b0175a3","slice-certificates.json":"069a6d4bb333eec682021d00cb6bd1c7ad7e2bb2132788181ac7ac05cbf5f4ba","base-certificates-v2.json":"3a6fde3efe3cab20481c89f5ca857d4bceb0a226f895517d1174d250aae97021"},"author_rung":"verified","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-09-23T06:31:09.197Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":[],"handles":[],"returns":[1519,1518,1517],"messages":[]},"tokens":{"log":"custom","input":0,"models":{"deepseek-flash":0},"output":0,"source":"none","entries":0,"cache_read":0,"cache_write":0,"observed_models":["deepseek-flash"]},"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":{"outcome":"progress","route_id":139,"next_step":{"method":"Obtain or publish the 17 bases (per `base-convention.md`), then verify each against its certificate: recompute the hunk-region digest from the published bytes and compare with `pre_slice_sha256`, and re-run `slice_certificates.py` so `whole_file_base_served` becomes true for all 45 patch rows.","compute":{"ram_gb":2,"disk_gb":1,"cpu_hours":0},"failure":"A published base whose hunk regions disagree with the served patch, which would mean the patch text and the bytes are from different revisions.","success":"45/45 patch rows carry a whole-file base whose hunk regions match the recorded pre-image digest.","question":"Can the 17 slice-only rows be closed by publishing their base bytes, and do the published bytes hash to each row's recorded pre_slice_sha256?","budget_hours":0.5,"required_tools":[],"required_sources":[]},"depends_on":[1519,1518],"evidence_md":"# Evidence — slice certificates for the accepted lane (job 2869, route 139)\n\nCompanion to `report-2869.md`; continues #1518 (census) and #1519 (v2 certificates).\n\n## Measurements\n\n`slice_certificates.py` -> `slice-certificates.json`, `slice-certificates.md`,\n`out/slice_certificates.out`. Inputs: the #1518 patch texts (`patches/lane-<id>.patch`), the #1519\nresolution statuses, and the #1518 whole-file base hashes. No server reads, no re-walk.\n\n- **45 patch rows** (57 lane rows minus the 12 revision-only rows) carry `n_hunks`,\n  `pre_lines`/`post_lines`, `pre_slice_sha256`, `post_slice_sha256`, `self_check_post_reproduced`,\n  `whole_file_base_served`, `whole_file_base_sha256`.\n- **Self-check: true for all 45** — building a base from the concatenated pre-image slices and\n  applying the row's hunks at unique overlapping offsets reproduces the concatenated post-image\n  slices byte-for-byte. This is also the parser control: a mis-split hunk would fail it.\n- **28 whole-file bases served** (corpus rows plus #20/#454), **17 slice-only** — #1519's residual,\n  with digests now recorded per row (e.g. #11 `patched.js` 4 hunks `pre=b13d87106920…`; #289 one hunk\n  `pre=c82657c2b991…`, `post=c005f93d024e…`).\n- One classification bug was caught and fixed before reporting: the first run inherited #1518's\n  `needs_publication` flags and reported 20 slice-only rows; the count is **17** once #1519's\n  resolution status (R1 for #35/#132, R3 for #20) is used.\n\n## Reproduce\n\n```\n$V slice_certificates.py     # -> slice-certificates.{json,md}, out/slice_certificates.out\n```\n(`$V` = workspace virtualenv python, run from the workspace root.)\n\n## Calibration\n\n- **Verified**: the digests, the hunk/line counts, the self-check, and the classification; all\n  re-runnable and independent of any server read.\n- **Not claimed**: that a slice certificate substitutes for a whole-file base (it does not), that any\n  patch is correct, or that the 17 residual rows are resolvable without publishing bytes.\n- **Correction carried here**: #1519's `files` array listed the v1 certificates; the v2 artefacts are\n  attached to this return with their hashes (see report §3).","prior_art_md":"Corpus, served: #1518 (the lane census and the 57-row certificate table), #1519 (the v2 resolution and the 17-row residual), #1517 (the anchor resolver and its C1 control). External (read 2026-09-23, unchanged from #1517's record): git-apply(1) `--3way` needs the patch's `index` line (apply.c), fuzzy/context application is classical (diff-match-patch `match_main`), `git patch-id --stable` content-addresses a patch without its base but is not an applicability certificate, and content-addressed storage is textbook. Exact remaining gap: no source read packages per-hunk pre/post slice digests as a fallback certificate for a queue whose accept path records no base; the ingredients are classical and the packaging plus these measured certificates is the contribution."},"research_route_id":139,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_23424801c73890cd6fd3264c","run_id":"run_9cda8e25020f0955d5df6681","triage_lead":null,"revision_base_sha":null,"integration":null,"resolves":null,"handle":"victor-geere","job_brief":"First update the online prior-work search for this experiment. If existing work covers it, record that and stop; otherwise run this bounded sprint on the uncovered uncertainty. Use cited published numbers during pursuit; their reproduction belongs in later validation. Build on the supplied findings; do not reconstruct earlier research. Return concrete progress and its cheapest credible check, a useful result for review, or a precisely scoped obstacle. Continued investment requires a distinct experiment.\n\nRead GET <project base>/research-routes/139 and return #1519. Return the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 139, outcome: \"promising|progress|blocked|inconclusive|known|result\", evidence_md: \"what the evidence changes, <=4000 chars\", prior_art_md: \"updated online search record, sources and exact remaining gap, <=4000\", next_step: {question, method, success, failure, budget_hours} <only for continued pursuit>, obstacle: {kind, statement, assumptions, evidence, revisit_when} <for blocked/inconclusive>, depends_on: [<return ids actually required>]}. A result with a distinct next_step requests review and continues pursuit concurrently; omit next_step when no further experiment is warranted. Use known with prior_art_md and no next_step or obstacle when cited prior work already covers the proposed contribution; it stops automatic investigation without requesting review. The evidence grade is separate. Do not close a broad route because one proof attempt failed.","review_deferred":false,"in_triage":false,"triage":[],"verification_runs":[],"verification_state":null,"verification_summary":null,"canonical_return":null,"review_history":[],"dependencies":[{"id":"1518","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"1519","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null}],"research_url":"/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/139","transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/1522/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"fca01d0c6cbf18fa477fc71aadad1062e35ea7847d6e0f28f86538fd145028df","name":"report.md","bytes":4159},{"sha256":"bbff4856dda3f8295a1e141449291a6fa7e8a61ab1fbaa5dabeec5d4d9d91419","name":"evidence.md","bytes":2172},{"sha256":"07cb1c3ab6f8eba162fd6c01d95252aeda330c3741f9e0f68090043d84fcdacc","name":"slice-certificates.md","bytes":5057},{"sha256":"069a6d4bb333eec682021d00cb6bd1c7ad7e2bb2132788181ac7ac05cbf5f4ba","name":"slice-certificates.json","bytes":23152},{"sha256":"a9f5a6c45c9cbd4886e51c24750aa926c4940dccc45db43e0f089c04522d7199","name":"slice_certificates.py","bytes":5422},{"sha256":"8a42f52e40b52b1d4e60469c2b8f0cfd446551675a9cb144c648b406fa9128fb","name":"slice_certificates.out","bytes":1480},{"sha256":"569579abdf333b0bd4805f1ade76fe406cff33843f4e5a52ddc042c02b0175a3","name":"base-certificates-v2.md","bytes":7100},{"sha256":"3a6fde3efe3cab20481c89f5ca857d4bceb0a226f895517d1174d250aae97021","name":"base-certificates-v2.json","bytes":27142},{"sha256":"bab6c0636401e98e11dbc55edd0ded1e82c53b9bff074da8ea33d7cded4bec10","name":"certify_bases_v2.py","bytes":9042}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}