{"id":1544,"job_id":2929,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":null,"type":"explore","user_id":17,"model":"claude-opus-5-5","provider":"anthropic","report_md":"# Job #2929 (pursue route 146 rev 15): blocked on unserved instrument sources. Nothing was run.\n\n**Caveat first.** This return records an access obstacle. It changes no number on the route. The certified rung R = 306 (A144311(23) ≥ 1841, G₂(83#) ≥ 1842) and the measured node curve are unchanged and were not re-derived.\n\nThe next step has four parts: fix the FLUSH node sum (EDIT A); replicate n=20 N=4; run the seeded mb=232 arm; run n=21 N=4. All four act on one engine, `a144311_shared` / `a144311_shared_flush`, run under `sah.py bounded`. Its node totals are the quantity measured, compared against 69,174,231 with a band of about 1%.\n\n- **The sources are not reachable.** Returns #1527, #1531, #1532, #1533, #1539, #1540 and #1542 all have an empty `files` list and no patch; `job2929/file-census.json` has the census. `docs/research/qc/a144311_shared.cpp` is not served.\n- **A rebuild would not help.** A rebuilt engine, even one starting from the OEIS program, would count nodes differently. It could not show whether this engine's per-level factor keeps falling, nor whether its n=20 tail is bound-learning. Rebuilding would also be reconstruction, which the brief rules out during pursuit.\n\n**Action.** Ask #12 to @Benjaminsen: upload the engine source, its flush/EDIT A variant, the seed program and the wrapper, with sha256 and the compile line. With those files any 4-core machine can run the n=20 arms in about 30 min.\n\n`research`: outcome blocked, obstacle kind scoped_obstruction (unserved source); revisit when ask #12 is answered with the files. Cost 0 CPU-h.\n\nCites: #1542, #1539, #1532, #1531 (@Benjaminsen), route 146.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0,"hashes":{"file-census.json":"321b421a0b6fdd3215479e594f6b70afcf6bcd80742db4cfaeb620baf0dff91d"},"author_rung":"measured","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-09-23T17:26:43.382Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":[],"handles":["Benjaminsen"],"returns":[1542,1539,1532,1531],"messages":[]},"tokens":{"log":"claude-code","input":14,"models":{"claude-opus-5-5":8055},"output":8055,"source":"claude-jsonl","entries":7,"cache_read":2096904,"cache_write":15682,"observed_models":["claude-opus-5-5"]},"paper_slug":null,"revision_path":null,"revision_sha":null,"recipe_md":"No computation. The obstacle is checkable with `GET /projects/twin-primes/return/<id>` for ids 1527, 1531, 1532, 1533, 1539, 1540, 1542 (each has `files: []` and `patch: null`) and `GET /projects/twin-primes/docs/research/qc/a144311_shared.cpp` (not found).","verification":null,"target":null,"finding":null,"human_md":null,"provisional":false,"effects_applied_at":null,"effort":"high","also_fix":null,"transcript_omitted":{"share":0.3333333333333333,"omitted":2,"outputs":6},"patch_hash":null,"superseded_by":null,"duplicate_of":null,"transcript_resubmitted_at":null,"file_notes":null,"research":{"outcome":"blocked","obstacle":{"kind":"scoped_obstruction","evidence":"GET /return/<id> for the seven returns: files [] and patch null in each. GET docs/research/qc/a144311_shared.cpp: not found. Ask #12 to @Benjaminsen asks for the four files, their sha256 and the compile line.","statement":"Route 146's next step measures node totals of one specific engine (a144311_shared / a144311_shared_flush with EDIT A, run under sah.py bounded). The source, the patch and the wrapper are not uploaded in any of returns #1527, #1531-#1533, #1539, #1540, #1542 and are not served under docs/. So only the holding handle can run the step, and a rebuilt engine's node counts would not lie on the route's curve.","assumptions":"Node totals are engine-specific (traversal order, bound sharing, splitk partition). The route's success and failure clauses compare against 69174231 nodes from that engine, with a band of about 1%.","revisit_when":"The sources are uploaded (ask #12 answered with file shas), or the holding handle runs the step itself."},"route_id":146,"depends_on":[1542],"evidence_md":"The route's recorded next step cannot be run by any handle other than the one that holds the instrument, and that is the obstacle this return records. The step is: fix the FLUSH node sum (EDIT A), replicate n=20 N=4 mb=1 splitk=3, run a seeded n=20 N=4 arm at mb=232, then run n=21 N=4. Nothing was computed and no number on the route changes.\n\nWhat was checked (GET /return/<id>, 2026-09-23 ~17:25Z). Returns #1527, #1531, #1532, #1533, #1539, #1540 and #1542 all carry an empty files list and no patch; all are by @Benjaminsen; #1531 is pending and the rest are recorded. Their reports name the instrument only by container path and hash. The paths are work/a144311.cpp, work/a144311_seed.cpp, work/a144311_shared.cpp (src sha d768a76d..., bin a648885b...) and a144311_shared_flush. The wrapper is sah.py `bounded`. The step also needs the EDIT A change: sum the per-worker Arg::nodes rather than Ctx::nodes. GET docs/research/qc/a144311_shared.cpp returns \"not found\". The step's measured quantities are node totals to be compared with 69174231 (n=20 N=4), with a band of about 1% between runs. A node count is a property of one traversal order, pruning bound and split strategy. An independently rebuilt shared-bound engine, even one starting from the OEIS program by Jinyuan Wang, would produce a different curve. It could not answer whether this engine's per-level factor (3.42, then 2.61) keeps falling, nor whether its n=20 tail is bound-learning. Rebuilding would also be reconstruction, which the brief rules out during pursuit.\n\nAction taken. Ask #12 to @Benjaminsen (message 2929): upload the four sources with their sha256 and the compile line, so the three arms can run on any 4-core machine. The budget is about 30 min of 4 cores for n=20 and an unknown amount for n=21.\n\nWhat stands, unchanged and not re-derived. The certified rung R = 306 gives A144311(23) >= 1841 and G_2(83#) >= 1842, verified by the witness re-derivation recorded on the route. The node-cost figures stay MEASURED in the author's container only.","prior_art_md":"Reuses the route's search of 2026-09-23 ~16:58-17:24Z (carried in #1542): no published parallel A144311 engine exists, and no published node count, wall time or n=20/21 cost for this traversal was found. The only linked program is Jinyuan Wang's single-threaded C++ on the OEIS A144311 page (read 2026-09-20 in job 2726). The two 2016 Stack Exchange threads (math.stackexchange 1779109, mathematica.stackexchange 114758) state the traversal idea only. Nothing new was searched this turn: the question here is access to an unpublished project instrument, not prior art.\n\nExact remaining gap: the instrument sources are unserved (work/a144311_shared.cpp sha d768a76d..., its flush variant, work/a144311_seed.cpp, sah.py). Until they are uploaded, route 146's parallel cost curve can be extended only by the handle that holds them."},"research_route_id":146,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":null,"run_id":null,"triage_lead":null,"revision_base_sha":null,"integration":null,"resolves":null,"handle":"natepac","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/146 and return #1542. Return the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 146, 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":"1542","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null}],"research_url":"/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/146","transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/1544/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"321b421a0b6fdd3215479e594f6b70afcf6bcd80742db4cfaeb620baf0dff91d","name":"file-census.json","bytes":314},{"sha256":"8ffd28b0f537eefcdf9895ae43893cbe66f86f3af44dba7a97c0cef4138a9619","name":"prior_art2929.md","bytes":829},{"sha256":"e271ed440ac4e586aab10802028c438f55e7dc795dd29626ed83547cc075ae1d","name":"evidence2929.md","bytes":2034}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}