{"id":1549,"job_id":2926,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":null,"type":"explore","user_id":34,"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# Job #2926 — Triage of route #148: the dated-record contract as a shared tool\n\nAttempt `4f568556814e4628796e745b8ce51e35` · session `639c7ddc4d924a9269499904` (assignment 1, general\nmode) · run `bf8-277b519cc908fd26` · route **148** rev 1 (`proposed`) · basis: return #1541 (recorded).\nProtocol `department-v2.research-2026-09-22.1`, guidance `research-2026-09-22.1`.\nIdentity for this turn, measured: `deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash`, effort `max` (two independent harness\nfields carry each value and agree). Readiness **15/15 exit 0** before the joining URL was called.\n\n## What the assignment asked, and what was done\n\nTriage of route 148: decide whether **one bounded next experiment** is justified, using the prior-work\nsearch and the weakest assumption. The assignment explicitly excludes repeating published\ncomputations, so this return does not re-derive #1541's numbers; it measures the population the\nroute's next step would work on, and tests the one assumption its own write-side verdict rests on.\n\nTwo reasons the route's *recorded* next step is not the experiment to run as written, and one reason\nits write side needs a fix before anyone adopts it:\n\n1. **The recorded next step is scoped to records, but the decision surface is readers.** It proposes\n   walking every JSON record in the tree, re-reading each through `load()` and re-running its consumer.\n2. **Its success criterion has already been met once, by the route's own evidence.** #1541 records\n   three transport rows moving from `UNRESOLVED` to `ARRIVED AFTER` when the adjudication record's\n   instant became generated instead of prose — i.e. a verdict that changed when the record was dated.\n3. **The write-side recognition, not the write side itself, is the weak link** — measured below.\n\n## Measurement 1 — the record population the next step would walk (`records-probe.json`)\n\nRoots: the proposing run's tree, `job2830`, and this run. **870 JSON records, 462 carry an instant,\n408 do not**, 1 unreadable, 1 not an object. By kind: **362 of the 408 undated records are operation\nreceipts** (a request/response record, not a standing reading), and of the standing records **51 are\ndated and 46 undated**. Instants found by field: `at` 446, `covered_at` 14, `observed_at` 2.\n\nAgainst 1914 code files, **10 undated records have any consumer at all** — and that test is\n*deliberately weak*: it is a basename match, so generic names collide (`me.json` is \"consumed\" by two\nunrelated scripts of another run, and two of the ten are this run's own selftest fixtures). So the\nhonest reading is **≤10**, not 10.\n\nA **scope control** runs with the probe: a declared root that contributes no record makes it exit 3.\nPer-root counts: proposing run **788**, `job2830` **26**, this run **58**.\n\n## Measurement 2 — the readers that could care (`records-probe.py` uses the contract's own reader)\n\nCode that mentions or imports the contract: **8 files**. Of those, **exactly one branches on an\ninstant's value** — `audit-transport-codes.py` (lines 221-228: an unmentioned row newer than\n`covered_at` is `ARRIVED AFTER`, otherwise `UNRESOLVED`); one **refuses** an undated baseline\n(`census.py`); the rest generate the instant or write dated output.\n\nSo an hour spent enumerating records would be spent almost entirely on material that cannot change a\nverdict. The experiment worth its hour is **readers × does the instant change the verdict**.\n\n## Measurement 3 — the write-side finder, falsified and pinned (`producers-probe.json`)\n\nRoute 148 admits the central uncertainty: \"`producers` is a text-level finder and can be fooled by a\nwrite it does not recognise, or flag a `json.dumps` that writes no file. It says so in its own\noutput.\" That is a caveat, not a bound, and the route's **closed** write-side verdict rests on it.\nReading the implementation (lines 363-369) gives the mechanism:\n\n```python\nWRITE_SITE     = re.compile(r\"json\\.dumps?\\s*\\(\")\nINSTANT_NAME   = (\"covered_at\", \"written_at\", \"observed_at\")\nguarded = any(ev in text for ev in GUARD_EVIDENCE) or any(n in text for n in INSTANT_NAME)\n```\n\n`guarded` is computed once, **from the whole file text**, then applied to every site in it. Four\npredictions were registered before the run; **all four hold** (`producers-probe.json`, re-derived\nindependently by `verify-producers-probe.py` at a pinned module hash):\n\n* **P1** a writer inlining `json.dumps` in a file that never names an instant → **UNGUARDED**;\n* **P2** the *same writer*, in a file that merely **reads** an instant field → **GUARDED**;\n* **P2b** the *same writer*, where the only mention is **inside a comment** → **GUARDED**;\n* **P3** a writer routed through `sahdated.write` → **no site at all**.\n\nP2/P2b: prose about an instant buys every write in the file the compliant verdict. P3: the compliant\npath leaves nothing for a line-based finder to match, so **4 real files in this tree write JSON through\nshared helpers with no site** (`boundary.py`, `fetch.py`, `stamp-standing-records.py`, and the\nchecker's own fixture), and the audit cannot tell \"no writes\" from \"all writes routed\".\n\n`site-census.json` separates the population the finder actually counts: this run **18 sites, of which\n14 are not file writes** (8 stdout `print(json.dumps(...))`, 1 deep copy, 5 other) → **4 real inline\nwrites, 0 unguarded**; `job2830` **34 sites, 27 not file writes**, 9 unguarded of which **3 are\n`json.loads(json.dumps(x))` deep copies that write nothing**. The published job2830 verdict\nreconciles: its 6 genuinely unguarded inline writers are the exemption-listed falsified baselines.\n\n**Recognition gap, hit live.** This session's `fetch.py` wrote the fetched route and return bodies with\nthe instant named `fetched_at` — a **9th spelling the accepted list does not contain**. Result: the\nrecord-level audit called both records `undated-fixable` while the write-site audit called the file\nthat wrote them `guarded`. **Two halves of one contract disagreed about the same file, in the same\nminute, in the session whose only job was to triage the contract.** Fixed in place (the script now\nnames `covered_at`), and the records were stamped — which marks them, honestly, as retro-fits and not\nmeasurements.\n\n## Two defects found in my own triage instruments, and fixed\n\n* The first record census walked **one directory level too far**, so every declared root resolved to a\n  non-existent path; it silently scanned only its own directory and **reported a clean \"0 undated\"**.\n  A scope error that reads as a clean result is this route's own thesis, so the fix is a **scope\n  control** that fails (exit 3) when a declared root contributes nothing.\n* The checker's third negative control — deleting the compliant-writer fixture — was **not detected**:\n  \"no site\" and \"no file\" are the same answer to a naive `not by_file.get(...)`. Every verdict now\n  requires its fixture to be **present**. The control caught the vacuous pass, which is what controls\n  are for.\n\n## On this run's own tree, the contract holds (`audit-this-run.txt`, `producers-this-run.txt`)\n\n`audit`: **16 records, 16 dated, 0 undated**, exit 0. `producers`: **18 write sites in 7 files, all\nguarded, VERDICT closed**, exit 0 — after removing the tool's own regenerated `fx*` selftest fixtures\n(which are wiped on each `selftest` run) and the deliberate must-fail fixture, and stamping the four\nrecords written before the spelling was fixed. So the write-side claim **survives a fresh population**;\nwhat does not survive is the claim that the finder's verdict *means* what a reader assumes.\n\n## Verdict on the investment\n\n**Promising**, with the next step **re-scoped from records to readers and recognition**. The route's\ndirection is sound and its tool is already load-bearing on one real reader; the hour it asks for is\nbetter spent closing the two recognition gaps and measuring the reader population — a set small enough\nto enumerate exhaustively, which is what makes the result decisive rather than sampled.\n\n## Limits of this triage, stated\n\nThe consumer test is a basename match, so it **over-counts**. The site classification is a reading of\nthe finder's output lines, and 5 + 17 \"other\" rows are unclassified. Only **one** reader was examined\nclosely. The four predictions are about `sahdated/1.1.1` at one hash; a new revision must re-run the\nchecker, which pins the hash it needs.\n\n## Outstanding work and usage\n\n* `outstanding`: **1 issued / 0 settled** at registration; this return settles it. No other attempt of\n  this run is open, and no process of this session survives it.\n* **Usage is pending, not zero.** This turn was open at filing time, so the transcript carries the\n  instruction line only (`usage: null`). The log is `seq 868..end` of thread\n  `ef6341e1-185b-4182-a88f-a88a9fe3f145`, to be cut with `--usage` and attached through\n  `POST /return/<id>/transcript` on the next invocation; `job2926/open-turn-note.md` records it.\n* **96 of @maxime-fleury's returns wait for a verdict** (55 on `deepseek-v4-flash`), the oldest since\n  2026-09-13; the project queue is 415. They need a trusted reviewer or a person granted trust — not\n  this session, which is neither.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0.4,"hashes":{"boundary.py":"a9b4cc39aee2397a0608629db5c124cd4cce0229ead2b955a16604a4e6a7ee71","triage-148.md":"fce89cacfd1d9056358b5443ab92b6ca813d978836b741c677da29642e2eb636","site-census.py":"a03355bc8bfe7cb1226b45971489de16533d4c22124194eae804bab0b54f1c33","records-probe.py":"953e4f4a2290ab2d42e01f79073d7b4331d71e1b8f22933be35a9b75ddc2bb92","site-census.json":"01800f554c01be1c3f635d9fcf5b7450538d5c318472bff918500f8bc7ea36b5","open-turn-note.md":"bef7ffb041cda6ea33e217b6fd44c858f4310383d0386f373ab727c00b5ce808","audit-this-run.txt":"5996d46ae834a52e6c603af74e29c41ac2dc6e4bfa23ef9dde91aed36d35c2a8","producers-probe.py":"e503cbedadde20a8609eb8ae2a12772881bce539bb2f5e45f9bb35d0d57d4b97","records-probe.json":"bb8c5b5dd0c57d74fb3b131fb3bb2aa6fbf647fe63922c7d53ceb24b5eb8c554","producers-probe.json":"09aae567ace705c78529f81804e8d67a5c225a4702eae4f4fcea14a76a1425e9","sahdated-selftest.txt":"876205d29a1c3cb695c7c4fde27e671046ad8bc6b34a7f325037f617007a87a6","producers-this-run.txt":"938452d7dea44b6b2f05d50c94d14a72ee87f8fc7e5636327974d14ac5a39b4d","sahdated-1.1.1-pinned.py":"d638f6f647d4aaed79ffdb81e492c9062e660be376f96e68c1a0dd64039130e0","verify-producers-probe.py":"48c5c2bf15d6e714c9e362c652ddb24946336de6cc53ea53894adce6b7ea2d27","transcript-job2926-open.jsonl":"b7428e06cb5970eba34a9a5a8e9b3ab5d54b6890eb6f762e6b18930717380de2","01800f554c01be1c3f635d9fcf5b7450538d5c318472bff918500f8bc7ea36b5":"site-census.json","09aae567ace705c78529f81804e8d67a5c225a4702eae4f4fcea14a76a1425e9":"producers-probe.json","48c5c2bf15d6e714c9e362c652ddb24946336de6cc53ea53894adce6b7ea2d27":"verify-producers-probe.py","5996d46ae834a52e6c603af74e29c41ac2dc6e4bfa23ef9dde91aed36d35c2a8":"audit-this-run.txt","876205d29a1c3cb695c7c4fde27e671046ad8bc6b34a7f325037f617007a87a6":"sahdated-selftest.txt","938452d7dea44b6b2f05d50c94d14a72ee87f8fc7e5636327974d14ac5a39b4d":"producers-this-run.txt","953e4f4a2290ab2d42e01f79073d7b4331d71e1b8f22933be35a9b75ddc2bb92":"records-probe.py","a03355bc8bfe7cb1226b45971489de16533d4c22124194eae804bab0b54f1c33":"site-census.py","a9b4cc39aee2397a0608629db5c124cd4cce0229ead2b955a16604a4e6a7ee71":"boundary.py","b7428e06cb5970eba34a9a5a8e9b3ab5d54b6890eb6f762e6b18930717380de2":"transcript-job2926-open.jsonl","bb8c5b5dd0c57d74fb3b131fb3bb2aa6fbf647fe63922c7d53ceb24b5eb8c554":"records-probe.json","bef7ffb041cda6ea33e217b6fd44c858f4310383d0386f373ab727c00b5ce808":"open-turn-note.md","d638f6f647d4aaed79ffdb81e492c9062e660be376f96e68c1a0dd64039130e0":"sahdated-1.1.1-pinned.py","e503cbedadde20a8609eb8ae2a12772881bce539bb2f5e45f9bb35d0d57d4b97":"producers-probe.py","fce89cacfd1d9056358b5443ab92b6ca813d978836b741c677da29642e2eb636":"triage-148.md"},"author_rung":"measured","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-09-23T17:42:29.116Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":[],"handles":[],"returns":[1541,1453,1455,1447],"messages":[]},"tokens":{"log":"custom","input":177806,"models":{"deepseek-v4-flash":117958},"output":117958,"source":"custom-jsonl","entries":1,"cache_read":18660096,"cache_write":0,"observed_models":["deepseek-v4-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":"max","also_fix":null,"transcript_omitted":{"share":0,"omitted":0,"outputs":0},"patch_hash":null,"superseded_by":null,"duplicate_of":null,"transcript_resubmitted_at":"2026-09-23T20:11:39.257Z","file_notes":[{"sha":"876205d29a1c3cb695c7c4fde27e671046ad8bc6b34a7f325037f617007a87a6","name":"sahdated-selftest.txt","notes":["carries a hard-coded home directory: C:\\Users\\Max\\AppData\\Local\\Temp\\tmpsjnwffif\\undated.json (line 1); on another machine that path does not exist. Use a path relative to the repository."],"fixed_by":"112db1b6db303517cb3a3dfd6ed44a53bfedfdb5218c352b75e1dcf5da8cf0ea"}],"research":{"outcome":"promising","route_id":148,"next_step":{"method":"(1) Pre-register the reader list ONCE from the census in this return (8 files mention the contract; 1 branches on the instant, 1 refuses, the rest generate it): for each, copy the record it consumes, strip the instant, re-run the reader, and classify the result as CHANGED / REFUSED-AND-STATED / SILENTLY-UNCHANGED. (2) Close the two recognition gaps: warn when a record carries an instant-shaped field name outside the accepted list (the `fetched_at` case), and scope `guarded` to the site's window rather than the whole file. (3) Attach a failing-before/passing-after regression test for each, using this return's minimal pair as the fixture.","compute":{"ram_gb":2,"disk_gb":1,"cpu_hours":0.5},"failure":"Every reader refuses an undated record (the instant is enforced everywhere it is consulted) AND both recognition gaps turn out unreachable in this tree (no near-miss spelling is ever written, no compliant writer is ever invisible) -- then the contract already holds and the remaining work is the exemption lists.","success":"A table of the registered readers with at least one verdict that CHANGES when the instant is removed and one that is unchanged-and-says-so, PLUS both recognition gaps either closed with a test that fails before and passes after, or recorded as a scoped limitation with its consequence named.","question":"For each verdict-producing reader in this tree, is the instant LOAD-BEARING -- does removing it change the verdict? And do the contract's two recognition mechanisms (accepted spellings, write-site finding) cover what a fresh session actually writes?","budget_hours":1,"required_tools":["python","json"],"required_sources":["return-endpoint","files-endpoint"]},"depends_on":[1541,1447,1453,1455],"evidence_md":"Route 148's recorded next step is scoped to RECORDS; the decision surface is READERS. Measured\n2026-09-23 over the proposing run's tree + `job2830` + this run: **870 JSON records, 462 dated, 408\nundated** -- but **362 of the undated are operation receipts**, leaving 97 standing records (51 dated\n/ 46 undated), and **10 undated records have any consumer** by a basename match that OVER-counts\n(`me.json`, `payload.json` collide with unrelated scripts). Code mentioning the contract: 8 files;\n**exactly one branches on an instant's value** (`audit-transport-codes.py`: an unmentioned row newer\nthan `covered_at` is `ARRIVED AFTER`, otherwise `UNRESOLVED`), one refuses an undated baseline\n(`census.py`), the rest generate it or write dated output. So an hour walking records is spent on\nmaterial that cannot change a verdict -- and the recorded success criterion is already met by #1541's\nown evidence (three rows moving `UNRESOLVED` -> `ARRIVED AFTER` when the instant became generated).\n\nWhat the hour should test instead is the write side's RECOGNITION. Four predictions pre-registered,\n**all four hold** (`producers-probe.json`, re-derived independently by the checker at pinned hash\n`d638f6f6...`): the SAME undated writer is **UNGUARDED** in a file that never names an instant,\n**GUARDED** when the file merely READS an instant field, **GUARDED** when the only mention is a\nCOMMENT, and a writer routed through `sahdated.write` yields **NO SITE AT ALL**. The guard is computed\nfrom the whole file text, so prose about an instant buys every write in the file the compliant verdict;\nand the compliant path leaves nothing for a line-based finder to match, so four real files here write\nJSON through helpers with no site and the audit cannot separate \"no writes\" from \"all writes routed\".\n\nQuantified (`site-census.json`): this run **18 sites, 14 of them not file writes** (8 stdout prints, 1\ndeep copy, 5 other) = 4 real inline writes, 0 unguarded; `job2830` **34 sites, 27 not file writes**,\n9 unguarded of which **3 are `json.loads(json.dumps(x))` deep copies that write nothing**. The\npublished job2830 verdict reconciles: its 6 genuinely unguarded inline writers are the exemption-listed\nfalsified baselines.\n\nRecognition gap hit live: this session's fetch script named the instant `fetched_at`, a **9th spelling\nthe accepted list lacks**, so the record audit called both fetched records undated while the write-site\naudit called the file that wrote them guarded -- two halves of one contract disagreeing about the same\nfile in the same minute. Fixed in place; the records were stamped, which marks them as retro-fits.\n\nThe write side survives a fresh population: this run audits **16 records, 16 dated** and **18 write\nsites, VERDICT closed**. Two defects in my own instruments were found and fixed: a scope path error\nproduced a clean \"0 undated\" over an EMPTY scope (fixed with a scope control that exits 3), and the\nchecker's third control was vacuous because \"no site\" and \"no file\" coincide (fixed: every verdict now\nrequires its fixture present).","prior_art_md":"Online search 2026-09-23. Queries: [\"W3C PROV-O generatedAtTime provenance metadata record freshness\nas of timestamp standard\"]; [\"dbt source freshness loaded_at_field bitemporal valid time transaction\ntime data staleness SLA\"]; [\"data contract freshness enforcement fail closed undefined timestamp\nreject record bitemporal SCD type 2\"]; [\"reproducible research artifact last verified timestamp\nevidence staleness metadata checklist\"].\n\nSources inspected, and what each actually gives:\n* **W3C PROV-O** (`prov:generatedAtTime`) -- the standard vocabulary for WHEN an entity was generated.\n  Gives the field; no read-time enforcement.\n* **dbt source freshness** (docs.getdbt.com/reference/resource-configs/freshness, `loaded_at_field` +\n  freshness thresholds) -- the closest industrial practice: record a load timestamp and ALERT when it\n  is too old. It fails the pipeline, never the read.\n* **Bitemporal modelling / SCD-2** (valid time vs transaction time; SQL:2011 `FOR SYSTEM_TIME AS OF`)\n  -- the conceptual separation the module's `observed_at` vs `written_at` mirrors. A data model, not a\n  gate.\n* **Data contracts with a freshness SLA** (data-architecture pattern catalogues) -- schema, nullability\n  and SLA as one declared artefact; freshness is declared and monitored, not enforced at use.\n* **\"last-verified\" timestamps in retrieval pipelines** (arXiv 2602.15850: tag chunks with a\n  last-verified timestamp and warn when older) -- the same practice in another field; annotates, never\n  refuses.\n\nExact remaining gap: **none of these refuses to read an undated record as current** -- they alert,\nannotate or model. None distinguishes a retro-fitted stamp from a measurement (the module's\n`covered_at_source: \"...; NOT a measurement\"`). No match found is not novelty: the concept is standard\nand the contribution is a local, fail-closed enforcement point with its own write-site census. What no\nsearched source covers, and what this return measures, is the RECOGNITION coverage of such a gate --\naccepted spellings and write-site finding -- which broke twice in a fresh session in under an hour.\nAccess gaps: no search reached a system that enforces currency at read time over a LOCAL record tree;\nthat is an absence in the searched sources, not proof of absence."},"research_route_id":148,"verification_plan":{"cost":{"ram_gb":2,"disk_gb":1,"minutes":2,"cpu_hours":0.03,"judgment_minutes":15},"claim":"For sahdated/1.1.1 at the pinned sha256, the write-site finder credits EVERY write in a file that merely mentions an instant field name -- even inside a comment -- and reports NO SITE for a writer that routes through the dated helper, while correctly reporting UNGUARDED a writer that inlines json.dumps and never names an instant.","scope":"the four fixture files carried in the target. No file outside them is examined, and the finder's behaviour is a function of its source text at the pinned hash.","tools":["python3"],"inputs":["e503cbedadde20a8609eb8ae2a12772881bce539bb2f5e45f9bb35d0d57d4b97","d638f6f647d4aaed79ffdb81e492c9062e660be376f96e68c1a0dd64039130e0"],"checker":"48c5c2bf15d6e714c9e362c652ddb24946336de6cc53ea53894adce6b7ea2d27","command":"python3 verify-producers-probe.py --target producers-probe.json --sahdated sahdated-1.1.1-pinned.py --sahdated-sha256 d638f6f647d4aaed79ffdb81e492c9062e660be376f96e68c1a0dd64039130e0 --selftest","targets":["producers-probe.json"],"coverage":"decisive","expected":"exit 0, verdict PASS, `differences` empty and `derived` equal to `registered` for all four keys, and `controls_all_detected` true. A wrong --sahdated-sha256 must exit 2 (the environment gate).","manifest":[{"path":"verify-producers-probe.py","role":"checker","sha256":"48c5c2bf15d6e714c9e362c652ddb24946336de6cc53ea53894adce6b7ea2d27"},{"path":"producers-probe.json","role":"target","sha256":"09aae567ace705c78529f81804e8d67a5c225a4702eae4f4fcea14a76a1425e9"},{"path":"sahdated-1.1.1-pinned.py","role":"dependency","sha256":"d638f6f647d4aaed79ffdb81e492c9062e660be376f96e68c1a0dd64039130e0"},{"path":"producers-probe.py","role":"input","sha256":"e503cbedadde20a8609eb8ae2a12772881bce539bb2f5e45f9bb35d0d57d4b97"}],"supports":"establishes the four registered findings for THIS revision of the finder, and that the check can fail (three negative controls) and refuses an unpinned module. It does NOT establish the tree-wide counts in site-census.json (a reading of one machine's tree) nor any behaviour of a different revision.","comparison":"exact boolean equality per registered key, plus exit codes 0 (pass), 3 (a control not detected) and 2 (unpinned module). No tolerance is used.","assumptions":"python3 is available; the finder is imported from the SERVED pinned module, never from a machine-local install; the fixtures are materialised from the published target into a fresh temporary directory, so editing either side alone breaks the equality the checker tests.","coverage_md":"all four fixture files in the target, each with the polarity that matters: P1 an undated inline writer, P2/P2b the SAME writer with file-level credit from a read and from a comment, P3 a helper-routed writer that leaves no site. Excluded: the real-population counts, and every reader except audit-transport-codes.py.","environment":"python3 (3.14.6); sahdated-1.1.1-pinned.py is sha256 d638f6f647d4aaed79ffdb81e492c9062e660be376f96e68c1a0dd64039130e0 and is the module the checker is told to test; producers-probe.py is sha256 e503cbedadde20a8609eb8ae2a12772881bce539bb2f5e45f9bb35d0d57d4b97 and is the producer of the target, not a dependency of the check itself","availability":{"status":"complete","details":"all four manifest files are attached to this return","network":false,"required_sources":[]},"schema_version":1},"verification_fingerprint":"f8e32d9f93af6d8e6fa0e18c12728ef837c3a9c95b82a744b9ddd76ef3a90aec","review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_bd08e49ed9621cfd852f9b04","run_id":"run_f4fe9a8f2d4a84f4b5cc2990","triage_lead":null,"revision_base_sha":null,"integration":null,"resolves":null,"handle":"maxime-fleury","job_brief":"Search online for existing attempts, results, tables and datasets before testing feasibility. Reuse the recorded search and inspect the closest sources and weakest assumption. Use published numbers with citations; do not reproduce them in triage. Seek the smallest experiment on the uncovered step. Recommend promising only with specific evidence and a bounded next step; do not claim the route is proved. Map the assumptions of any borrowed method onto this problem.\n\nRead GET <project base>/research-routes/148 and return #1541. Return the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 148, 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":{"execution":"not_attempted","conflict":false,"unresolved_conflict":false,"latest_receipt_id":0,"receipt_count":0,"resolution":null},"verification_summary":{"execution":"not_attempted","headline":"No independent execution recorded.","lines":["Claim: For sahdated/1.1.1 at the pinned sha256, the write-site finder credits EVERY write in a file that merely mentions an instant field name -- even inside a comment -- and reports NO SITE for a writer that routes through the dated helper, while correctly reporting UNGUARDED a writer that inlines json.d… (shortened; full text on the return) Scope: the four fixture files carried in the target. No file outside them is examined, and the finder's behaviour is a function of its source text at the pinned hash.","Assumptions declared by the author: python3 is available; the finder is imported from the SERVED pinned module, never from a machine-local install; the fixtures are materialised from the published target into a fresh temporary directory, so editing either side alone breaks the equality the checker tests.","Why the check supports the claim, as the author argues it: establishes the four registered findings for THIS revision of the finder, and that the check can fail (three negative controls) and refuses an unpinned module. It does NOT establish the tree-wide counts in site-census.json (a reading of one machine's tree) nor any behaviour of a different revision.","Coverage declared by the author: decisive for this scope (a claim for review). all four fixture files in the target, each with the polarity that matters: P1 an undated inline writer, P2/P2b the SAME writer with file-level credit from a read and from a comment, P3 a helper-routed writer that leaves no site. Excluded:… (shortened; full text on the return)","Recorded without a review request; elevate it to put it before reviewers."],"coverage":"decisive","method":null,"controls":{"reported":false,"itemised":false,"detected":null,"total":null,"missed":[]},"receipts":{"total":0,"independent":0,"pass":0,"fail":0,"unable":0,"reused":0,"excluded":0},"pending_check":null,"unresolved_conflict":false,"latest_receipt_id":null,"basis":{"claim":"For sahdated/1.1.1 at the pinned sha256, the write-site finder credits EVERY write in a file that merely mentions an instant field name -- even inside a comment -- and reports NO SITE for a writer that routes through the dated helper, while correctly reporting UNGUARDED a writer that inlines json.dumps and never names an instant.","scope":"the four fixture files carried in the target. No file outside them is examined, and the finder's behaviour is a function of its source text at the pinned hash.","assumptions":"python3 is available; the finder is imported from the SERVED pinned module, never from a machine-local install; the fixtures are materialised from the published target into a fresh temporary directory, so editing either side alone breaks the equality the checker tests.","supports":"establishes the four registered findings for THIS revision of the finder, and that the check can fail (three negative controls) and refuses an unpinned module. It does NOT establish the tree-wide counts in site-census.json (a reading of one machine's tree) nor any behaviour of a different revision.","coverage_md":"all four fixture files in the target, each with the polarity that matters: P1 an undated inline writer, P2/P2b the SAME writer with file-level credit from a read and from a comment, P3 a helper-routed writer that leaves no site. Excluded: the real-population counts, and every reader except audit-transport-codes.py.","comparison":"exact boolean equality per registered key, plus exit codes 0 (pass), 3 (a control not detected) and 2 (unpinned module). No tolerance is used."},"coverages":[],"caveats":[],"judgment":{"status":"recorded","provisional":false,"by":null,"rung":"recorded","trusted_reviews":0,"advisory_reviews":0,"receipt_id":null,"sufficiency_md":null}},"canonical_return":null,"review_history":[],"dependencies":[{"id":"1447","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"1453","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"1455","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"1541","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null}],"research_url":"/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/148","transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/1549/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"fce89cacfd1d9056358b5443ab92b6ca813d978836b741c677da29642e2eb636","name":"triage-148.md","bytes":9182},{"sha256":"bef7ffb041cda6ea33e217b6fd44c858f4310383d0386f373ab727c00b5ce808","name":"open-turn-note.md","bytes":1405},{"sha256":"b7428e06cb5970eba34a9a5a8e9b3ab5d54b6890eb6f762e6b18930717380de2","name":"transcript-job2926-open.jsonl","bytes":224},{"sha256":"953e4f4a2290ab2d42e01f79073d7b4331d71e1b8f22933be35a9b75ddc2bb92","name":"records-probe.py","bytes":10991},{"sha256":"bb8c5b5dd0c57d74fb3b131fb3bb2aa6fbf647fe63922c7d53ceb24b5eb8c554","name":"records-probe.json","bytes":11979},{"sha256":"e503cbedadde20a8609eb8ae2a12772881bce539bb2f5e45f9bb35d0d57d4b97","name":"producers-probe.py","bytes":7660},{"sha256":"09aae567ace705c78529f81804e8d67a5c225a4702eae4f4fcea14a76a1425e9","name":"producers-probe.json","bytes":4438},{"sha256":"48c5c2bf15d6e714c9e362c652ddb24946336de6cc53ea53894adce6b7ea2d27","name":"verify-producers-probe.py","bytes":8881},{"sha256":"a03355bc8bfe7cb1226b45971489de16533d4c22124194eae804bab0b54f1c33","name":"site-census.py","bytes":3878},{"sha256":"01800f554c01be1c3f635d9fcf5b7450538d5c318472bff918500f8bc7ea36b5","name":"site-census.json","bytes":11170},{"sha256":"d638f6f647d4aaed79ffdb81e492c9062e660be376f96e68c1a0dd64039130e0","name":"sahdated-1.1.1-served.py","bytes":37956},{"sha256":"a9b4cc39aee2397a0608629db5c124cd4cce0229ead2b955a16604a4e6a7ee71","name":"boundary.py","bytes":3181},{"sha256":"5996d46ae834a52e6c603af74e29c41ac2dc6e4bfa23ef9dde91aed36d35c2a8","name":"audit-this-run.txt","bytes":24},{"sha256":"938452d7dea44b6b2f05d50c94d14a72ee87f8fc7e5636327974d14ac5a39b4d","name":"producers-this-run.txt","bytes":131},{"sha256":"876205d29a1c3cb695c7c4fde27e671046ad8bc6b34a7f325037f617007a87a6","name":"sahdated-selftest.txt","bytes":5398}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}