{"id":1563,"job_id":2958,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":null,"type":"explore","user_id":34,"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# Job #2958 — Triage of route #149: the R = 308 decision is already answered, and the rung is 309\n\nAttempt `c20cee5d2be8241bae9b43d9e1a77d98` · session `17f7d0490870faabbaab3441` (assignment 9, explore,\ngeneral mode, effort `max`) · run `bf5-c0210c4b8b2e4e97` · route **149** rev 1 (`proposed`) · basis:\nreturn #1554 (recorded); declared dependencies #1507 (recorded), #1381 (pending, not used — #1507 carries\nits artifacts). Protocol `department-v2.research-2026-09-22.1`, guidance `research-2026-09-22.1`.\n\nRead for this triage: `GET /research-routes/149`; #1554 with all nine of its artifacts fetched by sha\n(certificate, run log, both engine variants and diffs, `witness.py`); #1507, #1381; #1541/#1549/#1555/#1556\nto confirm no newer route-149 return exists (the route's `last_return_id` is still 1554); OEIS A144311\nlive; arXiv:1706.03668. The engine was **not** run: every claim below is arithmetic re-derived from the\ndefinition in `witness.py`/0018 and cross-checked against the certificate's own printed numbers.\n\n**Verdict: `promising`** — one bounded experiment is justified, but not the one route 149 records. R = 308\nis already decided; the certified rung is **309** (`A144311(23) ≥ 1859`, `G₂(83#) ≥ 1860`); the first open\ndecision is **R = 310**.\n\n## 1. The route's own question is answered, at zero search cost\n\nA configuration's covered set shifts with the configuration (`S(a + t) = S(a) + t`), so the certification\nof `[0, pre(a) − 1]` is a statement about *one translate* of a witness, not about the witness. #1554's\ncertificate does not stop at 0:\n\n```\n-5:C -4:C -3:. -2:C -1:C 0:C ... 306:C 307:. 308:C 309:. 310:C ...\nMAX covered run 309 at [-2, 306]      pre(a) as printed by the engine: 307\n```\n\nPosition 307 is uncovered, so the engine's `pre = 307` is right; 309 is uncovered, so this configuration\ncertifies nothing above 309; but `[-2, 306]` is 309 consecutive covered positions, and translating by +2\ngives a configuration whose prefix is **309** (`translate t = 2 reproduces the max run as a prefix: True`,\nchecked as a fresh configuration). A rung R is a covering of `[0, R−1]`: therefore **R = 308 and R = 309\nare COVERABLE**, the route's recorded success criterion (\"REFUTED at R = 308 ⇒ A144311(23) = 1847 exactly\")\nis unreachable, and the first genuinely open target is R = 310. Under the route's own map\n`A144311(n+2) = 6R + 5`, the certificate in hand certifies **1859 / 1860**, +12 over the banked 1847\n(+150 over the published `A144311(22) = 1709`).\n\n## 2. The record already held it: a banked witness certifies 309\n\n`ladder-runs.py` re-reads the witnesses **already filed** for their covered run (walk left and right from\n0; the prefix stops at the first gap by construction):\n\n| witness (already on the record) | engine `pre(a)` | run containing 0 | rung | A144311(23) ≥ |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 0017 return 1379, target 285 | 288 | 291 | 291 | 1751 |\n| 0018 ascent, target 289 | 294 | 295 | 295 | 1775 |\n| 0018 ascent, target 295 | 296 | 296 | 296 | 1781 |\n| 0018 ascent, target 297 | 304 | 305 | 305 | 1835 |\n| **0018 ascent, target 305** (#1507) | 306 | **309** ([-3, 305]) | **309** | **1859** |\n| **#1554, target 307** | 307 | **309** ([-2, 306]) | **309** | **1859** |\n\nSo the correction is not hypothetical: the witness #1507 banked at 05:00Z today already certified 309, and\nboth the ladder summary (306) and #1554 (307) read 3 and 2 low. Five of the six witnesses have slack\n(288→291, 294→295, 296→296, 304→305, 306→309, 307→309).\n\n## 3. The map was calibrated, not assumed\n\n`mapcheck.py` brute-forces `R(n)` as the maximal covered run over **all** configurations for n = 1..5 and\ncompares `6R + 5` with the published terms: R = 1, 4, 6, 10, 17 → 11, 29, 41, 65, 107, matching OEIS\n**exactly at 5 of 5** (n = 5 exhaustive over 17,017 configurations). The run reading is the published one:\nwere the rung only a prefix statistic, the small cases would not reproduce the sequence.\n\n## 4. Why the reading was missed, and what fixing it costs\n\nThe corpus's `witness.py` is explicit that the rung is `pre(a)` and that a witness may exceed its target\n(0018's Lemma 2, which corrected 0017's target-vs-prefix error). The remaining slack is *inside* `pre`:\nthe prefix is read at whichever translate the engine printed, and the print starts at 0. The corpus's own\npaper draft states the object is \"the longest run of consecutive integers each ≡ ±1 mod some prime ≤ x\" —\na run statistic — so the run is the definitionally right reading. Fix: walk left as well as right, i.e.\n`pre` → the run containing 0. One loop, no engine change, no re-run; it would have banked 309 today.\n\n## 5. Price of the real next decision (first REFUTED R ≥ 310)\n\nMeasured, from the record: R = 307's decision cost 736,303,790,107 nodes with the witness in hand at\nt ≈ 14,454 s of a 149,231.6 s rung (the rest is `pthread_join` on unfinished branches); the log's own rate\nis 2.77e6 nodes/s per branch, 8 branches. The corpus's cost fit (0018 §6, factor 1.087 per +1 in R at\nn = 17) puts R = 310 at ≈ 1e12 nodes ≈ 12 h wall on 8 threads (≈ 95 CPU-h). So: the **coverable** half of\nR = 310 (early-abort build `jtwin_hb2`) plausibly fits a bounded budget; the **exhaustive** half, which is\nwhat exactness needs, does not — the route's declared `next_step.budget_hours: 4` is under-priced by more\nthan an order of magnitude for a refutation. That is a price finding for the route's owner, not a reason\nto stop: the cheapest first move is §2 and costs nothing.\n\n## 6. What this does not claim\n\nNo exactness (`A144311(23)` remains open; a refutation needs a complete search), no upper bound, no\nasymptotics, nothing about twin-prime infinitude, and **R = 310 is not decided here** — the certificate in\nhand stops at 309. The `+12` is a lower bound under the route's own `A = 6R + 5` map, which is cited from\n0017/#1381/#1507 and calibrated here at n = 1..5, not re-proved at n = 21. The run readings are of the\nrecord's six witnesses, not of the search space.\n\n## 7. Instruments, including one that failed\n\n`runcheck.py` (from-definition scan, both directions, with drop-one/shift-one controls), `ladder-runs.py`\n(the record's witnesses), `mapcheck.py` (published calibration). Cross-check against the corpus's own\ntool: `witness.py check` reproduces my six prefixes 6/6, so the scratch implementation and the corpus's\nagree on the object. One instrument failed and is disclosed: `oeis-bridge.py` scanned integers\n[−80, 2100] for a run of ≥ 1859 consecutive integers each ≡ ±1 mod some prime ≤ 83 and found none — a\nlocation error, not a counterexample, since the integer run's position is fixed by a CRT congruence inside\na period of 83# ≈ 3e34 (see `evidence.md` §4).\n\n## 8. Outstanding work, usage, and the queue\n\n- `outstanding` before this filing: 8 issued / 8 settled, `[]` — and the two pending usages are now\n  cleared in this turn (#1461 credited 16,713,317; #1470 credited 13,708,410), each from its own closed\n  filing turn cut out of the harness record, scrubbed, verified and machine-path-redacted before posting.\n- **Usage for this return is pending, not zero.** This turn is still open at filing time (thread\n  `602e47f9-…`, user seq 876 → end), so the transcript attached here is the open turn; the closed turn's\n  usage is posted with `POST /return/<id>/transcript` on the next invocation, never estimated.\n- **86 of @maxime-fleury's returns wait for a verdict** (45 on `deepseek-v4-flash`), the oldest since\n  2026-09-13. Verdicts need a trusted reviewer; this session is neither, and the queue is not mine.\n- Attribution: the translate observation was first made in the previous attempt on this job (sibling run\n  `bf9-07c6aa2c40694e21`, released unstarted-for-filing, local package not on the record). Everything here\n  is re-derived with this return's own code and does not rest on that package.\n\n## Reproduce\n\n```\npython runcheck.py src/certificate-R307.txt     # run 309 at [-2,306]; translate t=2 -> prefix 309\npython ladder-runs.py --window 4000             # the record's six witnesses; best rung 309\npython mapcheck.py --maxn 5                     # 6R+5 vs published A144311: exact 5/5\npython src/0018-witness.py check 21 1 2 9 0 4 12 9 5 29 2 4 13 31 9 54 35 56 67 37 62 33\n```\n\nEach script writes its JSON with `newline=\"\\n\"` and no timing field, so a re-run reproduces the same\nbytes; all were re-run before this return was built.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0,"hashes":{"080583bb9191fbd593b9a90f47a6df5b9abda33d87a3e8a3368df9e852d025de":"oeis-bridge.py","18e6333a5f8c2bd36d1a6949c0887996963e6032e443692790bb5aba37d509a1":"evidence.md","263774bb52043a2e59872118c9eb36893c1d235d526c0a29114cf199d69c102a":"prior_art.md","2b7eadb79a61c668aeedd741dd7e3781677d472070673fe88eaa3d2be165f10b":"ladder-runs.json","37f025cdf6e1b41d7943620198feeb57984d84b8588594476ae08fbd69de56b8":"ladder-runs.py","53d499c042db37fb51abc7a2fd21cac43c84f6f16759c07fc3675e422e277e9f":"recipe.md","7305d9b2b99a1f5efd92f5d637174a82154944d29449b6bdd7f3ab83a4a02e75":"runcheck.json","7d37e59297963b4c45dcf9563b1b644c69336702d2b158d89fe43331ba088aa8":"runcheck.py","8ca105b2f38b0f1f233c099f851e0ac951d83400c5b6fe4c532df1bd78b86464":"oeis-bridge.json","8e3a93080f90a5c79856a83298bc6d2fc767858828ac4fd698baa7aef3b66d51":"mapcheck.py","e61ee69a8242fae49f49a3c4161ed49ee4658ec49a94606f270a8d46d26d6cb9":"mapcheck.json","f3e1c2b0b3f1b54da4d580fdfb437f87e31b515add4d26174deea5dd01a2171f":"report.md"},"author_rung":"verified","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-09-23T23:34:59.061Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"returns":[1507,1554]},"tokens":{"log":"custom","input":836261,"models":{"deepseek-v4-flash":0},"output":142604,"source":"reported","entries":0,"cache_read":15151744,"cache_write":0,"observed_models":["deepseek-v4-flash"]},"paper_slug":null,"revision_path":null,"revision_sha":null,"recipe_md":"# Recipe — route 149 triage (job #2958), from the record's own bytes\n\nEverything below runs offline from artifacts this return fetches by sha; no engine, no search.\n\n```\n# 1. the certificate and the instruments the route rests on (by sha, from #1554 / #1507 / #1381)\npython getfile.py <sha-of-certificate-R307.txt> src/certificate-R307.txt\npython getfile.py <sha-of-0018-witness.py>       src/0018-witness.py\npython getfile.py <sha-of-0018-seed-certificate.txt> src/0018-seed-certificate.txt\n\n# 2. re-derive the covered run of the filed certificate (both directions), with controls\npython runcheck.py src/certificate-R307.txt\n#   expect: MAX covered run 309 at [-2, 306]; prefix 307; translate t=2 -> prefix 309 True;\n#           drop-one / shift-one maxima inside [29, 200] (the scan can fail)\n\n# 3. re-read the six certified witnesses on the record for their runs\npython ladder-runs.py --window 4000\n#   expect: 288->291, 294->295, 296->296, 304->305, 306->309, 307->309; best rung 309\n\n# 4. calibrate the map against the published terms (brute force, all configurations)\npython mapcheck.py --maxn 5\n#   expect: R = 1,4,6,10,17 -> 11,29,41,65,107 = OEIS A144311(3..7), exact 5/5\n\n# 5. cross-check the object against the corpus's own tool (it agrees on all six prefixes)\npython src/0018-witness.py check 21 <a_5 ... a_83>\n```\n\nInputs are parsed out of the filed artifacts (`runcheck.parse_certificate`), never retyped. Outputs are\nwritten with `newline=\"\\n\"` and carry no timing field, so a re-run reproduces the same bytes.","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":"2026-09-23T23:58:53.794Z","file_notes":null,"research":{"outcome":"promising","route_id":149,"next_step":{"method":"First the free move: re-read the record's witnesses for the covered run containing 0 (walk left and right from 0 instead of stopping at the first uncovered j >= 0) -- this already banks R = 309 with no search. Then run the ascent at target R = 310 with the early-abort build jtwin_hb2, seeded with the record's six witnesses, and measure the run of any witness it returns. A refutation needs the complete tree: ~1e12 nodes at this rung (0017's cost fit, factor 1.087 per +1 in R, from the measured 736e9 at R = 307), i.e. tens of CPU-hours (measured rate: 8 x 2.77e6 nodes/s, so the coverable half is ~10 CPU-h and a refutation ~100), far past a 4 CPU-hour budget -- cap the run and report coverable-or-unresolved, never exactness. Re-price the refutation half before attempting it.","compute":{"ram_gb":2,"disk_gb":1,"cpu_hours":32},"failure":"Neither within the cap: R = 310 stays undecided, the rung remains 309, and the result is recorded as unresolved -- not as a refutation.","success":"A witness at R = 310 or above with its run measured (certifying a higher lower bound), or a complete refutation, which would make A144311(23) = 1859 exact and a new OEIS term.","question":"Is R = 310 COVERABLE (the rung rises above 309) or is it the first REFUTED rung (so A144311(23) = 1859 exactly)?","budget_hours":4,"required_tools":[],"required_sources":[]},"depends_on":[1507,1554],"evidence_md":"# Evidence — route 149 (job #2958): R = 308/309 are COVERABLE by a translate; the certified rung is 309\n\n**What this changes.** The route's recorded decision (\"Is R = 308 REFUTED … or COVERABLE?\") is answered and\nits success criterion is unreachable: a translate of the R = 307 certificate already on the record covers\n[0, 308], so R = 308 and R = 309 are COVERABLE. The bound moves `A144311(23) ≥ 1847 → 1859`,\n`G₂(83#) ≥ 1848 → 1860`, at zero search cost; the first open decision becomes **R = 310**.\n\n## 1. Verified: the certificate's covered set extends below 0 (own code, from the definition)\n\n`runcheck.py` rebuilds the covered set from the corpus definition (`c_p = 2·6⁻¹ mod p`; `j` covered iff\n`j ≡ a_p` or `a_p + c_p` mod some prime in {5,…,83}), parses the residues out of the filed certificate,\nand scans both directions:\n\n```\nboundary: -5:C -4:C -3:. -2:C -1:C 0:C ... 306:C 307:. 308:C 309:. 310:C ...\nMAX covered run 309 at [-2, 306]   prefix pre(a) as printed by the engine: 307\nrun-reachable bounds  A144311(23) >= 1859 ;  G_2(83#) >= 1860    (prefix-reachable: 1847/1848)\n```\n\n307 is uncovered (so the engine's `pre = 307` is right) and 309 is uncovered (so nothing above 309 is\nclaimed here), but `[-2, 306]` is 309 consecutive covered positions. Covered sets shift with the\nconfiguration (`S(a+t) = S(a)+t`), so the translate `a + 2` is a configuration with `pre = 309`, checked as\na fresh configuration: `translate t = 2 reproduces the max run as a prefix: True`. A rung R is a covering\nof `[0, R−1]`, so `a + 2` covers `[0, 308]`: R = 308 and R = 309 are COVERABLE and **R = 310 is the first\ntarget this configuration does not decide**. Controls (the scan must be able to fail): deleting any one of\nthe 21 classes leaves a maximum run in [29, 200]; moving any single residue by +1 (mod p) leaves [29, 200].\n\n## 2. Verified: the record already banked a witness that certifies 309\n\n`ladder-runs.py` re-reads the already-filed witnesses for the run containing 0 (walk left and right; the\nprefix stops at the first gap):\n\n| witness already on the record | engine `pre` | run containing 0 | rung |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| 0017 #1379, target 285 | 288 | 291 | 291 |\n| 0018 ascent, target 289 | 294 | 295 | 295 |\n| 0018 ascent, target 295 | 296 | 296 | 296 |\n| 0018 ascent, target 297 | 304 | 305 | 305 |\n| **0018 ascent, target 305 (#1507)** | 306 | **309** [−3, 305] | **309** |\n| **#1554, target 307** | 307 | **309** [−2, 306] | **309** |\n\nBoth certify 309: A144311(23) ≥ 1859 has been on the record since #1507, read 12 low (ladder summary 306,\n#1554 307).\n\n## 3. Verified: the map was calibrated against the published terms, not assumed\n\n`mapcheck.py` brute-forces R(n) as the maximal covered run over **all** configurations for n = 1..5 and\ncompares `6R + 5` with the published A144311 terms: R = 1, 4, 6, 10, 17 → 11, 29, 41, 65, 107, **exact\n5/5** (n = 5 exhaustive over 17,017 configurations): the run reading is the published one.\n\n## 4. One instrument failed (disclosed)\n\n`oeis-bridge.py` scanned integers [−80, 2100] for ≥ 1859 consecutive integers each ≡ ±1 mod some prime\n≤ 83 and found none. That is a location error, not a counterexample: the integer run's position is\nfixed by a CRT congruence in a period of 83# ≈ 3e34, so a window scan cannot see it. The bridge to integers\nis the corpus's own Lemma 2.2, tested at small n in §3; the position-space statement is what this return\nuses. Object cross-check: `witness.py check` reproduces my six prefixes 6/6.\n\n**Rungs.** §1–§3 are verified finite arithmetic, recheckable from the receipts. The map is cited\nfrom 0017/#1381/#1507, not re-proved at n = 21. No exactness, no upper bound, no asymptotics.\n\n## 5. Attribution\n\nThe translate observation was first made in the previous attempt on this job (sibling run\n`bf9-07c6aa2c40694e21`, released before filing, local package not on the record). Everything above is\nre-derived with this return's own code and does not rest on that package.","prior_art_md":"# Prior art — route 149 (job #2958), searched 2026-09-23/24\n\n## Online, read today\n\n- **OEIS A144311, live 2026-09-23** (page last modified 2026-09-23 18:45 EDT). Definition verbatim:\n  \"The length of the longest sequence of consecutive integers, each equal to 1 or -1 modulo at least one\n  of the first n primes\". Data: 22 terms, `a(22) = 1709`, offset 1, `nonn,more,hard`. Extensions:\n  a(8)-a(16) Max Alekseyev 2009; **a(17)-a(22) Jinyuan Wang, 2024**. Links: a StackExchange thread\n  (2016) and Wang's C++ program `a144311.cpp.txt`, a branch-and-bound DFS that works inside the 6-wheel\n  (the corpus's `a144311-full-ladder.js` documents the same program and its `pskip` = the -2 class).\n  Cross-refs A048670, A049300, A058989. **No a(23) anywhere on the page, and no lower bound beyond the\n  sequence data**: the route's \"an exact a(23) would be new\" is still accurate, and an exact a(23) would\n  also be the first term past Wang's published computation.\n\n- **Ziller & Morack, arXiv:1706.03668** (submitted 12 Jun 2017), \"A short note on the computation of the\n  generalised Jacobsthal function for paired progressions\": the paired Jacobsthal function is computed\n  \"for primorial numbers for primes up to 73\", and all computed values satisfy the conjectured bound\n  relevant to Goldbach and the prime-pairs conjecture. Ancillary data: `full_details.pdf`,\n  `moduli_2.txt`, `permutations_2.txt`, `psi_2_min.txt`, `remainders_2.txt`. So the published\n  paired-Jacobsthal programme reaches p = 73 = A144311(21); the 83# rung is two ranks past it and past\n  OEIS's own last term.\n\n- **Access gap, open.** Nguyen, \"Finite-Window Noncovering on Primorial Wheels: Higher-Order CRT Bounds\n  and Shift Correlations\", DOI 10.20944/preprints202608.1299.v1: `https://www.preprints.org/` answers\n  **403** from this machine for the manuscript page (my own fetch today; the previous attempt on this job\n  reports the PDF likewise). The corpus holds it at title level only. Its subject is this route's\n  refutation side, so it is the one item that could bound or occupy the route; closing it needs a\n  browser, not compute, and remains the cheapest open prior-art debt on route 149.\n\n## Internal prior art, read and not repeated\n\n- #1554 (route 149's origin) and #1381/#1507 (programme 0018 v1/v2): the witness-prefix ascent, the\n  R = 307 certificate, and the certified ladder. 0018's Lemma 2 already records the target-vs-prefix\n  error (0017 reported R = 285 for a witness whose `pre = 288`) and takes every rung from `pre(a)`.\n- The corpus's own paper draft on the two-class object states: \"It is OEIS A144311 shifted by one.\n  A144311 counts the longest run of consecutive integers each ≡ ±1 mod some prime ≤ x; that is G₂ − 1.\"\n  The corpus therefore already knows the object is a **run** statistic; that is what makes reading the\n  rung off one printed translate's prefix a defect rather than a convention.\n- `research/covering-dive.md`: no two-class upper bound of any exponent is in print (the\n  Iwaniec/Vaughan line is one class per prime). Unaffected by this return.\n- Route 73 (`A144311`'s 25th term, state `blocked`) is the same ladder three ranks up; it consumes\n  A144311(25), so today's correction moves it by nothing directly.\n\n## Exact remaining gap\n\n1. **Exactness of A144311(23).** Needs the first REFUTED rung, now known to be ≥ 310. Nothing above\n   bounds it: no counting certificate fires at this level (0018's Lemma 4, `capacity.out`: `cap(R) - R`\n   is positive for every R ≤ 320), so it is a complete search or nothing.\n2. **The banked bound is 12 low** until this correction is read into the record: the record carries 1841\n   (#1507) / 1847 (#1554); the witnesses on the record certify **1859**.\n3. The Nguyen preprint, above, if it holds a noncovering bound at this scale."},"research_route_id":149,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_bd08e49ed9621cfd852f9b04","run_id":"run_3c0c1f8676019314310d5014","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/149 and return #1554. Return the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 149, 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":"1507","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"1554","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null}],"research_url":"/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/149","transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/1563/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"f3e1c2b0b3f1b54da4d580fdfb437f87e31b515add4d26174deea5dd01a2171f","name":"report.md","bytes":8459},{"sha256":"18e6333a5f8c2bd36d1a6949c0887996963e6032e443692790bb5aba37d509a1","name":"evidence.md","bytes":4013},{"sha256":"263774bb52043a2e59872118c9eb36893c1d235d526c0a29114cf199d69c102a","name":"prior_art.md","bytes":3808},{"sha256":"53d499c042db37fb51abc7a2fd21cac43c84f6f16759c07fc3675e422e277e9f","name":"recipe.md","bytes":1528},{"sha256":"7d37e59297963b4c45dcf9563b1b644c69336702d2b158d89fe43331ba088aa8","name":"runcheck.py","bytes":7661},{"sha256":"7305d9b2b99a1f5efd92f5d637174a82154944d29449b6bdd7f3ab83a4a02e75","name":"runcheck.json","bytes":5675},{"sha256":"37f025cdf6e1b41d7943620198feeb57984d84b8588594476ae08fbd69de56b8","name":"ladder-runs.py","bytes":4741},{"sha256":"2b7eadb79a61c668aeedd741dd7e3781677d472070673fe88eaa3d2be165f10b","name":"ladder-runs.json","bytes":3762},{"sha256":"8e3a93080f90a5c79856a83298bc6d2fc767858828ac4fd698baa7aef3b66d51","name":"mapcheck.py","bytes":4552},{"sha256":"e61ee69a8242fae49f49a3c4161ed49ee4658ec49a94606f270a8d46d26d6cb9","name":"mapcheck.json","bytes":1333},{"sha256":"080583bb9191fbd593b9a90f47a6df5b9abda33d87a3e8a3368df9e852d025de","name":"oeis-bridge.py","bytes":3448},{"sha256":"8ca105b2f38b0f1f233c099f851e0ac951d83400c5b6fe4c532df1bd78b86464","name":"oeis-bridge.json","bytes":443}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}