{"id":1693,"job_id":3333,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":6,"type":"audit","user_id":1,"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# research/history/staging/varE-exact-ladder-01.md: the falsification row no longer claims a\nmonotone fall (job 3333)\n\nOne table cell, and it now agrees with the note's own §1 text.\n\nThe falsification-table row for \"the decoupling error is `O(1/ln y)` or better\" said\n\"PARTLY. **Falling on x = 13..31**; the levels exclude growth and nothing finer, exactly as at\nsix levels\". That contradicts the same note's §1: the column rises **0.00404 -> 0.00459\n(+13.6 %) at x = 19 -> 23**, and §1's own prose (l.88-89) already says \"The last column is\nbounded on every level computed and falls at every step **above x = 23**\". The cell now reads\n\"PARTLY. **Bounded on x = 13..31, falling at every step except 19 -> 23**; the levels exclude\ngrowth and nothing finer, exactly as at six levels\" -- the reviewer's wording, matching §1.\n\n**What does not change:** the row's verdict `PARTLY`, its scope `MEASURED, 8 exact levels`, its\nfalsifier (`delta*(X - X_dec)*ln y` growing at a new level) and the closing clause about growth;\nevery other row of the table, the §1 table and all eight exact levels. The claim being hedged is\nunchanged -- the levels still exclude growth -- only the word that misdescribed *this* range is\nreplaced.\n\n**Guard counts, measured:** served and revision both `fences=0, out-sha256=0`. `code-sha256`\nappears **once on both sides**, and it is a **prose reference** (l.12: \"`research/varE-exact-\nladder-01.js` (embedded, `code-sha256` and body verified ...)\"), not a marker and not a bound\nOUTPUT block -- there is no embedded hash or captured stdout in this document, so nothing is\nre-embedded and the producer's embedded state is untouched. The task's stdout clause is vacuous\nhere rather than satisfied.\n\n`resolves [208]`, `cites.returns [108]`. Revision `acacba84212413103ce2ac58d7866271370b22581b2a70dea5ba5be8438a7c22` (17094 B, 274 lines), base = served `3bf27af9…` (17055 B, 274 lines,\n`/history` `versions: []`), re-verified against the server immediately before upload. Diff = 1\nchanged line.\n\n**Evidence.** Served `research/history/staging/varE-exact-ladder-01.md` and its `/history` read\nthis assignment (2026-09-25); the §1 table's 0.00404 -> 0.00459 step and l.88-89's \"falls at\nevery step above x = 23\" are in the same served file, so the correction is checked against the\nartifact it belongs to rather than against the finding's paraphrase alone. #208 is review #330\nof return #108; the sibling finding #207 on `varE-theta2-step.md` was fixed in return #1692\nearlier in this grant and quotes the same 13.6 % step.\n\n49 of @Benjaminsen's returns wait for a verdict (job 3333's brief).\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0,"hashes":{},"author_rung":null,"status":"pending","final_rung":null,"created_at":"2026-09-25T12:27:43.101Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"returns":[108]},"tokens":{"log":"custom","input":0,"models":{"deepseek-v4-flash":0},"output":0,"source":"none","entries":0,"cache_read":0,"cache_write":0,"observed_models":["deepseek-v4-flash"]},"paper_slug":null,"revision_path":"research/history/staging/varE-exact-ladder-01.md","revision_sha":"acacba84212413103ce2ac58d7866271370b22581b2a70dea5ba5be8438a7c22","recipe_md":"1. GET /projects/twin-primes/docs/research/history/staging/varE-exact-ladder-01.md -> sha256\n3bf27af9..., 17055 B, 274 lines, `/history` `versions: []`. 2. `grep -n 'Falling on x = 13..31'`\n-> l.261; `sed -n '85,92p'` and `grep -n '0.00404'` show the +13.6 % step at x = 19 -> 23 that the\ncell denied. 3. One string replacement (asserted to match exactly once), re-verify the served sha\nagainst the server, POST /files. 4. Check: 0 fenced blocks and 0 `out-sha256`; the single\n`code-sha256` hit is a prose mention at l.12, so nothing is re-embedded.","verification":null,"target":null,"finding":null,"human_md":null,"provisional":false,"effects_applied_at":null,"effort":null,"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":null,"research_route_id":null,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":"2026-09-25T12:27:43.101Z","department_id":"dept_0e793a31e299699dfaaa6fee","run_id":"run_c007fd68ea8c6411bb393e15","triage_lead":null,"revision_base_sha":"3bf27af9858e86cbd205ee9c3bbf3504fb456ce701044d1dbb34132ffe002a73","integration":null,"resolves":[208],"handle":"Benjaminsen","job_brief":"A reviewer found a defect in the served file `research/history/staging/varE-exact-ladder-01.md` while reviewing return #108 (review #330 by @Benjaminsen), recorded as finding #208. Fix it; do not redo the work it belongs to.\n\nWhat the reviewer said:\n> The falsification table row for \"the decoupling error is O(1/ln y) or better\" (l.261) says \"Falling on x = 13..31\". Its own §1 table rises 0.00404 -> 0.00459 (+13.6 %) at x = 19 -> 23. Say \"bounded on x = 13..31, falling at every step except 19 -> 23\", matching l.88-89.\n\nFetch the current file (GET <project base>/docs/research/history/staging/varE-exact-ladder-01.md), make the change, check it still runs and that its stdout reproduces byte for byte elsewhere (progress, timing and rates go to stderr; paths relative to the repository), upload the revised file (POST /files) and return as this job with `\"revision\": { \"path\": \"research/history/staging/varE-exact-ladder-01.md\", \"file\": \"<sha256 of the revised file>\" }`, the sha in `files`, a one-line report of what changed and why, and `\"cites\": { \"returns\": [108] }`. If the file's embedded hashes depend on the change, re-embed them and say so. Send `\"revision\": { …, \"base\": \"<X-Content-SHA256 of the text you edited>\" }` so a later change to the file is caught rather than overwritten, and list the findings your revision answers in `\"resolves\": [<finding ids>]` (GET <project base>/findings?path=research/history/staging/varE-exact-ladder-01.md lists the open ones). Accepted, the revision becomes the served version and closes the findings it answered; a finding it leaves open goes to the next fix job.","review_deferred":false,"in_triage":true,"triage":[],"verification_runs":[],"verification_state":null,"verification_summary":null,"canonical_return":null,"review_history":[],"dependencies":[],"research_url":null,"transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/1693/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"acacba84212413103ce2ac58d7866271370b22581b2a70dea5ba5be8438a7c22","name":"research-history-staging-varE-exact-ladder-01.md","bytes":17094}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}