{"id":1868,"job_id":4224,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":6,"type":"explore","user_id":34,"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# Job #4224 — route 87 step check: the LOW top-edge step is **still open**; the held pursuit may go out with this note\n\n**Outcome: `promising`, with route 87's step copied exactly** (proved by the attached checker as\nparsed-JSON and canonical-byte equality, step sha256 `b236bfd1…`). Nothing in this check measures the\nstep or promotes the eps table: it is a read of the record, and it says the record does not answer the\nquestion the step asks.\n\n## 1. What was asked\n\nRoute 87's next experiment was set by return **#1122** (2026-09-19) and this is a first look: decide,\nbefore a pursuit is spent, whether the returns recorded since already answer it. The step:\nextend the LOW half's `H_SUB` grid **upward** past 0.48 and re-run *only* the synthetic families and\nthe inversions, reporting for each channel INSIDE/OUTSIDE and, when outside, which edge; \"an outside\ninversion must never be reported as 'no information' again\". The question behind it: is the LOW R\nchannel's failure a **top-edge artefact** of a grid that stops at 0.48?\n\n## 2. What the returns recorded since settle\n\n| return | job | recorded | what it actually does | answers the step? |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| **#1863** | 4221 | 2026-09-26T19:40:49Z | the previous step check on this same step; its only files are `edge4221.py` + `edge4221.out.json`, and its own docstring says *\"read-only, stdlib only, no simulation\"*: it positions each LOW channel against #1122's top edge and adds two **extrapolated forecasts** (pooled H ≈ 0.49/0.50; unpooled R 0.505–0.708 depending on extrapolator) | **No** — forecasts, not inversions; it returned `promising` with the step copied |\n| **#1864** | 4222 | 2026-09-26T19:45:23Z | route **72**'s own step check (residue-preserving nulls, matched-support moments); its research block contains nothing about route 87, the fGn family, `H_SUB` or the R channel | **No** |\n| #1091, #1094, #1101, #1104, #1106, #1107, #1108, #1111 | 2046…2079 | 2026-09-18/19 | the route's own earlier line; they **precede** the step (set by #1122) and are its premises, not its answer | No |\n| **#1122** | 2083 | 2026-09-19 | the step's setter: the pooled power floor works, and all three R channels land **outside below the top** on LOW — the failure it re-located to the grid's extent | No (it *set* the question) |\n\n## 3. The decisive facts, verified from the instruments rather than the summaries\n\nAll three objects were fetched anonymously by sha from `/files` and re-hashed locally:\n\n- **#1122's `check-2083.py`** (`5931777b…4fa2`), **line 70**:\n  `H_SUB = [0.30, 0.33, 0.36, 0.39, 0.42, 0.45, 0.48]` — top edge **0.48**, and its own comment says\n  the pre-registered grid was `0.38..0.50` and was **widened downward** (defect (b), the *bottom*\n  edge). The top edge has never been measured on the record.\n- **#1863's `edge4221.py`** (`90243cce…b1ebb`): docstring \"…no simulation\"; **no numpy**; it pins its\n  input as #1122's `check-2083.out.json` by sha `67a4f8c7…` and hard-codes the same grid; it calls no\n  generator. Its output (`3e87feca…7dbb`) reports `grid_top 0.48` and each channel's\n  `inverted_H: null` with `gap_below_family_top` — i.e. the same \"outside below\" fact, plus forecasts.\n- **Route state** (`/research-routes/87` revision 10, snapshot attached): `state active`,\n  `last_return_id 1863`; events are `#1091…#1122` plus **#1863**; the jobs after #2083 are\n  **2095** (`expired`, no return), **4221** (`returned`, #1863) and **4224** (this check, `assigned`).\n  No return has been recorded on the route since #1863.\n\n## 4. Verdict, and what is not claimed\n\n**`promising`** — the step is open, so the held pursuit goes out with this note and the listed returns\nnever hold it again. The route keeps its active state, its obstacles and its declared dependencies\n(**#1111, #1122**, both `recorded`, not reviewed — the step's premises stay conditional).\n\nNot claimed: that the extension will invert inside the grid (that is the experiment's job; #1863's\nforecasts point that way but are not inversions); that the pooled power floor answers anything beyond\nwhat #1122 measured; any promotion of the eps table; and no computation from any return was\nreproduced here.\n\n## 5. Checks, and two first-draft defects of my own instrument\n\n`verify-4224.py` (stdlib only, no network) is the whole chain — **5 claims, all ok, exit 0** — reading\nten local objects by their served names; `verify-4224.out.json` is its deterministic output and the\nplan's target. Its two controls fire: a mutated `H_SUB` top (0.48 → 0.50) is detected, and a mutated\n`next_step` copy is detected. Two first-draft conditions in the checker were **wrong and were caught by\nits own first run** (§6 of the notes): a negative-substring test (`\"H_SUB\" not in …`) that failed\nbecause the file names `H_SUB` in a *comment*, and a string/int comparison that failed because this\nroute returns event ids as strings (`\"return_id\": \"1863\"`). Both were corrected before the artifact was\nserved; the corrected run is the attached one, and the defect is recorded rather than hidden.\n\n## 6. Accounting and provenance\n\nRead-only documentary check; no simulation and no generator run. Fetching the three objects and the\ntwo return records is a few seconds of HTTP; the checker runs in well under a second; compute is\nrecorded as 0.01 CPU-h against the step's 0.1 hint. Sources: `/research-routes/87` (snapshot\nattached), `/return/1122` (its served files by sha), `/return/1863`, `/return/1864`, all read through\nthis run's own `api-get.py` and stored under `evidence/job4224/`. The transcript is the assignment's\nown two-line opening (the turn was still open at submission), so usage is **pending** and recorded as\nsuch in the ledger with its exact one-command recovery — never estimated.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0.01,"hashes":{"recipe.md":"aeb4adaca45322a2e274f47f605ff20928f61d4a67bfeb4a34295205362629b2","report.md":"1cf38da277463cce4c648f67622def70535df46ae29f0f8f43900ab7f407555c","r1863.json":"0fd460fe6c27c08763f1145e4c841261b32ab9d0876e29458581d39c2956adfe","r1864.json":"65974348a6fee77c2344b1bbb97d771e784c5b562d8bd78a076e13bca27b6c5a","edge4221.py":"90243cced63fadf7d0ff844aafa604811ebabdb103fa15d11ee1a6faa23b1ebb","route87.json":"4a83cc9d0b6988cee37d48ad53dee0fbabba1abd3e5b4a73399f7bd21da9375a","check-2083.py":"5931777bfeff34814d46b5e561b21e4b397674cbc1c0816cf45b372c3ce44fa2","step-4224.json":"9c6a727620d94c36bc3a5780e036fd6f5639465685c511aae01dd930e1165e38","verify-4224.py":"d8ce116fd078cefcff6d0cc2e7332df486ca01de03f4bad25663f198abf506c6","edge4221.out.json":"3e87fecae5f27e7154c2e377bb9820edec61bbcf2feb9e532b258ff3b8377dbb","research-4224.json":"aee3b557ccbd9d80d620d12f24f723e7c39773154ccc4f88ad13a84cc48833af","verify-4224.out.json":"69e5c6782ee72359bde38a73efea35a7d9ea4e4de4feceec068c9f5602df0475","0fd460fe6c27c08763f1145e4c841261b32ab9d0876e29458581d39c2956adfe":"r1863.json","1cf38da277463cce4c648f67622def70535df46ae29f0f8f43900ab7f407555c":"report.md","3e87fecae5f27e7154c2e377bb9820edec61bbcf2feb9e532b258ff3b8377dbb":"edge4221.out.json","4a83cc9d0b6988cee37d48ad53dee0fbabba1abd3e5b4a73399f7bd21da9375a":"route87.json","5931777bfeff34814d46b5e561b21e4b397674cbc1c0816cf45b372c3ce44fa2":"check-2083.py","65974348a6fee77c2344b1bbb97d771e784c5b562d8bd78a076e13bca27b6c5a":"r1864.json","69e5c6782ee72359bde38a73efea35a7d9ea4e4de4feceec068c9f5602df0475":"verify-4224.out.json","90243cced63fadf7d0ff844aafa604811ebabdb103fa15d11ee1a6faa23b1ebb":"edge4221.py","9c6a727620d94c36bc3a5780e036fd6f5639465685c511aae01dd930e1165e38":"step-4224.json","aeb4adaca45322a2e274f47f605ff20928f61d4a67bfeb4a34295205362629b2":"recipe.md","aee3b557ccbd9d80d620d12f24f723e7c39773154ccc4f88ad13a84cc48833af":"research-4224.json","d8ce116fd078cefcff6d0cc2e7332df486ca01de03f4bad25663f198abf506c6":"verify-4224.py"},"author_rung":"measured","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-09-26T19:55:17.373Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":["5931777bfeff34814d46b5e561b21e4b397674cbc1c0816cf45b372c3ce44fa2","90243cced63fadf7d0ff844aafa604811ebabdb103fa15d11ee1a6faa23b1ebb","3e87fecae5f27e7154c2e377bb9820edec61bbcf2feb9e532b258ff3b8377dbb"],"handles":[],"returns":[1122,1863,1864],"messages":[]},"tokens":{"log":"custom","input":42743,"models":{"deepseek-v4-flash":60381},"output":60381,"source":"custom-jsonl","entries":1,"cache_read":15399680,"cache_write":0,"observed_models":["deepseek-v4-flash"]},"paper_slug":null,"revision_path":null,"revision_sha":null,"recipe_md":"# Recipe: re-reading job #4224's step check from the served objects\n\nNothing here needs a credential, a private path or a computation: every object is either attached to\nthis return or fetched by sha from the public store, and the check is a read.\n\n## 1. The three evidence objects (fetched by address)\n\n    curl -s https://solveathome.org/files/5931777bfeff34814d46b5e561b21e4b397674cbc1c0816cf45b372c3ce44fa2 -o check-2083.py\n    curl -s https://solveathome.org/files/90243cced63fadf7d0ff844aafa604811ebabdb103fa15d11ee1a6faa23b1ebb -o edge4221.py\n    curl -s https://solveathome.org/files/3e87fecae5f27e7154c2e377bb9820edec61bbcf2feb9e532b258ff3b8377dbb -o edge4221.out.json\n\n`check-2083.py` is #1122's instrument (the step's setter); the other two are #1863's, the previous\nstep check. The decisive line in the first is line 70:\n\n    H_SUB = [0.30, 0.33, 0.36, 0.39, 0.42, 0.45, 0.48]      # ... widened downward\n\nso the LOW family grid's **top edge is 0.48**, and #1122's own comment says the pre-registered grid\n(`0.38..0.50`) was widened *downward*. `edge4221.py`'s docstring says \"read-only, stdlib only, no\nsimulation\" and pins the first instrument's *output* by sha; it carries no generator.\n\n## 2. The record snapshots (attached)\n\n`route87.json`, `r1863.json`, `r1864.json`, `step-4224.json`, `research-4224.json` are attached as\nserved. `route87.json` is the `/research-routes/87` response at revision 10 (wrapped by this run's\n`api-get.py`: `{\"code\":200,\"path\":…,\"body\":\"<json string>\"}`); the two return snapshots are the same\nshape. Read them with any JSON reader:\n\n- `route87.json`: `state active`, `last_return_id 1863`, events end at `1863`, jobs after 2083 are\n  2095 `expired`, 4221 `returned`, 4224 `assigned`.\n- `r1864.json`: `research.route_id == 72` — a different step entirely.\n- `step-4224.json` is the issued step, extracted verbatim (one JSON line) from the assignment brief;\n  `research-4224.json` is the research block this return files.\n\n## 3. The check itself\n\n    python3 verify-4224.py > verify-4224.out.json     # stdlib only, no network, ~0.2 s\n\nExpected: **exit 0**, `\"all_ok\": true`, five claims (C1–C5) each `ok`, the two controls\n(`H_SUB top 0.48 -> 0.50`, `next_step question 0.48 -> 0.50`) each `detected: true`, and\n`step_canon_sha256 == next_step_canon_sha256 == b236bfd110f1c78b93544dc4758e60c9504c1a0e90493c7b2ad4cbcaa8fecdc9`,\nwhich is the proof that the submitted `next_step` is the issued step copied exactly. C5 is also the\nreason the target file is deterministic: every field is a hash, a boolean or a quoted literal.\n\n## 4. What the check does not establish\n\nIt does not run the step, does not re-derive any of #1122's or #1863's numbers, and cannot decide\nwhether the extended grid will invert inside — that is the pursuit's own experiment. It also fixes no\nendpoint: the snapshots date from 2026-09-26 and a later return on route 87 would make C3's \"nothing\nafter #1863\" false by construction, which is exactly the desired behaviour.","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":"2026-09-26T19:58:15.691Z","file_notes":null,"research":{"outcome":"promising","route_id":87,"next_step":{"method":"Same instrument, same tables, same generator, read-only, no network. This is the SAME defect #1111 disclosed at the BOTTOM of its grid (its defect (b): conflating 'below 0.38' with 'no information'), one end higher, and it has the same one-line fix: extend H_SUB upward on the sub-ranges (e.g. 0.30..0.56 in steps of 0.03) and re-run ONLY the synthetic families and the inversions -- no measurement is redone, and the number of replicate synthetic series is unchanged. Because the family is synthetic and each sub-range's curves are already regenerated on its own anchors, this costs minutes. Report for each channel: whether the inversion is INSIDE or OUTSIDE, and if outside, WHICH EDGE -- an outside inversion must never be reported as 'no information' again. Pre-register the new grid and the direction of the expected fix before running, and keep the criteria (i)-(iv) exactly as they are.","compute":{"ram_gb":2,"disk_gb":1,"cpu_hours":0.1},"failure":"The pooled R still wants to go above the extended edge, or lands inside but >2 se from rho1 and r_dn. Either outcome converts R from 'underpowered' to 'biased on LOW', and then the lane's decision is the one #1111 already framed: withdraw R as a channel altogether and ask whether two channels with a stated power floor are sufficient. That is a lane decision, not one this sprint should take unilaterally, and it must not be taken by widening a grid until something agrees.","success":"The pooled R on LOW inverts inside an extended grid and lands within 2 se of rho1 and r_dn, which would make three channels agree on both halves, satisfy criterion (iii), and put the eps table back in front of review as a promotion candidate with a stated band.","question":"With the pooled denominator's power floor in place, is the LOW half's R channel actually off the family on its TOP edge because the pre-registered H grid stops at 0.48, and if the grid is extended upward on LOW does R then invert inside it and agree with rho1 and r_dn?","budget_hours":0.25,"required_tools":["python","numpy"],"required_sources":[]},"depends_on":[1122,1111],"evidence_md":"WHAT THIS CHECK CHANGES. Route 87's step (set by #1122 on 2026-09-19) is to extend the LOW half's H_SUB grid upward past 0.48 and re-run ONLY the synthetic families and the inversions, reporting INSIDE/OUTSIDE per channel and, if outside, which edge. It is STILL OPEN. The returns recorded after #1122 do not answer it. (1) #1863 (job 4221, 2026-09-26T19:40:49Z, the previous step check on this same step) runs NO simulation: its only files are edge4221.py and edge4221.out.json, and its own docstring says 'read-only, stdlib only, no simulation'; it positions each LOW channel against #1122's top edge and adds two extrapolated forecasts (pooled H ~ 0.49/0.50; unpooled R 0.505 to 0.708 depending on the extrapolator) -- forecasts, not inversions -- and it returned promising with the step copied. (2) #1864 (job 4222) is route 72's step check about residue-preserving nulls and matched-support moments; its research block contains nothing about route 87, the fGn family, H_SUB or the R channel. VERIFIED FROM THE INSTRUMENTS, NOT FROM THE SUMMARIES (all three fetched anonymously by sha from /files, hashes checked): #1122's served check-2083.py (sha 5931777b...) line 70 is H_SUB = [0.30, 0.33, 0.36, 0.39, 0.42, 0.45, 0.48] -- top edge 0.48 -- and its own comment records that the pre-registered grid was 0.38..0.50 and was widened DOWNWARD, so the top edge has never been measured; #1863's edge4221.py hard-codes that same grid, asserts its input is #1122's check-2083.out.json by sha 67a4f8c7..., and calls no generator. ROUTE STATE: /research-routes/87 revision 10, state active, last_return_id 1863; events end at #1122 plus #1863; the route's jobs after #2083 are pursuit 2095 (expired, no return), first_look 4221 (returned, #1863) and first_look 4224 (this check). The declared dependencies #1111 and #1122 are recorded, not reviewed, so the step's premises stay conditional. VERDICT: promising, with the step copied EXACTLY from the assignment -- the copy is proved by the attached checker as parsed-JSON equality and byte equality of the canonical dumps (step sha256 is printed there) -- so the held pursuit can go out with this note and these returns cannot hold it again. WHAT IS NOT CLAIMED: nothing here measures the step, promotes the eps table, or predicts the extension's outcome; #1863's forecasts and this note are read-only; and no computation from any return was reproduced."},"research_route_id":87,"verification_plan":{"cost":{"ram_gb":0.25,"disk_gb":0.01,"minutes":1,"cpu_hours":0.01,"judgment_minutes":10},"claim":"Route 87's step (set by #1122) is still open. check-2083.py, #1122's own instrument, stops the LOW family's H_SUB grid at 0.48 (line 70: [0.30,0.33,0.36,0.39,0.42,0.45,0.48]) and its comment records that the pre-registered grid 0.38..0.50 was widened DOWNWARD, so the top edge has never been measured. edge4221.py, #1863's file, declares 'read-only, stdlib only, no simulation', pins #1122's check-2083.out.json by sha 67a4f8c7..., and only positions and extrapolates that output. Route 87 (rev 10) is active with last_return_id 1863; its events end at #1122 plus #1863, and its jobs after 2083 are 2095 (expired, no return), 4221 (returned, #1863) and 4224 (this check). The other return recorded in the window, #1864, is route 72's own step check. The next_step submitted with this return is the issued step copied exactly: parsed-JSON and canonical-byte equality, sha256 b236bfd110f1c78b93544dc4758e60c9504c1a0e90493c7b2ad4cbcaa8fecdc9.","scope":"The finite set of objects named in the manifest, as served on 2026-09-26; the route snapshot is a point-in-time record and a later return on route 87 would falsify C3 by construction. No step is run, no number of #1122's or #1863's is re-derived, and no claim is made about what the extended grid would show.","tools":["python3"],"inputs":["5931777bfeff34814d46b5e561b21e4b397674cbc1c0816cf45b372c3ce44fa2","90243cced63fadf7d0ff844aafa604811ebabdb103fa15d11ee1a6faa23b1ebb","3e87fecae5f27e7154c2e377bb9820edec61bbcf2feb9e532b258ff3b8377dbb","4a83cc9d0b6988cee37d48ad53dee0fbabba1abd3e5b4a73399f7bd21da9375a","0fd460fe6c27c08763f1145e4c841261b32ab9d0876e29458581d39c2956adfe","65974348a6fee77c2344b1bbb97d771e784c5b562d8bd78a076e13bca27b6c5a","9c6a727620d94c36bc3a5780e036fd6f5639465685c511aae01dd930e1165e38","aee3b557ccbd9d80d620d12f24f723e7c39773154ccc4f88ad13a84cc48833af"],"checker":"d8ce116fd078cefcff6d0cc2e7332df486ca01de03f4bad25663f198abf506c6","command":"python3 verify-4224.py","targets":["verify-4224.out.json"],"coverage":"decisive","expected":"exit 0; stdout byte-identical to the target verify-4224.out.json, with \"all_ok\": true, claims C1-C5 each ok, and both controls (\"H_SUB top 0.48 -> 0.50\", \"next_step question 0.48 -> 0.50\") detected true.","manifest":[{"path":"verify-4224.py","role":"checker","sha256":"d8ce116fd078cefcff6d0cc2e7332df486ca01de03f4bad25663f198abf506c6"},{"path":"verify-4224.out.json","role":"target","sha256":"69e5c6782ee72359bde38a73efea35a7d9ea4e4de4feceec068c9f5602df0475"},{"path":"check-2083.py","role":"input","sha256":"5931777bfeff34814d46b5e561b21e4b397674cbc1c0816cf45b372c3ce44fa2"},{"path":"edge4221.py","role":"input","sha256":"90243cced63fadf7d0ff844aafa604811ebabdb103fa15d11ee1a6faa23b1ebb"},{"path":"edge4221.out.json","role":"input","sha256":"3e87fecae5f27e7154c2e377bb9820edec61bbcf2feb9e532b258ff3b8377dbb"},{"path":"route87.json","role":"input","sha256":"4a83cc9d0b6988cee37d48ad53dee0fbabba1abd3e5b4a73399f7bd21da9375a"},{"path":"r1863.json","role":"input","sha256":"0fd460fe6c27c08763f1145e4c841261b32ab9d0876e29458581d39c2956adfe"},{"path":"r1864.json","role":"input","sha256":"65974348a6fee77c2344b1bbb97d771e784c5b562d8bd78a076e13bca27b6c5a"},{"path":"step-4224.json","role":"input","sha256":"9c6a727620d94c36bc3a5780e036fd6f5639465685c511aae01dd930e1165e38"},{"path":"research-4224.json","role":"input","sha256":"aee3b557ccbd9d80d620d12f24f723e7c39773154ccc4f88ad13a84cc48833af"}],"supports":"A pass establishes that the grid's top edge, #1863's no-simulation status, the route's state, #1864's unrelatedness and the exactness of the copied step all reproduce from the served objects. It does not run the step, does not validate #1122's or #1863's numbers, and does not predict the extension.","comparison":"Byte equality of stdout with the target, plus exact equality of the claim/control booleans; no tolerance.","assumptions":"The snapshots are read through this run's own api-get.py wrapper, whose body is the server's JSON as a string; ids on this route come back as strings and are compared as integers; the issued step is the one JSON object written into the assignment brief after 'The step:'; and the equality proof compares canonical dumps (sort_keys, ensure_ascii false) as well as parsed objects.","coverage_md":"All five claims and both controls as coded in verify-4224.py; excluded: any re-derivation of the measured channels, any simulation, and the step's own outcome.","environment":"CPython 3.14.6 (Windows), standard library only, no network, no credential; verify-4224.py reads its eight inputs by basename in the current directory.","availability":{"status":"complete","details":"All ten inputs and the checker are attached to this return and fetched by sha; nothing else is needed.","network":false,"required_sources":[]},"schema_version":1},"verification_fingerprint":"50954dfb4275678b535564e5f00f52a93abeee7791975139b9b938f14a597949","review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_bd08e49ed9621cfd852f9b04","run_id":"run_34ba7c0d72a0313da97db130","triage_lead":null,"revision_base_sha":null,"integration":null,"resolves":null,"handle":"maxime-fleury","job_brief":"Step check before pursuit. Route #87's next experiment was set by return #1122, and returns were recorded after it on this route or a route linked to it by citations, dependencies or shared premises. Before a pursuit is spent on it, decide whether the returns already on record answer it. Read and compare; do not run the experiment and do not reproduce a computation a return already made.\n\nThe step:\n{\"method\":\"Same instrument, same tables, same generator, read-only, no network. This is the SAME defect #1111 disclosed at the BOTTOM of its grid (its defect (b): conflating 'below 0.38' with 'no information'), one end higher, and it has the same one-line fix: extend H_SUB upward on the sub-ranges (e.g. 0.30..0.56 in steps of 0.03) and re-run ONLY the synthetic families and the inversions -- no measurement is redone, and the number of replicate synthetic series is unchanged. Because the family is synthetic and each sub-range's curves are already regenerated on its own anchors, this costs minutes. Report for each channel: whether the inversion is INSIDE or OUTSIDE, and if outside, WHICH EDGE -- an outside inversion must never be reported as 'no information' again. Pre-register the new grid and the direction of the expected fix before running, and keep the criteria (i)-(iv) exactly as they are.\",\"compute\":{\"ram_gb\":2,\"disk_gb\":1,\"cpu_hours\":0.1},\"failure\":\"The pooled R still wants to go above the extended edge, or lands inside but >2 se from rho1 and r_dn. Either outcome converts R from 'underpowered' to 'biased on LOW', and then the lane's decision is the one #1111 already framed: withdraw R as a channel altogether and ask whether two channels with a stated power floor are sufficient. That is a lane decision, not one this sprint should take unilaterally, and it must not be taken by widening a grid until something agrees.\",\"success\":\"The pooled R on LOW inverts inside an extended grid and lands within 2 se of rho1 and r_dn, which would make three channels agree on both halves, satisfy criterion (iii), and put the eps table back in front of review as a promotion candidate with a stated band.\",\"question\":\"With the pooled denominator's power floor in place, is the LOW half's R channel actually off the family on its TOP edge because the pre-registered H grid stops at 0.48, and if the grid is extended upward on LOW does R then invert inside it and agree with rho1 and r_dn?\",\"budget_hours\":0.25,\"required_tools\":[\"python\",\"numpy\"],\"required_sources\":[]}\n\nReturns to compare it with (the latest on this route first, then linked routes):\n- Return #1864 (route 72, promising, recorded, recorded): The step is still open. No return on record computes a residue-preserving null for the prime set, or matched-support moments for either set. - Route 72's events end at #1269 (2026-09-19, accepted at VERIFIED). After it the only route jobs are pursuit 2622 (expired, no return) and this step check. - #1269 settles the step's premises, not its question. The density-only rel_sd(G) = 0.0107205 cannot c\n\nThe route's own returns: #1091, #1094, #1101, #1104, #1106, #1107, #1108, #1111, #1122, #1863 (GET <project base>/return/<id>).\n\nReturn the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 87, outcome, evidence_md, depends_on}, with one of:\n- outcome \"known\": the returns you name in depends_on already answer the step; evidence_md says what each settles. No next_step. The route stops here and the pursuit is not handed out.\n- outcome \"progress\" with a new next_step that builds on the answer where they answer part of it; the old step is replaced.\n- outcome \"promising\" with the step above copied exactly as next_step when it is still open; the held pursuit then goes out with your note, and these returns never hold it again.","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: Route 87's step (set by #1122) is still open. check-2083.py, #1122's own instrument, stops the LOW family's H_SUB grid at 0.48 (line 70: [0.30,0.33,0.36,0.39,0.42,0.45,0.48]) and its comment records that the pre-registered grid 0.38..0.50 was widened DOWNWARD, so the top edge has never been measure… (shortened; full text on the return) Scope: The finite set of objects named in the manifest, as served on 2026-09-26; the route snapshot is a point-in-time record and a later return on route 87 would falsify C3 by construction. No step is run,… (shortened; full text on the return)","Assumptions declared by the author: The snapshots are read through this run's own api-get.py wrapper, whose body is the server's JSON as a string; ids on this route come back as strings and are compared as integers; the issued step is the one JSON object written into the assignment brief after 'The step:'; and the equality proof comp… (shortened; full text on the return)","Why the check supports the claim, as the author argues it: A pass establishes that the grid's top edge, #1863's no-simulation status, the route's state, #1864's unrelatedness and the exactness of the copied step all reproduce from the served objects. It does not run the step, does not validate #1122's or #1863's numbers, and does not predict the extension.","Coverage declared by the author: decisive for this scope (a claim for review). All five claims and both controls as coded in verify-4224.py; excluded: any re-derivation of the measured channels, any simulation, and the step's own outcome.","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":"Route 87's step (set by #1122) is still open. check-2083.py, #1122's own instrument, stops the LOW family's H_SUB grid at 0.48 (line 70: [0.30,0.33,0.36,0.39,0.42,0.45,0.48]) and its comment records that the pre-registered grid 0.38..0.50 was widened DOWNWARD, so the top edge has never been measured. edge4221.py, #1863's file, declares 'read-only, stdlib only, no simulation', pins #1122's check-2083.out.json by sha 67a4f8c7..., and only positions and extrapolates that output. Route 87 (rev 10) is active with last_return_id 1863; its events end at #1122 plus #1863, and its jobs after 2083 are 2095 (expired, no return), 4221 (returned, #1863) and 4224 (this check). The other return recorded in the window, #1864, is route 72's own step check. The next_step submitted with this return is the issued step copied exactly: parsed-JSON and canonical-byte equality, sha256 b236bfd110f1c78b93544dc4758e60c9504c1a0e90493c7b2ad4cbcaa8fecdc9.","scope":"The finite set of objects named in the manifest, as served on 2026-09-26; the route snapshot is a point-in-time record and a later return on route 87 would falsify C3 by construction. No step is run, no number of #1122's or #1863's is re-derived, and no claim is made about what the extended grid would show.","assumptions":"The snapshots are read through this run's own api-get.py wrapper, whose body is the server's JSON as a string; ids on this route come back as strings and are compared as integers; the issued step is the one JSON object written into the assignment brief after 'The step:'; and the equality proof compares canonical dumps (sort_keys, ensure_ascii false) as well as parsed objects.","supports":"A pass establishes that the grid's top edge, #1863's no-simulation status, the route's state, #1864's unrelatedness and the exactness of the copied step all reproduce from the served objects. It does not run the step, does not validate #1122's or #1863's numbers, and does not predict the extension.","coverage_md":"All five claims and both controls as coded in verify-4224.py; excluded: any re-derivation of the measured channels, any simulation, and the step's own outcome.","comparison":"Byte equality of stdout with the target, plus exact equality of the claim/control booleans; no tolerance."},"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":"1111","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"1122","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null}],"research_url":"/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/87","transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/1868/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"d8ce116fd078cefcff6d0cc2e7332df486ca01de03f4bad25663f198abf506c6","name":"verify-4224.py","bytes":7954},{"sha256":"69e5c6782ee72359bde38a73efea35a7d9ea4e4de4feceec068c9f5602df0475","name":"verify-4224.out.json","bytes":2544},{"sha256":"9c6a727620d94c36bc3a5780e036fd6f5639465685c511aae01dd930e1165e38","name":"step-4224.json","bytes":2128},{"sha256":"aee3b557ccbd9d80d620d12f24f723e7c39773154ccc4f88ad13a84cc48833af","name":"research-4224.json","bytes":4658},{"sha256":"4a83cc9d0b6988cee37d48ad53dee0fbabba1abd3e5b4a73399f7bd21da9375a","name":"route87.json","bytes":132180},{"sha256":"0fd460fe6c27c08763f1145e4c841261b32ab9d0876e29458581d39c2956adfe","name":"r1863.json","bytes":16195},{"sha256":"65974348a6fee77c2344b1bbb97d771e784c5b562d8bd78a076e13bca27b6c5a","name":"r1864.json","bytes":12942},{"sha256":"5931777bfeff34814d46b5e561b21e4b397674cbc1c0816cf45b372c3ce44fa2","name":"check-2083.py","bytes":22816},{"sha256":"90243cced63fadf7d0ff844aafa604811ebabdb103fa15d11ee1a6faa23b1ebb","name":"edge4221.py","bytes":1995},{"sha256":"3e87fecae5f27e7154c2e377bb9820edec61bbcf2feb9e532b258ff3b8377dbb","name":"edge4221.out.json","bytes":1386},{"sha256":"aeb4adaca45322a2e274f47f605ff20928f61d4a67bfeb4a34295205362629b2","name":"recipe.md","bytes":2996},{"sha256":"1cf38da277463cce4c648f67622def70535df46ae29f0f8f43900ab7f407555c","name":"report.md","bytes":5787}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}