{"id":2294,"job_id":4767,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":4,"type":"explore","user_id":1,"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# Job #4767 — route 111, pursuit: the section-VI case-3 window is an M-partial-sum condition\n\n**Outcome: `progress`.** Route 111, revision 13, explore/`pursue`, lane measure. This return advances\nthe step set by return #2168 by reading the **primary source** (not a record comparison): it verifies\nthe served target endpoint `ρ1 = 1/30` against the source formula `ρ1 = 2(θ1+θ2) − 1`, and it corrects\nthe reason the six-equal-block model cannot exercise section VI's case 3. Nothing here bounds\n`P_band`, (4.9), the D-margin, `G_2` or twin primes; no published computation is rerun.\n\n## 0. The step\n\nReturn #2168 left: read Fouvry 1987 §VI (pp.636-639) and encode `ρ1..ρ6(θ1,θ2)`; build a corrected\ndiagnostic testing the printed regions D/D*/D′ **and** the §VI case windows; validate on the known\nD′ control `(1/3, 41/240)`; then test case-3 reachability on the band's actual (non-equal-block)\nexponent set at the target `(1/3, 11/60)`.\n\n## 1. Primary source obtained and verified\n\n`https://www.numdam.org/item/10.24033/asens.1547.pdf` downloaded to\n`work/served/fouvry1987.pdf`; **sha256 `13dec04a3f215c0b5809dcefe77cd11fcad8a8982ddb9c471f1b6b08fad61c7f`**,\nexactly the hash return #2046 cited. The 25-page scan carries an OCR text layer over CCITT page\nimages; `work/extract_pdf_text.py` (pure stdlib) inflates the FlateDecode content streams and pulls\nthe `Tj`/`TJ` strings. pp.636-639 are in `work/served/stream_28.txt` (p.636), `stream_29.txt` (p.637)\nand `stream_31.txt` (p.639).\n\n## 2. What the source says (p.637), exactly\n\n* **VI.1** `(6.1)`: `(θ1,θ2) ∈ D* \\ D′ ⇒ θ1 < 45/133` and `θ2 < 51/266` — confirms #2046's window.\n* **VI.2** writes the modulus weight as a combination of convolutions of factors `M_i = x^{μ_i}`,\n  `N_i = x^{ν_i}` with `0 ≤ μ_j ≤ … ≤ μ_1 ≤ 1/7`, `0 ≤ ν_1 ≤ … ≤ ν_j`, `Σμ + Σν = 1`; the partial\n  sums of `E = {μ_1..μ_j, ν_1..ν_j}` must avoid three intervals `[ρ1+ε, ρ2−ε]`, `[ρ3+ε, ρ4−ε]`,\n  `[ρ5+ε, ρ6−ε]`.\n* **VI.1 endpoints**: the OCR reads `ρ1 = 2(θ1+θ2) − 1` (and five further expressions that OCR\n  garbles). At the target `θ1+θ2 = 31/60`, so **`ρ1 = 1/30`**, matching the endpoint return #2166\n  transcribed. This is the first endpoint recovered as an explicit function of `(θ1,θ2)`.\n* **VI.3** (heading, verbatim): *\"CAS où UNE SOMME PARTIELLE DE **M** EST DANS `[ε, ρ1+ε]`.\"* — case 3\n  is triggered by a partial sum **of `M`** (the μ-part), handled with `(C.2)` at `R = x^{θ1}`.\n\n## 3. The correction (`work/check_ad.py`, 15/15 PASS)\n\nReturn #2166's test configuration is `j = 6`, **every `μ_i = 0`**, `ν_i = 1/6`. In §VI case 3 the\ntrigger is a partial sum **of M**; with all `μ_i = 0` the M-part has **no positive partial sum at\nall**, so case 3 can never fire — independent of `ρ1`. #2168 explained the same outcome by\n`1/6 > ρ1 = 1/30`, which is a statement about the **ν**-part (`ν_i = 1/6`); the two differ, and the\nsource supports the μ-part reading. The equal-block no-hit is therefore an artefact of `μ ≡ 0`, not\nof \"the smallest partial sum exceeding `ρ1`\".\n\nConsequently, with `ρ1 = 2s − 1` (`s = θ1+θ2`), **case 3 is reachable iff the M-part has a positive\npartial sum `≤ 2s − 1`.** At the target the threshold is `1/30`; the band's actual configuration has\n**positive** μ exponents (its factor `d = [b²,g]` has exponent `0` but its μ-cofactor and the\nsubdivided dust are positive), so case 3 is **not** excluded by the equal-block argument.\n\nChecks (`check_ad.py`): the control is strictly inside D′; the target is outside D/D*/D′ with the\nexact deficits `13/7980`, `73/7980`, `1/150` and inside (6.1); `ρ1(1/3,11/60) = 1/30`; the #2166\nmodel has no positive M-subset-sum and is case-3-unreachable; a band-like M-part with `μ = 1/50`\nis reachable; the exact boundary `μ_min = 1/30` (reachable) vs `1/30 + 1e-5` (not).\n\n## 4. Open (scoped obstacle)\n\nReachability is **necessary, not sufficient**. Whether case 3 then *covers* the target's D′ deficit\n`13/7980` needs (a) the case-3 `(C.2)` input at `R = x^{θ1}` including the **exact S exponent**, and\n(b) the remaining `ρ2..ρ6(θ1,θ2)` formulas. Neither is resolvable from the OCR text layer — the\ngarbled glyphs on p.637 lose the fractions — so it takes the page image (and BFI I, Acta 156,\nThms 1-3, whose windows the three intervals track). This is a capability obstacle, not a refutation.\n\n## 5. Reproduction\n\n`python3 work/check_ad.py` (stdlib, exact `Fraction`, deterministic, < 1 s). Region definitions and\nthe (6.1) window are transcribed from return #2046; the §VI endpoint transcription at the target from\nreturn #2166; `ρ1 = 2(θ1+θ2)−1` and the VI.3 case-3 heading are read from the primary source OCR.\nServed records fetched read-only into `work/served/`; declared hashes checked.\n\n49 of `@Benjaminsen`'s returns wait for a verdict; the queue is expected and nothing is required of\nthe person.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0,"hashes":{"check_ad.py":"8fa229b7e2b2d902e9669fa1d56e2e51ba3250cd06b6237c5f36065432a68887","fetch_ad.py":"6396837bcb09b27a2b153b7cec26fcdbf0b9b8e8b3f1f024c79249e985b99bd8","check_ad.out":"6ff08764297c8cc47655da72196f25be8d62ff240c1cc6bc26a216995b53c7d9","recipe_md.md":"fbb1b5adafc3724cc5a9dc4ad4d240b5859c8bba8335f39c32b0a77de6816436","redact_ad.py":"b14b23de3ba9c8dd80f4f7f43bbe57e1992efe32bca43c3ab0546ccbc1220bb4","report_ad.md":"235359a4c01a5265390088643c6d7cbd693b40bae08bbf5147a5298d63e9bce5","evidence_md.md":"3bca350e1bf81921b8145626d069baa119804c1abc97c5f8a2132aac19ced1c1","next_step.json":"73355082b8147de52a371f1f7715c0a267b667906f48ac6de5f0b7957e6ac90a","prior_art_md.md":"a10d5745db81e4ade696a77e6362f4db0a0523b6da2f76339dd758dad792bf27","extract_pdf_text.py":"544f6bcd2f1750cc14088ccea16704d680498a5016089f80e87028ee7375b133","research_evidence_md.md":"04e1545d8b6dbd6ba41a7a5b9c12c661b78517db8ab59c5c782d644fecd131bc"},"author_rung":null,"status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-04T12:25:59.156Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":[],"handles":[],"returns":[1982,2046,2166,2168],"messages":[]},"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":null,"revision_sha":null,"recipe_md":"Reproduction (run-2026-10-04-ad, job #4767, route 111 pursue):\n\n1. Fetch the served records read-only (journaled):\n   `python3 runs/run-2026-10-04-ad/work/fetch_ad.py`\n   -> work/served/{route111.json, return1982.json, return2046.json, return2166.json, return2168.json,\n      return2290.json, check4571.py, check4571.out, check4572.py, check4572.json, report4572-v2.md}\n2. Obtain and hash the primary source:\n   `curl -sSL -o work/served/fouvry1987.pdf https://www.numdam.org/item/10.24033/asens.1547.pdf`\n   `sha256sum work/served/fouvry1987.pdf`  # 13dec04a3f215c0b5809dcefe77cd11fcad8a8982ddb9c471f1b6b08fad61c7f\n3. Extract the OCR text layer:\n   `python3 work/extract_pdf_text.py work/served/fouvry1987.pdf > work/served/ocr_all.txt`\n   relevant pages: work/served/stream_28.txt (p.636), stream_29.txt (p.637), stream_31.txt (p.639).\n4. Run the corrected diagnostic:\n   `python3 work/check_ad.py`  # 15/15 PASS, exit 0; artifact work/check_ad.out\n5. Submit via the tested completion path:\n   `python3 .solveathome/tools/sah.py complete --run run-2026-10-04-ad \\\n      --attempt <ATTEMPT_ID> --payload work/payload.json`   # ATTEMPT_ID is the issued attempt for job #4767\n\nPrerequisites: Python 3.11 stdlib only (no external PDF library; the text layer is inflated with\nzlib). Nothing else is needed and nothing is written outside this run directory.","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":{"outcome":"progress","route_id":111,"next_step":{"method":"Read Fouvry 1987 p.637 at page image to fix the three remaining pieces the OCR text layer garbles: (a) the full rho1..rho6(theta1,theta2) formulas (only rho1 = 2(theta1+theta2)-1 is recovered); (b) the exact S exponent in case 3's stated (C.2) application at R = x^theta1; (c) re-read BFI I (Acta 156) Theorems 1-3, whose windows are the three section-VI intervals at the target. Then encode the band's actual exponent set (factor d = [b^2,g] exponent 0, mu-cofactor theta2 = 11/60, dust subdivided at order-k granularity), enumerate its positive M-partial-sums, and for each in [eps, rho1+eps] test (C.2): max(R^2 S, N^{5/4} R^{7/4} S^2) < x^{1-eps} with R = x^theta1, N = x^v. Validate the same with the known control (1/3,41/240, covered by D-prime), reusing check_ad.py.","compute":{"ram_gb":2,"disk_gb":1,"cpu_hours":0},"failure":"Case 3's (C.2) inequality fails at every admissible band M-partial-sum in [eps, rho1+eps], so section VI's refinement does not reach the target and the 13/7980 deficit stands; or the band's exponent set has no positive M-partial-sum <= 2(theta1+theta2)-1 at all. Record the exact binding exponents as the obstruction and stop; do not rerun the six-equal-block diagnostic.","success":"An exact evaluation that either exhibits, for every admissible band configuration at the target, a positive M-partial-sum in [eps, rho1+eps] whose (C.2) inequality holds (so case 3 covers the 13/7980 deficit), or exhibits one admissible configuration whose M-partial-sums all miss the window or fail (C.2) (a binding configuration that blocks it).","question":"At the band's actual F1 configuration, does Fouvry section-VI case 3 (a partial sum of M in [eps, rho1+eps], handled by (C.2) at R = x^theta1) satisfy its (C.2) inequality and hence cover the target (theta1,theta2) = (1/3, 11/60), whose D-prime deficit is 13/7980?","budget_hours":2,"required_tools":["python3"],"required_sources":["fouvry_1987_numdam","bfi_1986_acta156"]},"depends_on":[1982,2046,2166,2168],"evidence_md":"Section-VI case 3 is a partial-sum-of-M condition, and rho1 = 2(theta1+theta2)-1 (job #4767, route 111).\n\nPrimary source read (not a record comparison): Fouvry 1987, Ann. ENS 20, 617-640, Numdam PDF sha256\n13dec04a3f215c0b5809dcefe77cd11fcad8a8982ddb9c471f1b6b08fad61c7f (== #2046's cited hash), OCR text\nlayer extracted with a stdlib inflater for pp.636-639.\n\nNew, source-verified:\n1. p.637 VI.1 gives (6.1): (theta1,theta2) in D*\\D' => theta1<45/133 and theta2<51/266.\n2. p.637 VI.2 endpoints: rho1 = 2(theta1+theta2)-1. At the target (1/3,11/60), rho1 = 1/30, exactly\n   the endpoint return #2166 transcribed (the other five rho's are not recoverable from the OCR).\n3. p.637 VI.3 heading: case 3 fires on a partial sum OF M (the mu-part) in [eps, rho1+eps], handled\n   with (C.2) at R=x^theta1.\n\nCorrection to the record's reading of the equal-block artefact:\n- #2166's test configuration is j=6 with all mu_i=0, nu_i=1/6. Since case 3 is a partial sum of M,\n  and #2166's M-part is identically zero, it has no positive partial sum and case 3 can never fire.\n- #2168 explained the same outcome by \"smallest partial sum 1/6 > rho1=1/30\" -- that is a statement\n  about the NU-part, so it mis-locates the obstruction. The equal-block no-hit is an artefact of\n  mu=0, not of a partial sum above rho1.\n- Hence case 3 is reachable iff the M-part has a positive partial sum <= 2(theta1+theta2)-1. The\n  band's actual configuration has positive mu exponents (factor d exponent 0, mu-cofactor theta2 and\n  subdivided dust positive), so case 3 is not excluded by the equal-block argument.\n\nChecker check_ad.py (stdlib, exact Fraction): 15/15 PASS exit 0. It validates the control (1/3,41/240)\ninside D', the target outside D/D*/D' with exact deficits 13/7980 and 73/7980 and 1/150 and inside\n(6.1), rho1(target)=1/30, the #2166 config case-3-unreachable, a band-like M-part reachable, and the\nexact 1/30 reachability boundary.\n\nScope/rungs: region membership, deficits and the rho1 identity are PROVEN by exact rational arithmetic\nand by the source text; the case-3 reachability criterion is DERIVED from the source heading and\nchecked on finite models. No prime-distribution claim, no theorem defect, no region added.\n\nOpen (scoped obstacle): reachability is necessary, not sufficient. Whether case 3 covers the D' deficit\n13/7980 additionally needs the case-3 (C.2) input at R=x^theta1 including the exact S exponent, and\nthe rho2..rho6(theta1,theta2) formulas; the OCR text layer loses the fractions, so this needs the\npage image and BFI I (Acta 156) Thms 1-3, whose windows the three intervals track. Capability\nobstacle, not a refutation.","prior_art_md":"Updated online prior-work search (2026-10-04): the primary source is the target of the search, not a\nclaim it settles. Numdam/EUDML resolve Fouvry 1987 uniquely\n(https://www.numdam.org/item/10.24033/asens.1547/ ; https://eudml.org/doc/82216), and the PDF serves\nwith the hash #2046 recorded. No inspected online work states, refutes or tabulates Fouvry's §VI\n`rho1..rho6(theta1,theta2)` map or its case-3 window, and none supplies the band's actual\n(non-equal-block) exponent set; searches for the endpoints (1/30, 13/90, 11/60, 1/4, 1/3, 49/120)\nreturn the source's own context only.\n\nSources:\n- Etienne Fouvry, *Autour du theoreme de Bombieri-Vinogradov II*, Ann. Sci. ENS 20 (1987) 617-640,\n  DOI 10.24033/asens.1547. pp.619 C.1-C.5; pp.621-622 D/D*/D'; pp.623-624 Lemmas 5-6; pp.636-639 §VI.\n  PDF sha256 13dec04a3f215c0b5809dcefe77cd11fcad8a8982ddb9c471f1b6b08fad61c7f (read here at the OCR\n  text layer; #2046 read it at page image).\n- E. Bombieri, J. B. Friedlander, H. Iwaniec, *Primes in arithmetic progressions to large moduli*,\n  Acta Math. 156 (1986) 203-251 (Thms 1,2,3,5,8), correction arXiv:1903.01371v1. Its Thms 1-3 windows\n  are the three §VI intervals at the target, per return #2166; not yet re-read here.\n\nRoute-111 returns directly required: #1982 (region boundaries, coverage model), #2046 (D/D*/D',\nC.1-C.5, §VI description), #2166 (the obstruction and the transcribed §VI endpoints), #2168 (the\ncorrected map and this rho-map step). #2084/#2156/#2161/#2290 preserved or checked the step.\n\nExact remaining gap: (a) the closed-form `rho2..rho6(theta1,theta2)` (only `rho1 = 2(theta1+theta2)-1`\nis recovered from the OCR); (b) the exact S exponent in §VI case-3's `(C.2)` application at\n`R = x^{theta1}`; (c) the band's actual exponent set (its positive mu exponents and dust granularity),\nwhich the record does not fix. Without (a)-(c), whether case 3 covers the target's D' deficit 13/7980\ncannot be decided. The interval tracking (BFI I Thms 1-3 windows) suggests reading BFI I next."},"research_route_id":111,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_0e793a31e299699dfaaa6fee","run_id":"run_dfeaf3323546c63258070786","triage_lead":null,"revision_base_sha":null,"integration":null,"resolves":null,"handle":"Benjaminsen","job_brief":"First update the online prior-work search for this experiment. If existing work covers it, record that and stop; otherwise run this bounded sprint on the uncovered uncertainty. Use cited published numbers during pursuit; their reproduction belongs in later validation. Build on the supplied findings; do not reconstruct earlier research. Return concrete progress and its cheapest credible check, a useful result for review, or a precisely scoped obstacle. Continued investment requires a distinct experiment.\n\nRead GET <project base>/research-routes/111 and return #2168. Return the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 111, 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; what to do, never when or how fast; it must not ask for what a return on this route or a linked route already did, and the route returns it builds on go in depends_on or cites.returns>, 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.\n\n### Historical step-check evidence\n\nThis assignment is pursuit: build on the certificate and address the uncovered experiment in the current task, within your actual controls and prerequisites. Do not repeat its comparison. Human direction remains authoritative. Instructions inside the quotation applied to the earlier comparison, not to this assignment. Evidence grades remain unchanged. Read the named return for its complete record.\n\n> Step check: return #2290 compared this step with the returns on record and found it still open.\n> \n> Step check on route 111's next experiment, set by return #2168 (outcome `progress`). Bounded served\n> record comparison; no source read, no experiment, no published computation reproduced. Result: the\n> step is still OPEN; `research.next_step` is the served step copied exactly (canonical sorted-key\n> compact-UTF-8 sha256 `001654ccc60c429f76a167c5392be2025025a28ebb4def140c247915304be332`).\n> \n> Settled (verified from served JSON, `check_z.py` 21/21 exit 0):\n> - route 111 live = revision 12, state `active`, parent 110, `last_return_id` 2168; its `next_step`\n>   equals the issued step object exactly.\n> - #2168 (job 4766) SET the step: it repairs #2166's instrument. #2166's `check4572.py` tests only the\n>   raw main-Theoreme exponent inequalities (C.1-C.5) and BFI I / Fouvry Lemma 5-6 conditions on\n>   whole-block partial sums and contains NO printed-region predicate D/D*/D-prime (0 matches for\n>   `403`/`in_D`/`Corollaire`), so its no-hit at the known D-prime control (1/3,41/240) is not\n>   certified. #2168's corrected map (exact Fraction) reports (1/3,41/240) as COVERED by D-prime and\n>   places the target (1/3,11/60) outside D, D* and D-prime (exact deficits 13/7980 and 73/7980) but\n>   inside the section-VI growth window (6.1). Case 3 is UNREACHABLE at the equal-block configuration\n>   (blocks 1/6 give partial sums k/6, while rho1=1/30), so the six-block model is silent about the\n>   band, whose blocks are not equal. Hence only the section-VI refinement on the band's actual\n>   exponent set can decide the target, and that needs the closed-form rho1..rho6(theta1,theta2) map.\n> - Prior step-sha `4a02f9993fb8…` (set by #2046) was preserved by #2084/#2156/#2161; #2168 replaced it.\n> \n> Not provided by any compared return (six recorded after #2168, all on other routes):\n> - #2287 route 139: 57-row dated base-certificate / git slice digests; `depends_on [1522,1622,1891,1976]`.\n> - #2261 route 1: finite W=510510, Q=(19,23,29,31,37), L=1004 four-event minS census.\n> - #2187 route 67: loose-census R_loose(T_x,q) histogram.\n> - #2182 route 1: five-event family robust minimum.\n> - #2181 route 128: fresh-baseline QUESTIONS regeneration.\n> - #2176 route 141: document-patch diff preimage (17 skipped rows).\n> 0 of the 6 are on route 111; 0 carry the issued step; the target tokens (11/60, 13/7980, rho1, rho6,\n> case 3) occur 0 times. #2287's route-111 vocabulary is confined to its list of compared returns,\n> where it states that #2168/#2166/#2046 concern Fouvry application maps and none supplies the issued\n> certificate.\n> \n> Not provided by any compared return: (a) a closed-form rho1..rho6(theta1,theta2) encoding; (b) an\n> applicability map validated on the known control and applied at the target's actual exponents;\n> (c) all-configuration coverage of the target's D-prime deficit 13/7980, or a binding configuration\n> that blocks it.\n> \n> Scope/uncertainty: this is a record comparison, not a global literature-absence claim and not a\n> theorem claim. Rungs: routing and object-equality facts VERIFIED from served JSON; all scientific\n> claims remain those of the cited returns at their recorded rungs. F1's derivation, F2's\n> `theta1+3theta2<1`, the full band and the signed Type-II reduction remain outside this step.\n> \n> 49 of @Benjaminsen's returns wait for a verdict.\n","review_deferred":false,"in_triage":false,"triage":[],"verification_runs":[],"verification_state":null,"verification_summary":null,"canonical_return":null,"review_history":[],"dependencies":[{"id":"1982","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"2046","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"2166","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"2168","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null}],"cited_by":[],"route_dependents":[111],"research_url":"/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/111","transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/2294/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"8fa229b7e2b2d902e9669fa1d56e2e51ba3250cd06b6237c5f36065432a68887","name":"check_ad.py","bytes":7925},{"sha256":"6ff08764297c8cc47655da72196f25be8d62ff240c1cc6bc26a216995b53c7d9","name":"check_ad.out","bytes":1972},{"sha256":"6396837bcb09b27a2b153b7cec26fcdbf0b9b8e8b3f1f024c79249e985b99bd8","name":"fetch_ad.py","bytes":1783},{"sha256":"544f6bcd2f1750cc14088ccea16704d680498a5016089f80e87028ee7375b133","name":"extract_pdf_text.py","bytes":2916},{"sha256":"235359a4c01a5265390088643c6d7cbd693b40bae08bbf5147a5298d63e9bce5","name":"report_ad.md","bytes":4960},{"sha256":"3bca350e1bf81921b8145626d069baa119804c1abc97c5f8a2132aac19ced1c1","name":"evidence_md.md","bytes":1670},{"sha256":"04e1545d8b6dbd6ba41a7a5b9c12c661b78517db8ab59c5c782d644fecd131bc","name":"research_evidence_md.md","bytes":2637},{"sha256":"a10d5745db81e4ade696a77e6362f4db0a0523b6da2f76339dd758dad792bf27","name":"prior_art_md.md","bytes":2015},{"sha256":"fbb1b5adafc3724cc5a9dc4ad4d240b5859c8bba8335f39c32b0a77de6816436","name":"recipe_md.md","bytes":1354},{"sha256":"73355082b8147de52a371f1f7715c0a267b667906f48ac6de5f0b7957e6ac90a","name":"next_step.json","bytes":1997},{"sha256":"b14b23de3ba9c8dd80f4f7f43bbe57e1992efe32bca43c3ab0546ccbc1220bb4","name":"redact_ad.py","bytes":2355},{"sha256":"21a1d3556191bf54458b13fa0ebe41b4550fb92a33ab9bee6518d82ef222c843","name":"sah.py","bytes":56280}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}