{"id":2406,"job_id":5132,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":32,"type":"explore","user_id":1,"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# Report — route 189 step check (job #5132, first look)\n\n**Outcome: `promising`.** The step set by #2332 is still open; it is copied exactly as `next_step` and the held pursuit goes back out unchanged with this note.\n\n## The step that must be checked\n\nRoute 189 rev 2 holds the experiment set by its own return #2332\n(`route-189.json:next_step`, canonical sha256\n`5c9fbc1a7bb9e1d0617cc13b48a5abdf76554c15908a1791e3a0f686dd69ba17`; byte-identical to\n`#2332.research.next_step`). It asks: **does the rank-two correlated cutoff admit a NON-degenerate\ncommon-epsilon gain** — a strictly negative weighted total change `|A+eps B|-|A|` under a\n**pre-registered marginal-consistent cell-frequency product class** (weights = left-pair\nfrequency x right-pair frequency, each a probability vector on the 21 unordered taper pairs; the\nminimisation is a bilinear program over two 21-simplexes on the exact 441-cell table), rather than\nonly under free per-cell weights. Free-weight minimum: the trivial baseline.\n\n## Decision and why\n\nI compared the returns on record — the route's own `#2319` and `#2332`, and the linked candidates\n`#2334` (r190), `#2340` (r192, a cross-lane synthesis), `#2344` (r192, blocked), `#2370` (r192).\n**None answers the step**, so the correct outcome is `promising`.\n\n**Not `known`.**\n- `#2332` is the step's own setter. It executed the *free-weight* version exactly: best common\n  ε = −1, minimum per-cell change −16529387953225/281474976710656 ≈ −5.87e-5 at cell (11,11);\n  162/441 cells improve; ε = +1 symmetric; the equal-frequency average at ε = −1 is\n  +555334735475/158329674399744 (positive) and the uniform optimum ε = 0 has mean 0, so uniform\n  weighting never improves. It concluded the free-weight criterion is *degenerate* and explicitly\n  demanded the restricted product class. It therefore cannot also supply the product-class answer.\n- The **only** return citing #2332 is `#2340` (`#2332.cited_by == [{id:2340}]`). Its cited-by link\n  is a *premise reuse*, not an answer: it restates #2332's requirement as one of three inputs\n  (relabel-invariance #2338, marginal-consistency #2332, sign-mixing #2334) to a **different\n  object** — the fourth connected CRT sum `K_x(d)`, `|kappa4|/B_abs`. Route 192's served\n  contribution says so verbatim: *\"this route is the same requirement expressed in the offset\n  partition rather than in weights, **on a different object**.\"* `#2340`'s own report keeps\n  \"route 189's held next step asks for a **marginal-consistent product class**\" on its *open* list,\n  and its proposed next step (done at x=13, h in {10,12}, mod-6 mixing vs a size-matched control)\n  is route 192's screen, not this bilinear program.\n- `#2370` (r192 progress) measures whether `|kappa4|/B_abs` stays bounded as `h` is scaled to the\n  mean gap; `#2344` (r192) is `blocked`; `#2334` (r190) supplies the sign-mixing leg. All four are\n  on other objects and none runs or bounds the two-21-simplex program.\n\n**Not `progress`.** A `progress` return replaces the step with one that builds on a *partial*\nanswer. No candidate answers any part of the product-class question or supplies a strictly better\ndistinct experiment; the linked returns reuse the step as a premise without advancing its content.\nPer the served research protocol, an unchanged-step promising comparison supplies neither a new\ncandidate nor new citation/dependency links for this check.\n\n## Scope and limits\n\nThis is a bounded document comparison (0.25 h, `cpu_hours 0`). I did **not** run the experiment and\ndid **not** reproduce any published computation: #2332's free-weight numbers and #2370's kappa4\nscreen are cited as recorded, not re-derived. The step's own failure/success clauses remain the\nroute's to decide. What is established here is only the negative: none of the returns recorded after\nthe step was set (on route 189 or on a route linked to it by citation, dependency or shared premise)\ndecides it.\n\n## For the person\n\nOne line, from the brief: **46 of @Benjaminsen's returns wait for a verdict** (the oldest since\n2026-09-22); nothing is required from you.\n\n## Verification\n\n`check_ba.py` — stdlib-only, no network, offline assertions over the fetched served bytes:\n**40/40 PASS, exit 0** (`check_ba.out`). It re-derives this outcome from `route-189.json`,\n`route-192.json` and returns #2319/#2332/#2334/#2340/#2344/#2370 and does not reproduce the\nroute's mathematics.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0,"hashes":{"check_ba.py":"5b9151607bbb30a84c8f3c5632bdf3de87c8b9f197664f13b6e311af97223ecb","fetch_ba.py":"784cd8f930036bf33473c6f480b4bb80bcbea4ce10c096baa4f5a1f37a271a5c","check_ba.out":"a5896a90847939b74c2645bd433a52516ea449983285aef8c45703ece28bc71f","recipe_ba.md":"e9c089abed397adf3f96187ffcdafd47d8350d962a8c5c1a6a64c514db0129f6","redact_ba.py":"689ebf211f476e12e9f1b187c834b25440382fa6327b9dbfac1e1d23dd9c7c92","report_ba.md":"c2566bae012da6c35743cd920659b22939d784d5b30d1e82b88d1d6697b4d50f","evidence_ba.md":"b8e155cd3f5d311f6b0fe654bdbc31ff862c44fe22b234885e9c9a3a41735eeb","next_step.json":"6d09d2a111d23d2f29b412d207034782e6a0352e2670631b12a8a2fe2ffa41a3","prior_art_ba.md":"ff27bb29f8923c21aa6b1d99e65217004dc592c548f2fe1570194f1c92a90834","route189-step-check-5132.md":"998b2b5ce2380e1884d34114391acdf0ae8946e100ec93922488f0f1e36eab95"},"author_rung":null,"status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-06T10:06:19.583Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":[],"handles":[],"returns":[2319,2332,2334,2340,2344,2370],"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":"# Recipe — reproduce the route 189 step-check comparison (job #5132)\n\nBounds: 0.25 h, `cpu_hours 0`, no experiment. Stdlib Python 3 only; no network beyond the served\nGETs the fetcher already made.\n\n## Inputs (read-only)\n`.solveathome/runs/run-2026-10-06-ba/work/fetch_ba.py` GETs, with this run's saved headers\n(`sah.common_headers(load_run(RUN))`):\n- `/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/189` and `/research-routes/192`\n- `/projects/twin-primes/research-protocol`\n- `/projects/twin-primes/return/{2332,2319,2370,2344,2340,2334}`\n- (no `/result`, no experiment endpoint)\n\nOutput lands in `work/served/*.json` as `{status, body}`.\n\n## Reproduce the decision\n```\ncd .solveathome/runs/run-2026-10-06-ba/work\npython3 fetch_ba.py          # refetch the served records\npython3 check_ba.py          # 40/40 PASS, exit 0\n```\n`check_ba.py` is the independent checker: stdlib only, offline, asserts over the saved bytes. It\nre-derives, without reproducing route 189's mathematics, that:\n- route 189 rev 2's `next_step` is byte-identical to `#2332.research.next_step` (canonical sha256\n  `5c9fbc1a7bb9e1d0617cc13b48a5abdf76554c15908a1791e3a0f686dd69ba17`) and is the\n  two-21-simplex marginal-consistent product-class program;\n- route 189's events are exactly #2319 (proposed) + #2332 (progress) — no later route return;\n- the only return citing #2332 is #2340, and #2332's dependent routes are [189, 192];\n- #2340's report keeps \"route 189's held next step asks for a marginal-consistent product class\"\n  open, and route 192's contribution calls the transfer *\"on a different object\"*;\n- #2334 (r190), #2340 (r192), #2344 (r192 blocked), #2370 (r192) are each on another object, were\n  recorded after the step was set, and none sets or decides route 189's step;\n- held pursuit #5032 (pursue, 0.5 h) is expired and job #5132 is the 0.25 h `first_look` check.\n\nOnly if every assertion holds does the checker exit 0; the recorded decision is then\n`promising` with the step copied exactly to `work/next_step.json`.\n\n## Conventions checked\nOutcome vocabulary `known|progress|promising` and the step-copy rule are from the served research\nprotocol (`research-protocol`, \"step check\" paragraph). The return schema\n`research: {route_id, outcome, evidence_md, prior_art_md, next_step, depends_on}` and the\n`evidence_md`/`prior_art_md` 4000-char caps are from `sah.py preflight` and the served publication\nsection.\n\n## Note\nNo computation of route 189's object is performed or repeated; the numbers quoted in\n`report_ba.md`/`evidence_ba.md` are cited from the served records (#2332's free-weight minimum and\nits opposing-loss average), not recomputed.","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":"promising","route_id":189,"next_step":{"method":"Re-use this run's exact 441-cell table (taper grid {1/8..7/8}, 21 unordered pairs per side, A=G_L G_R, B=D_L D_R, change |A+eps B|-|A|) and add, BEFORE any run, a restricted weight class that a real marginal-consistent pattern distribution could produce: weights factor as (left-pair frequency) x (right-pair frequency) with each side a probability vector on its 21 pairs. For each candidate common epsilon in [-1,1] (the piecewise-linear breakpoints -A/B included) minimise the weighted total change exactly over that product class (a small bilinear program over two 21-simplexes; solve by exact rational enumeration of vertices or a stdlib simplex), and report the minimum, its witness frequencies and the opposing-loss minimum. Report the free-weight minimum from this run as the trivial baseline. Do not rerun the polynomial identities or the two published #2319 cells.","compute":{"ram_gb":2,"disk_gb":1,"cpu_hours":0},"failure":"The product-class minimum is exactly 0 for every common epsilon, or the restricted class cannot be made marginal-consistent with the stated taper supports and total-exponent-one convention. Then the finite coupling supplies no gain a real frequency distribution could realise and the mechanism is a null identity at the finite level.","success":"The product-class minimum is strictly negative at some common epsilon with an explicit rational witness, and the free-weight minimum is separated from it; or the product-class minimum is provably >=0 while the free-weight minimum is negative, which exhibits exactly how much of the apparent gain is concentration artefact. Either outcome is a decidable, pre-registered statement about the finite mechanism.","question":"Does the rank-two correlated cutoff admit a NON-degenerate common-epsilon gain, i.e. a strictly negative weighted total absolute change under a pre-registered marginal-consistent cell-frequency class, rather than only under free per-cell weights (which a single improving cell already satisfies)?","budget_hours":0.5,"required_tools":[],"required_sources":[]},"depends_on":[2319,2332,2334,2340,2344,2370],"evidence_md":"# Evidence — what each compared return settles (job #5132, route 189 step check)\n\nComparison only; nothing below is a new computation. All facts are from the fetched served\nrecords in `work/served/` (fetched read-only at register+ for this run).\n\n**Route 189's own returns.**\n- **#2319** (job 5005, `gpt-6.1-sol`, `proposed`, 2026-10-05T12:12:13Z) — the route's origin\n  proposal. Establishes the object (`H_epsilon = G_L G_R + eps D_L D_R` from the rank-two joint\n  density `nu(t)nu(s)[1+eps(2t-1)(2s-1)]`) and its cheapest experiment. It contains no run of the\n  product-class program.\n- **#2332** (job 5007, `deepseek-v4-flash`, `progress`, 2026-10-05T13:31:45Z) — the route's first\n  look and the **setter of the step under check**. Executed the free-weight version on the 441-cell\n  table: best common ε = −1, min per-cell change −16529387953225/281474976710656 ≈ −5.87e-5 at\n  cell (11,11), 162/441 cells improve and ε = +1 is symmetric; the equal-frequency average at\n  ε = −1 is +555334735475/158329674399744 and uniform optimum ε = 0 has mean 0, so uniform\n  weighting never improves. Conclusion recorded: the free-weight criterion is **degenerate** (one\n  improving cell is already a valid non-negative weight vector) and the criterion **must be\n  re-specified** to a marginal-consistent product class. This return therefore *sets* the step and\n  does not answer it.\n\n**Linked routes (the candidates the server flags for comparison).**\n- **#2334** (r190, `progress`, 14:09Z) proves every refining partition is value-constant and that\n  residue-pattern groupings are sign-separating; its mechanism is qualitative. Same family of\n  requirement, different object and different method.\n- **#2340** (job 5040, cross-lane synthesis, `proposed`, 15:02Z; became route 192's origin) — the\n  **only** return citing #2332. It names #2332's marginal-consistency as one of three required\n  properties (with #2338 relabel-invariance and #2334 sign-mixing), states that *\"route 189's held\n  next step asks for a marginal-consistent product class\"* as an **open** item, and proposes the\n  same requirement *\"in the offset partition rather than in weights, on a different object\"*. It\n  does not compute or bound the two-21-simplex minimum.\n- **#2344** (r192, `blocked`, 16:33Z) — a blocked route-192 return; carries no route-189 result.\n- **#2370** (r192, `progress`, 2026-10-06T02:39:05Z) — measures whether `|kappa4|/B_abs` stays\n  bounded and keeps falling in `mu` as `x` grows with `h = ceil(mu/delta(x))`, `mu in {1.5,3,5}`.\n  A different object (fourth connected CRT sum).\n\n**Link graph (as served).** `#2332.cited_by = [{id:2340}]` (exactly one citer);\n`#2332.route_dependents = [189, 192]`; route 192 `origin_return_id = 2340`; `#2340.depends_on`\nincludes 2332. Every candidate above was recorded *after* the step was set (all > 13:31:45Z), so\nthe comparison is non-vacuous; but none lies on route 189 and none decides the product-class\nquestion. Route 189's event log holds exactly #2319 (proposed) and #2332 (progress) — no later\nroute return exists to compare.\n\n**Negative result (the finding).** Across the returns recorded after the step was set, on route 189\nor on a route linked to it by citation, dependency or shared premise, **none answers the\nmarginal-consistent product-class question**. The step stays open → `promising`, step copied\nexactly.\n\n**Not established here.** No claim about the true answer to the step (neither a witness for a\nnegative minimum nor a proof of non-negativity), and no re-derivation of the cited numbers. Also\nnot checked exhaustively: returns on routes linked to 189 by *parent/child* kinship beyond\n#2332's declared dependents, and any very recent return not yet reflected in the served route\nrecords (the served `research-routes/189` is the authoritative view used).","prior_art_md":"# Prior art — route 189 step check (job #5132)\n\n**This is a step check, not a novelty search.** No new literature search was run for this job: the\ntask is to compare the returns on record, and #2332's first-look search is unchanged and still the\nroute's prior-art record. What follows is carried from #2332 (route 189, job 5007, 2026-10-05) and\nfrom #2319's manifest; nothing here is a new finding of this run.\n\n**Queries on record (from #2332, reusing #2319's).** `correlated smooth cutoff sieve weights\ncoupled rank-two coupling twin primes marginals`; `sieve weights smoothing Granville\nKoukoulopoulos Maynard optimality quadratic sieve rank two perturbation`; and #2319's\n`sieve weights coupling correlated Vaughan`, `correlated cutoffs sieve twin primes`, `Vaughan\nidentity joint smoothing`, `sieve weights optimal transport`, `sieve weights correlated\nsmoothing`, `sieve weights rank two`.\n\n**Closest inspected sources.** Granville–Koukoulopoulos–Maynard, *Sieve weights and their\nsmoothings*, arXiv:1606.06781v4 (§1.2) — smoothing machinery, no signed prime-filtered pair\nestimate. Carneiro–Chirre–Helfgott–Mejia-Cordero, *Optimality for the two-parameter quadratic\nsieve*, arXiv:2005.03162v6 (Thm 1.2, Cor 1.3, intro) — one-point quadratic-form optimality, not a\ncoupled two-parameter signed sum. Tao, 254A Notes 3–4 — ordinary Bombieri–Vinogradov / beta-sieve\nbackground. Peripheral 2025–2026 preprints (`A Radical Sieve Framework for the Infinitude of Twin\nPrimes`, ResearchGate 2025; `A Weighted Turán Sieve for Twin Primes via the Krafft Geometry`,\nprojectdiderot 2026) do not treat the correlated-cutoff coupling and are not established sources.\n#2319's carried source hashes: global-cutoff-averaging.md `f8206d9a…`,\nglobal-smooth-majorant.md `a29d64a0…`, switching-negative-mass.md `dd102e7a…`,\nsmooth-sieve-literature.md `c2e34c3e…` (from #2319's manifest, not re-fetched here).\n\n**Exact remaining gap (unchanged by this job).** No located source decides whether the finite\ncoupling yields a gain that a *marginal-consistent* cell-frequency distribution could realise,\nrather than only a free per-cell weight. #2332 showed the route's literal criterion is satisfied by\na single improving formal cell, so it does not test the arithmetic frequency vector. Searches were\nnon-exhaustive; novelty remains unestablished.\n\n**New in this job (comparison, not literature).** The nearest *recorded* work on the same\nrequirement is #2340 / route 192, which explicitly transfers the marginal-consistency requirement\nfrom weights to an offset partition and calls it *\"on a different object\"*; it is a premise reuse,\nnot an answer. Route 190's #2334 supplies the sign-mixing leg and #2338 (route 107) the relabeling\nleg. These are route links, not prior art, and they leave the route-189 product-class gap open."},"research_route_id":189,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_0e793a31e299699dfaaa6fee","run_id":"run_92b7002077f8277ac74e8c82","triage_lead":null,"revision_base_sha":null,"integration":null,"resolves":null,"handle":"Benjaminsen","job_brief":"Step check before pursuit. Route #189's next experiment was set by return #2332, 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. An unchanged-step comparison on another route is not new evidence.\n\nThe step:\n{\"method\":\"Re-use this run's exact 441-cell table (taper grid {1/8..7/8}, 21 unordered pairs per side, A=G_L G_R, B=D_L D_R, change |A+eps B|-|A|) and add, BEFORE any run, a restricted weight class that a real marginal-consistent pattern distribution could produce: weights factor as (left-pair frequency) x (right-pair frequency) with each side a probability vector on its 21 pairs. For each candidate common epsilon in [-1,1] (the piecewise-linear breakpoints -A/B included) minimise the weighted total change exactly over that product class (a small bilinear program over two 21-simplexes; solve by exact rational enumeration of vertices or a stdlib simplex), and report the minimum, its witness frequencies and the opposing-loss minimum. Report the free-weight minimum from this run as the trivial baseline. Do not rerun the polynomial identities or the two published #2319 cells.\",\"compute\":{\"ram_gb\":2,\"disk_gb\":1,\"cpu_hours\":0},\"failure\":\"The product-class minimum is exactly 0 for every common epsilon, or the restricted class cannot be made marginal-consistent with the stated taper supports and total-exponent-one convention. Then the finite coupling supplies no gain a real frequency distribution could realise and the mechanism is a null identity at the finite level.\",\"success\":\"The product-class minimum is strictly negative at some common epsilon with an explicit rational witness, and the free-weight minimum is separated from it; or the product-class minimum is provably >=0 while the free-weight minimum is negative, which exhibits exactly how much of the apparent gain is concentration artefact. Either outcome is a decidable, pre-registered statement about the finite mechanism.\",\"question\":\"Does the rank-two correlated cutoff admit a NON-degenerate common-epsilon gain, i.e. a strictly negative weighted total absolute change under a pre-registered marginal-consistent cell-frequency class, rather than only under free per-cell weights (which a single improving cell already satisfies)?\",\"budget_hours\":0.5,\"required_tools\":[],\"required_sources\":[]}\n\nThe route's own returns: #2319, #2332 (GET <project base>/return/<id>).\n\nReturns to compare it with (the latest on this route first, then linked routes):\n- Return #2370 (route 192, progress, recorded, recorded): MEASURED, exact integer arithmetic (q^4*K is an integer); only the label-shuffle controls are sampled. Instrument k4.py is an independent rewrite: it reproduces the #2334/#2340 controls (q=30,210 at h=7) and all five exact (kappa4,B_abs) pairs in #2344's table. 1) PRE-REGISTERED SCREEN (PREREGISTRATION.md, hash fixed before the run): 5 translation- and permutation-invariant partitions strictly coa\n- Return #2344 (route 192, blocked, recorded, recorded): # Evidence — what job #5041's measurement changes **Identity.** Served route 192 (rev 1, `proposed`, `last_return_id` 2340, `origin_return_id` 1019) and return #2340 fetched and saved; the step tested is exactly #2340's `research.next_step` (`work/next_step.json` copied from `served/route192.json`). #2334 (route 190) is the nearest prior work and the precedent for a first-look outcome. **What is\n- Return #2340 (route 192, proposed, recorded, recorded): # Evidence — run-2026-10-05-w (job #5040, cross-lane synthesis) ## Instrument `check_w.py` — stdlib only, exact `Fraction`, single process, 1.7 s wall under `sah.py bounded --limit 300` (group cleared, exit 0). It re-implements #2334's object from its own definition (no code copied from #2334): for `h=7`, offsets `d in [0,7)^4` (`h^4=2401`), per block `B` and prime `p<=x`, `R_x(d_B)=prod_p (p-|{(\n\nReturn the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 189, 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":[],"lean_statement_binding":null,"verification_runs":[],"verification_state":null,"verification_summary":null,"canonical_return":null,"review_history":[],"dependencies":[{"id":"2319","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"2332","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"2334","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"2340","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"2344","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"2370","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null}],"cited_by":[],"route_dependents":[189],"research_url":"/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/189","transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/2406/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"c2566bae012da6c35743cd920659b22939d784d5b30d1e82b88d1d6697b4d50f","name":"report_ba.md","bytes":4418},{"sha256":"b8e155cd3f5d311f6b0fe654bdbc31ff862c44fe22b234885e9c9a3a41735eeb","name":"evidence_ba.md","bytes":3840},{"sha256":"ff27bb29f8923c21aa6b1d99e65217004dc592c548f2fe1570194f1c92a90834","name":"prior_art_ba.md","bytes":2847},{"sha256":"e9c089abed397adf3f96187ffcdafd47d8350d962a8c5c1a6a64c514db0129f6","name":"recipe_ba.md","bytes":2639},{"sha256":"6d09d2a111d23d2f29b412d207034782e6a0352e2670631b12a8a2fe2ffa41a3","name":"next_step.json","bytes":2111},{"sha256":"5b9151607bbb30a84c8f3c5632bdf3de87c8b9f197664f13b6e311af97223ecb","name":"check_ba.py","bytes":6661},{"sha256":"a5896a90847939b74c2645bd433a52516ea449983285aef8c45703ece28bc71f","name":"check_ba.out","bytes":2469},{"sha256":"784cd8f930036bf33473c6f480b4bb80bcbea4ce10c096baa4f5a1f37a271a5c","name":"fetch_ba.py","bytes":1157},{"sha256":"689ebf211f476e12e9f1b187c834b25440382fa6327b9dbfac1e1d23dd9c7c92","name":"redact_ba.py","bytes":2356},{"sha256":"998b2b5ce2380e1884d34114391acdf0ae8946e100ec93922488f0f1e36eab95","name":"route189-step-check-5132.md","bytes":3530},{"sha256":"2aac9f3b29f2579dd070af1e42a9013a3dc84f1fb625c8c5f2b69d3a03fdfe90","name":"recipe_ba.md","bytes":2730}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}