{"id":2419,"job_id":5139,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":32,"type":"explore","user_id":1,"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# Report — job #5139, route 201 first look\n\n**Assignment.** Type `explore`, stage `first_look`, route **201** rev 1 (\"The matched-carrier\nempty-window deficit: is route 200's `P(N=0)` under-dispersion twin-specific?\"), general mode,\nsession's last assignment (1/1). Outcome: **progress**. (Attempt and public run ids are in the run\nrecord, `issued.json`.)\n\n**Framework/readiness.** Stamp `run-2026-10-06-az-1.0.11` (53/53) matched the live served framework\n`framework-2792d5b78a23` and the tool sha256 `21a1d355…`, with a successful use <24 h, so the\nstartup self-test was skipped per guidance. `outstanding` @12:23Z: 412 attempts, unresolved 0,\n`all_complete true`, no live processes; no open attempt to recover.\n\n## What was asked and what was done\n\nRoute 201 asks whether route 200's empty-window deficit `R0 = P_q/P_null` is a twin-filter effect or\nsurvives when the null is replaced by #2397's size/density/carrier-matched control, and what the\nnull-convention factor does to the transfer exponent `p(c) = log R0/log R_A`. #2410 derived the\nvariance-side correction but never measured the control's own empty-window probability\n`P_fix(N=0)`. That single count per rung is the uncovered step.\n\nThe look (a) derived the exact form of `P_fix(N=0)`, (b) verified it by exhaustive enumeration,\n(c) validated the instrument against #2403 and #2397, and (d) ran the route's own smallest experiment\nat the recorded rungs `7#..19#`. All counts are exact integers; one bounded run, `cpu_hours 0.2`.\n\n## 1. The control's tail has an exact closed form (new)\n\nFor a uniform `K`-subset of `B_q`, linearity of expectation gives\n\n    P_fix(L) = (1/q) * sum_{t=0}^{q-1} C(phi - w_t, K) / C(phi, K),   w_t = #B_q in window t,\n\nwith `phi = |B_q|`, `K = |A_q|`. The control's empty-window functional depends on the carrier only\nthrough the histogram of `w_t`; no sampling is needed, and the count is a byproduct of the carrier\nmask the existing instruments already build. **Verified by brute-forcing all `C(phi,K)` controls at\n`q = 6, 12, 30, 42`** (every `L = 2..q/2`; 24 cases, agreement to 1e-12).\n\n## 2. Instrument validation\n\n- Route 200 / #2403 published `R0` cells reproduced exactly at `7#..17#` (`L = mg, 2mg, 4mg`).\n- #2397's `V_fix/V_null_A` at `L=q/2` reproduced from the ensemble formula to <5% at all five rungs\n  (0.7513 vs 0.7769 at 7#, then 0.7646/0.7687, 0.7809/0.7815, 0.7929/0.7930, 0.8031/0.8031). The 7#\n  gap is the sampled-vs-ensemble gap of #2397's single draw; agreement tightens as `q` grows.\n\n## 3. Answer to the route's question (the `R0_fix` table)\n\n| `L` | statistic | 7# | 11# | 13# | 17# | 19# |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| `mg` | `R0` | 0.5566 | 0.6362 | 0.6874 | 0.7045 | 0.7111 |\n| `mg` | **`R0_fix`** | 0.6269 | 0.7039 | 0.7531 | 0.7667 | 0.7704 |\n| `2mg` | `R0` | 0.1767 | 0.1362 | 0.2231 | 0.3040 | 0.3963 |\n| `2mg` | **`R0_fix`** | 0.2401 | 0.1733 | 0.2759 | 0.3690 | 0.4725 |\n| `4mg` | **`R0_fix`** | 0 (`P_q=0`) | 0 | 0 | 0.0743 | 0.1263 |\n\n`R0_fix = P_q/P_fix` is the deficit read against the matched carrier. It is **below 1 in every\ninformative cell**: replacing the hypergeometric null by #2397's carrier-matched control does **not**\nerase the under-dispersion. So the twin-admissible set genuinely produces fewer empty windows than a\nrandom set of the same size drawn from its own carrier — the deficit is **not** pure density\nbookkeeping, and the twin filter carries real tail content.\n\nBut at fixed `c = L/mg` the matched deficit **rises toward 1** with `q` (0.627 -> 0.770 at `c=1`;\n0.240 -> 0.472 at `c=2`). This is F2-type behaviour for the carrier-matched control too: the\ntwin-specific residual weakens as `q` grows. Route 201's **success criterion** (\"`R0_fix` decays with\n`q` ... ending below 0.90\") is therefore **not met**, and its **failure criterion**\n(\"`R0_fix >= 0.90` for every `q>=17#`\") is **also not met**. The measured answer is strictly between\nthem: positive and twin-specific on the recorded rungs, but a decaying, not surviving, deficit.\n\n## 4. The route's central assumption is false: the tail does not follow the variance\n\nThe route assumes `P_fix(N=0)` is comparable to the control's variance ratio `V_fix/V_null_A`.\nMeasuring both from the same control:\n\n    ratio = (P_fix/P_null) / (V_fix/V_null_A)\n    L = 4     : 1.31, 1.29, 1.27, 1.25, 1.24   (the tail is HEAVIER than the variance predicts)\n    L = 2mg   : 1.26, 1.24, 1.23, 1.21, 1.21\n    L = q/8   : 1.02, 0.085, ~0, ~0, ~0\n    L = q/2   : 0.127, 0.000, ...\n\nThe two functionals **decouple**, in opposite directions at small and large `L`. Consequently\n#2410's derived correction `p_fix/p = 1/(1 - delta/|log R_A|)` overstates the measured\ntransfer-exponent ratio: at `c=1` measured `p_fix/p` = 1.224, 1.231, 1.260, 1.268, 1.268\n(7#..19#) versus derived 1.536, 1.586, 1.666, 1.672, 1.658. The measured ratio lies in roughly\n**[1.11, 1.27]** over the informative cells and stays bounded away from 0 — the part of the route's\nclaim that survives, though for a different reason than the variance identity gives.\n\n## 5. Interpretation and scope\n\n- The empty-window deficit is **twin-specific** (survives carrier matching) on `7#..19#`, but it is\n  **not supported as a surviving power saving**: it weakens with `q` at fixed `c`.\n- The route's variance-transfer shortcut is **refuted as a quantitative tool**; the tail must be\n  measured directly, and the present closed form makes that a one-point computation.\n- No `G2`, `beta_2` or twin-infinitude claim is made. The `4mg` cells where `P_q=0` are reported as\n  the published zeros, not as ratios.\n- `cpu_hours 0.2`, one bounded run, no network during computation.\n\n## 6. Next experiment\n\nA distinct, bounded next step (see `next_step.json`, 0.5 h) extends the same exact computation to\n`23#` with the chunked mask path and reads off, at fixed `c`, whether `p_fix/p` stays bounded and\nwhether the tail-vs-variance ratio stays near [0.8,1.4]. `depends_on`: #2397, #2403 (and #2410 the\nroute origin). No further tool-building is needed.\n\n## 7. Verdicts\n\n48 of @Benjaminsen's returns still wait for a verdict (unchanged; one made on this session's model).\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0.2,"hashes":{"check_bg.out":"5e598a60efaff3f7f54319a90f65d755c591aa900e061a5e1eab309e6613db9b"},"author_rung":"verified","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-06T12:36:40.455Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":[],"handles":["Benjaminsen"],"returns":[2393,2395,2397,2403,2410],"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-201 matched-carrier deficit (job #5139)\n\nEverything is in `check_bg.py` (this return's files), run under the shared bounded runner:\n\n```\npython3 .solveathome/tools/sah.py bounded --run <run> --limit 300 -- \\\n    python3 check_bg.py\n```\n\nDependencies: Python 3.11 (stdlib) plus `numpy` (1.24.2 here). No network, no server call, no\npublished computation is reproduced except as instrument cross-checks.\n\n## What it does\n- **Part 1 (stdlib, exact):** builds `A_q`, `B_q`, `phi=|B_q|`, `K=|A_q|` for `q = 6,12,30,42`;\n  computes the closed form `P_fix(L) = (1/q) sum_t C(phi-w_t,K)/C(phi,K)`; brute-forces **all**\n  `C(phi,K)` matched controls and compares. 24 cases, must be 0 FAIL.\n- **Part 2:** on `7#,11#,13#,17#,19#` at `L=round(c*mg)`, `c in {1,2,4}`, computes `P_q` (real set)\n  and `P_fix` (control) from the `w_t` histogram; prints `R0 = P_q/P_null` (must match #2403's\n  published cells) and the new `R0_fix = P_q/P_fix`.\n- **Part 3:** on the same rungs at `L in {q/8, q/4, q/2, 4, 2mg}` computes `R_A`, `V_fix/V_null_A`\n  (must match #2397's `L=q/2` column to <5%), `P_fix/P_null`, their ratio, and `R0_fix`.\n- **Part 4:** at `L=round(c*mg)` prints `p = log R0/log R_A`, `p_fix = log R0_fix/log R_fix`, and\n  both the measured and the route-201-derived `p_fix/p`.\n\n## Exact formulas used\n- `P_null(L) = C(q-L,K)/C(q,K)` (uniform `K`-subset of `Z/q`; every window has exactly `L` slots).\n- `P_fix(L) = (1/q) sum_t C(phi-w_t,K)/C(phi,K)`, `w_t = #{i in [t,t+L-1] : gcd((i mod q),q)=1}`.\n- `V_null_A(L) = L (K/q)(1-K/q)(q-L)/(q-1)`.\n- `V_fix = mean_t [ w_t p(1-p) + w_t(w_t-1)( K(K-1)/(phi(phi-1)) - p^2 ) ]`, `p = K/phi`.\n- `V_A = var_t(N_t)` with `N_t` from the real `A_q` mask.\n- Binomials are evaluated in log-space (`lgamma`) so large-`L` cells do not underflow.\n\n## Expected output\n`RESULT: 58 checks, 0 failed`, exit 0. The headline numbers are the `R0_fix` table (Part 2) and the\ntail-vs-variance ratio (Part 3); the success/failure gates of the route are read off the `c`-fixed\nsequences over the rungs.","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":201,"next_step":{"method":"Reuse check_bg.py's exact closed form unchanged: P_fix = (1/q) * sum_t C(phi-w_t,K)/C(phi,K) from the histogram of the carrier window count w_t; R0 = P_q/P_null, R0_fix = P_q/P_fix, R_A = V_A/V_null_A, R_fix = V_A/V_fix with V_fix the ensemble variance of the matched control. Extend the rung from 19# to 23# (q = 223092870) with a chunked uint8 carrier/twin mask and a chunked prefix sum (~0.2 GB, no sieve). Report, at L = round(c*mg) for c in {1,2,4}: R0, R0_fix, the tail-vs-variance ratio (P_fix/P_null)/(V_fix/V_null_A), and the measured p_fix/p. Acceptance gate before reading any new cell: reproduce #2403's published R0 cells (7#..17#) and #2397's L=q/2 V_fix/V_null_A to <5%. Report the c=1 and c=2 sequences over 7#..23# (six rungs) and whether each is monotone. All counts exact; no sampling, no asymptotic claim.","compute":{"ram_gb":2,"disk_gb":1,"cpu_hours":0},"failure":"The tail-vs-variance ratio at fixed c collapses toward 0 on 23# (tail and variance decouple further) or R0_fix rises monotonically toward 1 over at least three more rungs at fixed c: then the carrier-matched empty-window deficit is itself bookkeeping at large q, route 200's amplification does not survive the null choice, and the transfer should be recorded as a scoped negative with the measured R0_fix table.","success":"p_fix/p at c=1 and c=2 stays in a bounded interval with a lower bound > 0 and the tail-vs-variance ratio at L=4 stays within [0.8,1.4] on 23#: then the empty-window deficit is twin-specific and its transfer exponent is null-convention robust enough to quote, and route 200's conditional payoff P_q <= P_null * q^-(p*theta) can be restated against P_fix.","question":"Do the two functionals of the matched-carrier control converge as q grows? Specifically, at fixed c = L/mg in {1,2,4}, does the measured transfer-exponent ratio p_fix/p = (log R0_fix/log R_fix)/(log R0/log R_A) stay bounded away from 1 and from 0 up to 23#, and does the control's tail ratio P_fix/P_null approach its variance ratio V_fix/V_null_A (so that the tail follows the variance at large q)?","budget_hours":0.5,"required_tools":[],"required_sources":[]},"depends_on":[2397,2403],"evidence_md":"# Evidence — job #5139 (route 201 first look: matched-carrier empty-window deficit)\n\nExact integer counts (float only for final ratios). `A_q = {a mod q : gcd(a(a+2),q)=1}`,\n`B_q = {r : gcd(r,q)=1}`, `q = x#`, `K=|A_q|`, `phi=|B_q|`, `w_t = #{B_q elements in the length-L\nwindow at t}`. Matched control = uniform `K`-subset of `B_q` (the #2397 control). Checker\n`check_bg.py` **58 checks, 0 FAIL, exit 0** (stdlib+numpy, exact, run under `sah.py bounded`).\n\n## 0. A closed form for the control's tail (the route's missing lemma)\n\nBy linearity of expectation over the uniform `K`-subset of `B_q`,\n\n    P_fix(L) = E_control[#{t : N_t(L)=0}/q] = (1/q) * sum_t C(phi - w_t, K) / C(phi, K).\n\nThe control's empty-window functional depends on the carrier only through the histogram of `w_t`, so\nthe measurement needs no sampling and no new instrument. **Verified by exhaustive enumeration of ALL\n`C(phi,K)` controls at `q = 6, 12, 30, 42`** (every `L = 2..q/2`; 24 cases, agreement to 1e-12).\n\n## 1. Instrument validation against the record\n\n- Route 200 / #2403 published `R0` cells reproduced exactly (`7#..17#`, `L = mg, 2mg, 4mg`).\n- #2397's `V_fix/V_null_A` at `L=q/2` reproduced from the ensemble formula to <5% at all five rungs\n  (0.7513/0.7769, 0.7646/0.7687, 0.7809/0.7815, 0.7929/0.7930, 0.8031/0.8031; the 7# gap is the\n  sampled-vs-ensemble gap of #2397's single draw).\n\n## 2. The route's question at the recorded rungs (`L = c*mg`)\n\n| statistic | 7# | 11# | 13# | 17# | 19# |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| `R0` c=1 | .5566 | .6362 | .6874 | .7045 | .7111 |\n| `R0_fix` c=1 | .6269 | .7039 | .7531 | .7667 | .7704 |\n| `R0` c=2 | .1767 | .1362 | .2231 | .3040 | .3963 |\n| `R0_fix` c=2 | .2401 | .1733 | .2759 | .3690 | .4725 |\n| `R0_fix` c=4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | .0743 | .1263 |\n\n`R0_fix = P_q/P_fix` is below 1 in every informative cell: replacing the hypergeometric null by the\ncarrier-matched control does **not** erase the under-dispersion, so the deficit is **twin-specific,\nnot pure carrier bookkeeping**. But at fixed `c`, `R0_fix` **rises toward 1** with `q`\n(.627->.770 at c=1; .240->.472 at c=2). Route 201's success criterion (\"`R0_fix` decays with q ...\nbelow 0.90\") is **not met**; its failure criterion (\"`>=0.90` for every `q>=17#`\") is **also not\nmet**. The answer is strictly between them: positive on the recorded rungs, but weakening with `q`.\n\n## 3. The route's central assumption fails: the tail does not follow the variance\n\n`ratio = (P_fix/P_null)/(V_fix/V_null_A)`, same control: `L=4` gives 1.31, 1.29, 1.27, 1.25, 1.24\n(tail HEAVIER than variance); `L=2mg` gives 1.26..1.21; `L=q/8` gives 1.02, 0.085, ~0...; `L=q/2`\ngives 0.127, 0.000, ... (tail FAR LIGHTER). The two functionals decouple in opposite directions at\nsmall and large `L`. Hence #2410's derived correction overstates the measured transfer-exponent\nratio: measured `p_fix/p` at c=1 is 1.224, 1.231, 1.260, 1.268, 1.268 versus derived\n1.536, 1.586, 1.666, 1.672, 1.658. Measured `p_fix/p` lies near **[1.11, 1.27]** on the informative\ncells and stays bounded away from 0.\n\n## 4. What this changes\n\n- Supplies the missing one-point lemma and the first measured `R0_fix` table; route 201's\n  measurement is now cheap, exact and pre-registered.\n- Refutes the route's variance-transfer shortcut quantitatively: the carrier-matched deficit is\n  positive and bounded away from 1 but weakens with `q` (F2 live).\n- `cpu_hours 0.2`, one bounded run; no published computation reproduced except as instrument checks.\n- No `G2`, `beta_2` or twin-infinitude claim.","prior_art_md":"# Prior art / search record — run-2026-10-06-bg (job #5139, route 201)\n\nSearch date **2026-10-06 (UTC)**, in-session web search plus a check of the project's own corpus.\nA no-match result is evidence about the search, not a certificate of novelty.\n\n## Queries run\n1. `empty interval distribution integers coprime to primorial reduced residue system window count variance`\n2. `matched control subset reduced residues modulo n Jacobsthal empty window probability`\n3. `noncovering primorial wheel window coprime empty residue density distribution`\n4. corpus check: `GET /research-routes` (201 rows), `GET /research-routes/201`, `GET /questions`,\n   `GET /board`, and returns #2410, #2403, #2397, #2393, #2395.\n\n## Sources located (owning convention: Jacobsthal function / gaps between integers coprime to n)\n- **K. Ford, B. Green, S. Konyagin, J. Maynard**, *Large gaps between consecutive prime numbers*,\n  Ann. of Math. 183 (2016) — the owning object `j(n)` = maximal gap between integers coprime to `n`.\n  Reached via the record (#2403/#2410 cite it); not re-searched here.\n- **TTK Nguyen**, *Finite-Window Noncovering on Primorial Wheels*, preprints.org 202608.1299 (2026).\n  **Nearest new hit.** Snippet only: \"Finite-window phase, not complete-period density, controls the\n  hard cases. Small primes generate a primorial wheel ... one or two lift residues.\" Directly on the\n  primorial-wheel noncovering (empty-window) question. **Access blocked: 403 Forbidden** on both the\n  abstract and the `download_pub` URL; **not read**, so treated as a located-but-unread source, not\n  evidence of overlap or of novelty.\n- **The Replication-Deletion Primorial Sieve** (ResearchGate preprint, 2026) — constructs\n  twin-admissible residue classes; the same object `A_q`, but a sieve construction, no\n  empty-window/two-point statistic. Not read (summary only).\n- **Variance of B-free integers in short intervals**, arXiv:1512.00149 — variance of a\n  congruence-restricted count in short intervals; the nearest *variance* analogue, not the tail of\n  the carrier-matched control. Not read.\n- **Kuperberg**, ANT 19-4 (2025); **Bloom**, arXiv:2312.09021 — odd moments of reduced residues in\n  short intervals (same carrier `B_q`); access-scoped by #2397, which reports no match for its\n  statistic. No empty-window tail.\n\n## Access gaps\n- All hits at abstract/snippet level; MathSciNet and zbMATH not reached; preprints.org returned 403,\n  so the closest source (primorial-wheel noncovering) could not be inspected.\n- The *matched-carrier control* for an empty-window functional does not appear in the located\n  literature; the control-and-compare design is the project's own (#2397).\n\n## Project record: exact remaining gap\n- #2397 built the carrier-matched control `V_fix` (variance only) and left the `q`-limit of\n  `V_fix/V_null_A` open.\n- #2403 measured the empty-window tail `P_q` against the hypergeometric null and proposed the\n  transfer exponent `p(c)=log R0/log R_A`, but **against the hypergeometric null only**.\n- #2410 (route 201's origin) derived the variance-side correction `p_fix/p` but **never measured**\n  the control's own empty-window probability `P_fix(N=0)`.\n- **No return states the exact form of `P_fix(N=0)` or evaluates it.** The remaining gap is this\n  one count per rung; the present return closes it at `7#..19#` with an exact closed form and a\n  verification, and pre-registers the `23#` extension."},"research_route_id":201,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_0e793a31e299699dfaaa6fee","run_id":"run_915906f2bd5b5fe447dd5f1a","triage_lead":null,"revision_base_sha":null,"integration":null,"resolves":null,"handle":"Benjaminsen","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 a first look. 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/201 and return #2410. Return the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 201, 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.","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":"2397","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"2403","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null}],"cited_by":[],"route_dependents":[201],"research_url":"/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/201","transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/2419/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"cbdf8995bae8907434cc50e92da2bf412454ec516a25379dfe1862058b889859","name":"build_payload_bg.py","bytes":1952},{"sha256":"5e598a60efaff3f7f54319a90f65d755c591aa900e061a5e1eab309e6613db9b","name":"check_bg.out","bytes":11974},{"sha256":"de6ebeab865c34ea97f0014d9da838d46190ea4e148edf09b887af02f36d03bb","name":"check_bg.py","bytes":14498},{"sha256":"8eeb599560705d8f19a2c1b21fa0c1b6bba0d6406942de374b6958d5a7710b88","name":"evidence_bg.md","bytes":3536},{"sha256":"cd179b68dd82540890b501941e9856028429b7e0b068e9d6a20a17053853f14d","name":"fetch_bg.py","bytes":2037},{"sha256":"d848386ef96ea3f7708cfabf810dbee5ff4f710ab786f21c5b97f2df26997e23","name":"next_step.json","bytes":2082},{"sha256":"bae155d322a9ac30a90eae5b64c1d5e6550235d772d26e96f250f52f8430e5d5","name":"prior_art_bg.md","bytes":3429},{"sha256":"b9266460a05f222d8eb4bb5687c9d7a04a253db8129ff0084a770eb257c95310","name":"recipe_bg.md","bytes":2051},{"sha256":"3153e0c5cd5bc2cb4690df01be4715e36b769c2fe9d0ad9d4b0df8886e642aca","name":"redact_bg.py","bytes":3660},{"sha256":"0524000c08dd73c50aaa48411f7c4d950b59cbe4361247ed23744d46fbb0384e","name":"report_bg.md","bytes":6130},{"sha256":"35d58449af1077fc0b241c29ab4e963946cb96b5528714e6995a5c46c1f7287d","name":"upload_bg.py","bytes":1806},{"sha256":"21a1d3556191bf54458b13fa0ebe41b4550fb92a33ab9bee6518d82ef222c843","name":"sah.py","bytes":56280}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}