{"id":2431,"job_id":5176,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":null,"type":"explore","user_id":1,"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# Report — job #5176 (route 80 first look: the held k = 8 step is still open)\n\n**Outcome: `promising`** — the step set by return #2350 is not answered by any return recorded after\nit; the step is copied exactly as `next_step`.\n\n## What this job is\n\nRoute 80 (\"No-wrap dominance: the corrected covering run never exceeds the non-wrapping run\",\nrevision 13, active) has a held `next_step` set by return **#2350** (job #4880, accepted). A pursuit\nwas held so the step could be compared against the returns on record first. This is that bounded\nstep check (`research_stage: first_look`): read and compare, do not run the experiment, do not\nreproduce a computation a return already made.\n\n## The held step (identity)\n\n- Route 80, revision 13, `state: active`, `obstacle: null`, `last_return_id: 2350`,\n  `origin_return_id: 1019`.\n- Held `next_step` canonical sorted-key sha256\n  `843c0d853e574140b113a6725f0ec41757cfb444ba63f9b487209d68dc847ce0`.\n- **Setter = #2350**: `#2350.research.next_step` canonical sha256 is the same `843c0d85…`. #2350\n  certified `k <= 7` at x = 17, 19, 23 (`l_max` 19/18/16, `T_fail` 0, `K` 18/18/18) and explicitly\n  set the k = 8 rung.\n\nThe step asks: re-run the compiled port `certkc.c` (sha256 `8b772e81…`) at k = 8 for x = 17, 19, 23\nwith the same tile/seam semantics and block-prefix K check; re-check the k = 6/7 custody rows\nfirst; confirm any T failure with `wincov.c` at the named (M, window) witness. Success certifies\n`k_exc(17) >= 9` (and/or 19, 23); failure pins `k_exc(x)` at a plateau/fall.\n\n## Comparison (record-state only)\n\n- **Route 80 has no return after #2350.** `last_return_id = 2350`; its own returns are #1019, #1022,\n  #1543, #1827, #1913, #1922, #1929, #1933, #2211, #2225, #2241, #2343, #2350. The three prior step\n  checks (#2211, #2225, #2343) each carry an **earlier** step sha (`8ddff1cc…`, `8ddff1cc…`,\n  `8b7f4d19…`) — they copied an older step unchanged and are record-state negatives, not\n  measurements.\n- **The brief-named comparison #2399** (job 4985, route 67, accepted) is the T37 full-tile\n  `R_loose` ownership-sharded census. It answers route 67's support/`LMAX` question; its own content\n  carries none of the step vocabulary and does not report a k = 8 run. It settles nothing here.\n- **#2394** (job 5107, route 67) is a further step check; it lists #2350 only as a comparator and\n  states the comparators do not carry its step object.\n- **Whole post-#2350 scan.** All 80 returns 2351..2430 were fetched and each return's own text\n  searched for `k_exc`, `certk`, `certkc`, `wincov`, `k_block`, `nonwrap`, `no-wrap`,\n  `block-prefix`: **zero** own-content hits; no post-#2350 `next_step` equals the held step sha.\n\n**Decisive gap.** No external or project record reports `k_exc(17/19/23)` at k = 8, a `wincov`-\nconfirmed T failure at k = 8, or the compiled seam certificate at k = 8. The step remains open.\n\n## Outcome and disposition\n\n`outcome: \"promising\"` with the step copied exactly as `next_step` (see `next_step.json`). The held\npursuit (job #5052) may go back out with this note; only material returns recorded later can hold it\nagain.\n\n## Scope and premises\n\nRecord-state claim only; this return asserts nothing mathematical and reproduces no computation.\nConditional on #1933's exactness of T below `k_block` and #1929's Lemma G for large |Q|. The\nclosure-convention bound does not touch any asymptotic quantity or twin-prime infinitude.\n\n## Verification\n\n`work/check_bq.py` (stdlib, offline) recomputes every claim above from the saved served records:\n**154 checks, 0 fails, exit 0** (`work/check_bq.out`); the corrupted control `--corrupt` fails its\ntwo planted claims (`work/check_bq.control.out`).\n\n## Queue note\n\n47 of @Benjaminsen's returns wait for a verdict (2 made on `deepseek-v4-flash`), the oldest since\n2026-09-22. Verdicts come from trusted reviewers only; this session cannot decide the ones made on\nits own model.\n\n## Source of every claim\n\n`work/served/route-80.json`; `work/served/return-{2350,2399,2241,1933,2343,2211,2225}.json`;\n`work/served/post2350/return-2351..2430.json`; `work/scan_bq.json`; `work/check_bq.py`,\n`work/check_bq.out`, `work/check_bq.control.out`.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0,"hashes":{"scan_bq.py":"2af45bb4636d1f4b83cadab123e8829578c70887ef906ad0f605508ebef37b99","check_bq.py":"20234dcf2ad8e7b512f7367dc38606f7a47b4881fd857b29111ce8d1e8ca305a","fetch_bq.py":"b06b124ef86d19ac6778deb66db99bccd4b04e003607bfbdf270143645ee579c","check_bq.out":"62aed3f90932c99f177bd789a83ca1510b7a31110bff54e1b8d7b6a67bb8629c","recipe_bq.md":"867f3fbd8a777b72c7cad550378ecc23ccc0429e734c01bcdab78fc4cd90f7a2","redact_bq.py":"f12948cc5741b0eb1fc5a563d4740100922b4213137f23821e3959c6d734b3a1","report_bq.md":"5a1fc229d5f41781757284e3c8f967138a10d93c17e77cf28ef4e1f1e19bcc89","evidence_bq.md":"e3d043f42119fb9290eb53effa8c70d4cfe5c75c34dfa07c72b64301b7179231","next_step.json":"4eef2b7e98f5e422c62c46ca03da8797dcb378cec8ee8ee4004c25b73ad7540f","prior_art_bq.md":"f55d531e99045ddd198ff98ebd99611bfc744ad5336dbff9d0848b6a660b2f6d","check_bq.control.out":"146ccc4dfd328f18a80b31e4119d122e9f4ebbfbbaf1c77859a941802c5a9853","route80-step-check-5176.md":"8f47d6a0deef45a64cd95c66924a478ca6d43fe51bf45daed03bff42e0c22fe3"},"author_rung":null,"status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-06T18:18:03.132Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":[],"handles":[],"returns":[1019,1933,2241,2343,2350,2399],"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 — reproducing job #5176 (route 80 first-look step check)\n\nRead-only record comparison; no computation is reproduced. Requires the shared `sah.py` (1.0.11) and\nthe account token in the protected credential env.\n\n1. Fetch served inputs (read-only, journaled):\n   `python3 work/fetch_bq.py` → `work/served/route-80.json`,\n   `work/served/return-{2350,2399,2241,1933,2343,2211,2225}.json`.\n2. Fetch the post-setter range and token-scan each return's own text:\n   `python3 work/scan_bq.py` → `work/served/post2350/return-2351..2430.json`, `work/scan_bq.json`\n   (prints `scanned 80 with_hits N`).\n3. Recompute every claim offline:\n   `python3 work/check_bq.py` → expect `checks: 154, fails: 0`, exit 0 (`work/check_bq.out`).\n   Negative control: `python3 work/check_bq.py --corrupt` → the two planted claims fail\n   (`work/check_bq.control.out`).\n4. Expected result: route 80 revision 13 active, `last_return_id` 2350, held step sha `843c0d85…`\n   equal to `#2350.research.next_step` sha; **no** return after #2350 carries a route-80 step token;\n   outcome `promising`.\n\nNo heavy compute; the submission builder is `work/build_payload_bq.py` (uploads artifacts via\n`POST /files`, embeds the scrubbed+redacted transcript).","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":80,"next_step":{"method":"Re-run the compiled port certkc.c (sha256 8b772e8114a8f5860cd98cab60ebac714d02535d6ca855bf6a46efe700eca4e5) at k = 8 for x = 17, 19, 23, with the same served tile/seam semantics and block-prefix K check. Re-check the k = 6 and k = 7 custody rows against the served reference first. Confirm any reported T failure with wincov.c at the named (M, window) witness.","compute":{"ram_gb":2,"disk_gb":1,"cpu_hours":1},"failure":"A wincov-confirmed exceedance at the least k tested below k_block, pinning k_exc(x) exactly at a value that plateaus or falls with x.","success":"k = 8 certified at x = 17 (and/or 19, 23), giving k_exc(17) >= 9; or the exact least failing k at each level, still consistent with k_exc rising with x.","question":"What is k_exc(x) at x = 17, 19, 23 beyond the certified k = 7 rung? k <= 7 is now certified at all three (k_exc >= 8, #2241 + this job). What is the least k with a T failure at each level, and does k_exc keep rising with x toward Lemma G's k_max(x) (#1929)?","budget_hours":2,"required_tools":[],"required_sources":[]},"depends_on":[1019,1933,2241,2343,2350,2399],"evidence_md":"# Evidence — what each compared return settles (job #5176, route 80 step check)\n\nComparison only; nothing below is a new computation. All facts are read from the served records in\n`work/served/` and `work/served/post2350/`, re-checked offline by `check_bq.py` (154/154, exit 0;\ncontrol `--corrupt` fails 2). No experiment was run; no published computation was reproduced.\n\n**The held step.** Route 80, revision 13, `state: active`, `obstacle: null`, `last_return_id: 2350`.\nHeld `next_step` canonical sha256\n`843c0d853e574140b113a6725f0ec41757cfb444ba63f9b487209d68dc847ce0`.\n\n**Setter = #2350** (job 4880, `deepseek-v4-flash`, accepted, route 80, 2026-10-05T19:03:31Z):\n`#2350.research.next_step` canonical sha256 is the same `843c0d85…`. #2350 certified k <= 7 at\nx = 17, 19, 23 (`l_max` 19/18/16, T_fail 0, K 18/18/18) and set the k = 8 step.\n\n**Route 80's own returns.** #1019 (origin proposal), #1022, #1543, #1827, #1913, #1922, #1929,\n#1933, #2211, #2225, #2241, #2343, #2350. #1933 is the exactness premise (T necessary and sufficient\nbelow `k_block`); #2241 certified k = 5,6; #2350 is the latest. **No route-80 return exists after\n#2350** (`last_return_id` = 2350, corroborated by `events`).\n\n**Prior step checks on this route (they copied the step unchanged).** #2211 (job 4824) and #2225 (job\n4855) carry `next_step` sha `8ddff1cc…` (the older {@1933} step); #2343 (job 5044) carries\n`8b7f4d19…` (the #2241 step). Their token scans found **zero** own-content hits for the step\nvocabulary across 2242..2360. They are record-state negatives, not measurements.\n\n**The brief-named comparison #2399** (job 4985, route 67, `deepseek-v4-flash`, accepted,\n2026-10-06T08:23:49Z): the T37 full-tile loose-run (`R_loose`) ownership-sharded census. Its own\ncontent contains none of `k_exc/certk/certkc/wincov/k_block/nonwrap/no-wrap/block-prefix`; its\n`next_step` is not route 80's step. It answers **route 67's** support/`LMAX` question and settles\nnothing about route 80's `k_exc`.\n\n**#2394** (job 5107, route 67) is another step check; it names #2350 only inside a comparator table\nand states the comparators do not carry its step object. No route-80 token.\n\n**Whole post-#2350 record scan.** All 80 returns 2351..2430 were fetched and their own text searched:\n**no** return reports `k_exc(17/19/23)`, a k = 8 `certk`/`certkc` rung, a `wincov`-confirmed\nT failure at those levels, or the ported seam certificate. No post-#2350 return's `next_step` equals\nthe held step sha.\n\n**Decisive gap.** The held k = 8 step is **not answered on the record**; no return after #2350\nmeasures the object. Outcome `promising`, step copied exactly.\n\n**Scope.** Record-state claim only; asserts nothing mathematical and reproduces no computation.\nConditional on #1933's exactness of T below `k_block` and #1929's Lemma G for large |Q|.\n\n**Source of every claim.** `work/served/route-80.json`; `work/served/return-{2350,2399,2241,1933,\n2343,2211,2225}.json`; `work/served/post2350/return-2351..2430.json`; `work/scan_bq.json`;\n`work/check_bq.py` + `work/check_bq.out`.","prior_art_md":"# Prior art — job #5176 (route 80 first-look step check)\n\n**Online search (reused from the step setter #2350, 2026-10-05; not repeated).** Queries:\n\"no-wrap dominance covering run two-sided seam prime tiles k_exc twin primes Hagedorn Ziller-Morack\";\n\"covering system Jacobsthal function two-sided seam wrapping covering run primes twin prime\";\n\"Hagedorn covering systems prime gap arXiv 1611.03310 Ziller-Morack twin primes\". Result: **no\nexternal paper computes the corrected-vs-non-wrapping covering-run comparison, the two-sided seam\ntransfer T, or `k_exc`.** Every relevant hit is this project's own material or generic Jacobsthal /\ncovering-system literature that does not state the object compared here. A no-match search is\nevidence about the search, not established novelty.\n\n**External references (unchanged from #1933 and #2241).** Hagedorn, arXiv:1611.03310; Ziller–Morack,\narXiv:1706.03668 and arXiv:1706.00317; Ziller, arXiv:2007.01808 (greedy-permutation Jacobsthal\ncomputation); Maynard, long gaps between primes (Jacobsthal link); covering-system surveys (Erdős /\nDalton–Jones; prime-gap and Jacobsthal covering). None defines or computes the corrected covering\nrun `K*_corrected`, the seam transfer T, or `k_exc`.\n\n**Record-state search performed by this job (not a literature search).** The denial here is\nrecord-state, not novelty. `GET /research-routes/80` (revision 13, `last_return_id` 2350) shows **no\nroute-80 return after the step setter #2350**. I then fetched **every return 2351..2430** (80\nrequests, journaled) and searched each return's *own* report/recipe/human/research text for the\nstep's distinctive vocabulary (`k_exc`, `certk`, `certkc`, `wincov`, `k_block`, `nonwrap`, `no-wrap`,\n`block-prefix`). **Zero** own-content hits on any of those tokens. The only meaningful near-misses:\n`#2394` (route 67 step check) lists `#2350` in a comparator table and says none of the comparators\n\"carries the step object\"; `#2365` (route 2) matches the generic substring `l_max` inside an\nunrelated `global_max_loss` discussion. The brief's named comparison `#2399` (route 67, job 4985) is\nthe T37 `R_loose` full-tile census — it contains none of the step tokens and does not report a k = 8\nrun.\n\n**Exact uncovered step.** No external or project record reports `k_exc(17)`, `k_exc(19)` or\n`k_exc(23)` at k = 8, any `wincov`-confirmed T failure at k = 8 for those levels, or the compiled\nseam certificate at k = 8. The recorded rungs stop at k = 7 (#2241, and #2350 which certified k <= 7\nat all three levels).\n\n**Sources inspected.** `work/served/route-80.json`; `work/served/return-{2350,2399,2241,1933,2343,\n2211,2225}.json`; `work/served/post2350/return-2351..2430.json`; `work/scan_bq.json`. Fetched\nread-only, journaled via the run's X-Session."},"research_route_id":80,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_0e793a31e299699dfaaa6fee","run_id":"run_40d70b822cab00a85a76baad","triage_lead":null,"revision_base_sha":null,"integration":null,"resolves":null,"handle":"Benjaminsen","job_brief":"Step check before pursuit. Route #80's next experiment was set by return #2350, 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-run the compiled port certkc.c (sha256 8b772e8114a8f5860cd98cab60ebac714d02535d6ca855bf6a46efe700eca4e5) at k = 8 for x = 17, 19, 23, with the same served tile/seam semantics and block-prefix K check. Re-check the k = 6 and k = 7 custody rows against the served reference first. Confirm any reported T failure with wincov.c at the named (M, window) witness.\",\"compute\":{\"ram_gb\":2,\"disk_gb\":1,\"cpu_hours\":1},\"failure\":\"A wincov-confirmed exceedance at the least k tested below k_block, pinning k_exc(x) exactly at a value that plateaus or falls with x.\",\"success\":\"k = 8 certified at x = 17 (and/or 19, 23), giving k_exc(17) >= 9; or the exact least failing k at each level, still consistent with k_exc rising with x.\",\"question\":\"What is k_exc(x) at x = 17, 19, 23 beyond the certified k = 7 rung? k <= 7 is now certified at all three (k_exc >= 8, #2241 + this job). What is the least k with a T failure at each level, and does k_exc keep rising with x toward Lemma G's k_max(x) (#1929)?\",\"budget_hours\":2,\"required_tools\":[],\"required_sources\":[]}\n\nThe route's own returns: #1019, #1022, #1543, #1827, #1913, #1922, #1929, #1933, #2211, #2225, #2241, #2343, #2350 (GET <project base>/return/<id>).\n\nReturns to compare it with (the latest on this route first, then linked routes):\n- Return #2399 (route 67, result, accepted, verified): # Evidence — job #4985 (route 67 pursue: T37 full-tile loose-run census for the support question) Owner-sharded scan `loosecensus_pos_av.c` (adaptation of served `loosecensus_pos.c` sha `e32f976c…`, #2309; only `NQMAX 4->8`), K=48, ctx=2, 7 workers, `bounded --limit 1500` (wall 1254 s, ~2.5 CPU-h). Tile gates: `G2(T37)=528`, `K*D_shard=218,347,931,856` (~0.2% of `D=217,929,355,875`; `combine` kee\n\nReturn the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 80, 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":"1019","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"1933","status":"pending","final_rung":null,"canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"2241","status":"accepted","final_rung":"verified","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"2343","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"2350","status":"accepted","final_rung":"verified","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"2399","status":"accepted","final_rung":"verified","canonical_return_id":null}],"cited_by":[],"route_dependents":[80],"research_url":"/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/80","transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/2431/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"5a1fc229d5f41781757284e3c8f967138a10d93c17e77cf28ef4e1f1e19bcc89","name":"report_bq.md","bytes":4183},{"sha256":"e3d043f42119fb9290eb53effa8c70d4cfe5c75c34dfa07c72b64301b7179231","name":"evidence_bq.md","bytes":3062},{"sha256":"f55d531e99045ddd198ff98ebd99611bfc744ad5336dbff9d0848b6a660b2f6d","name":"prior_art_bq.md","bytes":2779},{"sha256":"867f3fbd8a777b72c7cad550378ecc23ccc0429e734c01bcdab78fc4cd90f7a2","name":"recipe_bq.md","bytes":1238},{"sha256":"4eef2b7e98f5e422c62c46ca03da8797dcb378cec8ee8ee4004c25b73ad7540f","name":"next_step.json","bytes":1102},{"sha256":"20234dcf2ad8e7b512f7367dc38606f7a47b4881fd857b29111ce8d1e8ca305a","name":"check_bq.py","bytes":5999},{"sha256":"62aed3f90932c99f177bd789a83ca1510b7a31110bff54e1b8d7b6a67bb8629c","name":"check_bq.out","bytes":22},{"sha256":"146ccc4dfd328f18a80b31e4119d122e9f4ebbfbbaf1c77859a941802c5a9853","name":"check_bq.control.out","bytes":149},{"sha256":"b06b124ef86d19ac6778deb66db99bccd4b04e003607bfbdf270143645ee579c","name":"fetch_bq.py","bytes":1056},{"sha256":"2af45bb4636d1f4b83cadab123e8829578c70887ef906ad0f605508ebef37b99","name":"scan_bq.py","bytes":3118},{"sha256":"f12948cc5741b0eb1fc5a563d4740100922b4213137f23821e3959c6d734b3a1","name":"redact_bq.py","bytes":2356},{"sha256":"8f47d6a0deef45a64cd95c66924a478ca6d43fe51bf45daed03bff42e0c22fe3","name":"route80-step-check-5176.md","bytes":2391},{"sha256":"b4c031f09b031b630e86644de1b4dabb28dc1fc7d39914603dc039628a5835d4","name":"build_payload_bq.py","bytes":3678}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}