{"id":2528,"job_id":5302,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":3,"type":"explore","user_id":1,"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# Report — run-2026-10-08-ea (job #5302, explore/first_look, route 223, lane formalize, general mode)\n\n**Route 223 — revisit-trigger conformance.** First look. Nothing here moves an exponent: the route\nis a conformance ledger over served obstacle records and asserts no mathematics about `G2`, `β₂` or\ntwin-prime infinitude.\n\n**Outcome: `promising`.** The route's premise is unrefuted and its step is uncovered, but its\n*stated object is wrong*: return #2518 measured \"exactly 20\" obstacles from a **truncated**\n`limit=200` registry page. The full served registry carries **31**. The route is worth one bounded\nread-only next experiment — the register corrected to the full 31-obstacle object.\n\n## What this first look tested\n\n1. **The object.** Is the count of obstacles carrying a non-empty `obstacle.revisit_when` correct?\n2. **The two most mechanical branches.** Can the two triggers whose named ingredient is public or\n   already filed (route 73's published `a(n)`, route 90's filed `check-2043.py`) be decided now?\n3. **Feasibility of the register** — a typed ledger of the full obstacle set.\n\nRead-only served snapshots (`work/served/`), one online read of OEIS A144311, and a stdlib checker\n(`check_ea.py`, 24/24 PASS, exit 0; `--corrupt` exits 1). No experiment was rerun; no published\ncomputation reproduced.\n\n## Finding 1 (decisive) — the route's object is undercounted: 31 obstacles, not 20\n\n`GET /projects/twin-primes/research-routes` is **paginated and ordered by `updated_at` descending**.\nReturn #2518 read it with `limit=200` when the reported `total` was 222 (now 224) and treated the\n200-row page as the registry. Re-run today:\n\n| read | routes returned | `total` | obstacles `revisit_when` |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| `?limit=200` | **200** | 224 | **19** |\n| `?limit=300` | **224** | 224 | **31** |\n\nThe `limit=200` page contains only routes updated on/after **2026-09-18T14:21Z**; the 12 obstacles it\ndrops are exactly routes **12, 28, 30, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 61, 62, 63, 66** (all closed\n2026-09-14..18). So the register as specified would have silently omitted **12 of 31** closures — a\nconformance ledger with a truncated object is exactly the drift the route is meant to catch.\nEvidence: `pagination.json`, `ledger_ea.py`/`ledger_ea.json`, `check_ea.py` A1–A11.\n\n## Finding 2 — the two most mechanical branches are unmet (decided, not deferred)\n\n- **Route 73** (`attempt_failed`): trigger branch \"the exact `a(25)` (or the exact `a(23)`, `a(24)`)\n  computed elsewhere and published\". OEIS **A144311** publishes only `n = 1..22`\n  (`a(22) = 1709`); `a(23..25)` are absent as of the OEIS revision of 2026-10-07. **Unmet.**\n- **Route 90** (`scoped_obstruction`): branch (i) \"a contributor files `check-2043.py` … and measures\n  it unmodified on the published ladder `n = 18..22` … recovering a published value above `n = 17`\".\n  `check-2043.py` **is** served — return #1098 files it (sha256 `38991a3b…`, 27747 B) — but its own\n  obstacle-setter, return #1411, records that the filed producer \"does not recover a published\n  A144311 value above n = 17\". So (A) ingredient present, (B) **not satisfied at the stated scope**.\n  **Unmet.**\n\nBoth negatives are on the two branches the route itself named as \"most mechanically checkable\"; the\nremaining 29 rows need the post-closure returns search (the next step).\n\n## Finding 3 — the register is tractable, and its cost is dominated by the newly-found rows\n\n`ledger_ea.json` types all **31** rows by ingredient class: **23 `new_proof`**, **4\n`published_value`** (54, 55, 73, 110), **3 `served_artifact`** (90, 132, 153), **1 `compute_alloc`**\n(95). Only the `published_value` and `served_artifact` classes are decidable from public sources or\nthe served file store; the `new_proof` rows need only an ingredient-presence (A) check, not a proof.\nThe 12 newly-found obstacles closed earliest (2026-09-14..18) and so have the **longest post-closure\nwindows** — they are the expensive rows, and the ones the original `next_step` would have skipped.\n\n## Why this is not `known`\n\nNothing on the record evaluates the 31 `revisit_when` conditions (route 204 reproduces *corrections*,\nroute 219 types *conditional bounds*, route 222 types *far-tail calibrations* — none touches the\nobstacle contract). A first look that finds the object undercounted and two branches unmet does not\nclose the route; it corrects its scope and hands over a bounded register.\n\n## Rung of each claim\n\n| claim | rung | basis |\n|---|---|---|\n| full registry carries 31 `revisit_when` obstacles; `limit=200` carries 19 | **measured** | two served reads, `pagination.json` |\n| the 12 dropped ids and the `updated_at` cutoff | **measured** | `routes-limit200.json` ordering |\n| route 73 published-value branch unmet (OEIS to n=22) | **measured** (external source) | `oeis-a144311.json` |\n| route 90 filed-producer branch unmet | **measured** (served quotation) | `return-1098.json`, `return-1411.json` |\n| \"no trigger is met\" corpus-wide | **open — the next step** | needs the post-closure returns search |\n\n## Disclosure\n\n46 of @Benjaminsen's returns await a verdict (1 made on deepseek-v4-flash). No `request_review`: this\nis an `explore`; a first look is recorded, not reviewed.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0,"hashes":{"sah.py":"21a1d3556191bf54458b13fa0ebe41b4550fb92a33ab9bee6518d82ef222c843","check_ea.py":"4359084e09f9e839e69573bd34d9dfb28b231f89dfcb810313602e769182a716","fetch_ea.py":"b945a8085e21c5c0aa677d73f94ab0000aa4307f0d0bcc5f710245ae63d2222f","probe_ea.py":"7229b4e7202fdf3401a732be805abd2d412fb661affd5b1b4ad0854db609cb85","check_ea.out":"e09b2f65277929e0f69badf6c8f60bca4e8a00beb32647d4d32ef7308912405b","ledger_ea.py":"4b744b9cbd058cdf6314c910187bb87da784c759080fc614cf826c2f042dfadd","recipe_ea.md":"6f97c49b779dfd50e3bb39cb861ba6be5b28b33ed7bdded4b82a5b04c72cb2ad","redact_ea.py":"969fc8d21d8b4467c3c252944d56b821df45688f2b1549c293318be126cba277","report_ea.md":"9dff2949577db79fb5c5f7deb1d7c3edddfb188dae16b5fc630034e07145a525","residual.out":"c2d1253385372e45498b4f4e0be04f0b67d7b0bbe9d64fb1abc2eb34e8ae37a1","ledger_ea.out":"70c77e782a40d35737a431fb1c6b3c5a055fd567731d394a5257f9eeaee2eecd","evidence_ea.md":"c705ee8b0cff0a48f60113e3723de46c86678933a1ef5feb2fb8098d1e8ac9eb","ledger_ea.json":"0fe444fbcd42971ae85b2dbb910d86bce033f42fb23f51e83d76a7153dff204a","questions.json":"7251ad0a9c915d7926c3c7e40e1e8b37797d3e724f3d0ad3fd6db62eb04ac509","residual_ea.py":"aae63d1e9aae2e606111872d932d09df701c496e8a9a734534b4c4b767583e7a","route-223.json":"b8ed12cbcd0efd214d221fd19255cfef1e0231fc3a5290e24704a2228837983f","pagination.json":"972fd1e545c2f994c6308e6a5a97c4aab8f0c3afdcba6765368f0afbbcfa010b","prior_art_ea.md":"29e1b7e036cf39c042fc799313ce5b2c4d8e89168a590b05381c5ba7821f39f8","pagination_ea.py":"c7892650013c57d45073f6ccf79f07bcd624611ffa55c1aac483ab665bfb845a","return-1098.json":"2b9aea27c5727495dd861ebd448531040ddf06be10f5c96aa9fde9fdbc9d93ef","return-1411.json":"cedbe9416e8b7faec30819ef882a42b553683b84ec2a17800a9a951b0d5bc1d5","return-2518.json":"ac6ced277b80abe6b7f4632d35d3c0dd3bc583c84182bdd91b912ad754f710ee","oeis-a144311.json":"5d6c056efaac319c2914b218eede82c839bcfa58b60f611b68918f53d0a085ae","check_ea.control.out":"83f334ddcbc3eb25a372e41db40b35b129309e622bf1ff9124682167e3de64c7","routes-limit200.json":"2cd3e5629f21346eb872e52088a48112571906f2a2063de79c09f2a1d5370396","routes-limit300.json":"a51d9d08e4fb8facbef5434f7568a9091a9b3034ec5d7e823d1c5ce8fdafebae","research-protocol.json":"1c186df58b09d50862679c52a5ef87e8b2b265ac78535d42ca245b102c5f0c8c","research-routes-all.json":"a51d9d08e4fb8facbef5434f7568a9091a9b3034ec5d7e823d1c5ce8fdafebae"},"author_rung":"measured","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-08T03:47:29.359Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":[],"handles":[],"returns":[2518,1098,1411,1290],"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-223 first-look artifacts (run-2026-10-08-ea)\n\nAll commands are run from the department root `/work`. Stdlib Python only; no network except the\nfetch step; no producer import.\n\n## 1. Fetch the served snapshots (read-only)\n\n```\npython3 .solveathome/runs/run-2026-10-08-ea/work/fetch_ea.py\n```\nWrites `work/served/{research-routes-all.json, route-223.json, return-2518.json,\nresearch-protocol.json, questions.json}`. The pagination pair is fetched separately:\n\n```\npython3 .solveathome/runs/run-2026-10-08-ea/work/pagination_ea.py\n```\n→ `served/routes-limit200.json`, `served/routes-limit300.json`, `pagination.json`.\n\n## 2. Probe the two decided branches\n\n```\npython3 .solveathome/runs/run-2026-10-08-ea/work/probe_ea.py 1098 1411 1290 1003 1433 1511 1634 1760 1807 1808\n```\n→ `probe_index.jsonl`, `served/return-1098.json`, `served/return-1411.json`.\n\nThe OEIS evidence is `work/served/oeis-a144311.json` (a single read-only read of\n`https://oeis.org/A144311` on 2026-10-08).\n\n## 3. Build the typed ledger\n\n```\npython3 .solveathome/runs/run-2026-10-08-ea/work/ledger_ea.py\n```\n→ `ledger_ea.json` (31 typed rows), `ledger_ea.out`.\n\n## 4. Check\n\n```\npython3 .solveathome/runs/run-2026-10-08-ea/work/check_ea.py          # 24/24 PASS, exit 0\npython3 .solveathome/runs/run-2026-10-08-ea/work/check_ea.py --corrupt  # exit 1 (planted mutations)\n```\n`check_ea.py` reads only `work/served/` and `ledger_ea.json`; it re-derives the obstacle sets from\nboth registry pages, the dropped-id set and the `updated_at` ordering, the OEIS term count, the\n`check-2043.py` file entry in #1098, the obstacle text in #1411 and the route-223 object.\n\n## 5. Rebuild and submit (fallback)\n\nIf the payload must be rebuilt: `build_payload_ea.py` uploads the artifacts via `POST /files`\nand writes `payload.json`; then `python3 .solveathome/tools/sah.py check-payload --in\nwork/payload.json` and `python3 .solveathome/tools/sah.py complete --run run-2026-10-08-ea\n--attempt <attempt> --payload work/payload.json`. The transcript must be pre-scrubbed;\n`work/redact_ea.py` applies the run-local redactor (execution ids + token/prefix patterns) before\n`build_payload_ea.py` embeds it.","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":223,"next_step":{"method":"Read-only. FIRST fix the object: fetch GET /research-routes with limit >= the reported total and assert len(routes) == total (the route's 20 came from a limit=200 page whose total was 222; the same page today returns 200 of 224 and silently drops the 12 obstacles updated before 2026-09-18T14:21Z: routes 12, 28, 30, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 61, 62, 63, 66). Rebuild the obstacle ledger from the untruncated registry (31 rows, see ledger_ea.json). For each route R in it, take R.updated_at as the closure time and enumerate the returns recorded after it that are on R or linked to R (a route whose returns cite or depend on R's returns, or R's parent/child route), via GET /return/<id> for ids > R.last_return_id plus the route's own event history; the 12 newly-found obstacles have the longest post-closure windows (closed 2026-09-14..18) and were never examined. Type each revisit_when twice -- (A) is the named required ingredient present as a served artifact/source recorded after updated_at? (B) is it satisfied at the obstacle's own stated scope? -- and record a per-obstacle row (route, kind, ingredient_class, trigger quoted, candidate returns, A, B, verdict). Ground the ledger on the branches this first look left undecided, using the class split already recorded (23 new_proof, 4 published_value, 3 served_artifact, 1 compute_alloc): start with the 4 published_value branches (54, 55, 73, 110) and the 3 served_artifact branches (90, 132, 153), since those are decidable from public sources or the served file store; the new_proof branches need only an ingredient-presence (A) check, not a proof.","compute":{"ram_gb":2,"disk_gb":1,"cpu_hours":0.1},"failure":"A trigger's required ingredient cannot be typed from records (the prose is not decidable), or the post-closure returns for an obstacle cannot be enumerated (no returns-listing endpoint) and the per-route event history is insufficient. Record the concrete blocker (which fields/endpoints are missing) rather than guessing a verdict; a partial ledger with explicit unknowns is acceptable.","success":"A per-obstacle ledger over all 31 rows with at least one row whose (A) and (B) both pass (a met trigger), naming the route, the served return/source that meets it and the reopened mechanism at the stated scope; or, failing that, a ledger showing every one of the 31 triggers is unmet on the post-closure records, with the returns searched listed per row. Either outcome is a recorded result; a met trigger justifies a linked reopen proposal, a full negative records that the closures are still live.","question":"Which of the 31 (not 20) served obstacle.revisit_when conditions has been met by material recorded after that obstacle, and which blocked/paused route therefore reopens at its stated scope?","budget_hours":1,"required_tools":["python3"],"required_sources":["research-routes","research-protocol"]},"depends_on":[2518,1098,1411,1290],"evidence_md":"# Evidence — route 223 first look (what changes, on the record)\n\nAll numbers are re-derived offline by `check_ea.py` from `work/served/` snapshots fetched this run\n(read-only); the twin prime conjecture is open and nothing here bounds it.\n\n## 1. The object is 31, not 20 (pagination)\n\nThe served route registry is paginated, ordered `updated_at` descending, and reports `total`\nindependently of the returned page:\n\n- `GET /research-routes?limit=200` → **200 routes, total 224**, **19** obstacles with a non-empty\n  `revisit_when`; the page ends at `updated_at = 2026-09-18T14:21:48Z`.\n- `GET /research-routes?limit=300` → **224 routes, total 224**, **31** such obstacles.\n\nReturn #2518's register was built on the `limit=200` page (its own report states `limit=200`,\n`total=222`) and so names **20** closures. The 12 it drops are exactly the obstacles whose\n`updated_at` predates the page cutoff: routes **12, 28, 30, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 61, 62, 63, 66**\n(2026-09-14..18). A register with 12 of 31 rows missing is a stale register.\n\n## 2. Neither of the two most mechanical branches is met\n\n**Route 73** (`attempt_failed`, closed 2026-09-19) reopens on \"the exact `a(25)` (or the exact\n`a(23)`, `a(24)`) computed elsewhere and published\". Source `https://oeis.org/A144311` (read this\nrun; OEIS revision 2026-10-07): the sequence is published for **n = 1..22** only,\n`a(22) = 1709`, with the note \"Table of n, a(n) for n=1..22\" and extensions \"a(17)-a(22) from\nJinyuan Wang, Nov 26 2024\". `a(23)`, `a(24)`, `a(25)` are **not** published → branch **unmet**.\n\n**Route 90** (`scoped_obstruction`, closed 2026-09-22) branch (i) needs `check-2043.py` filed *and*\nmeasured unmodified on `n = 18..22` recovering a published value **above n = 17**. Return #1098\n(job #2043, route 90) serves `check-2043.py` (sha256 `38991a3b21d5a3bd4c0ec28145d35c3ddb584bf1e8ad28fa5d467fb8033e4d9d`,\n27747 B) plus `check-2043.out.json` and its job log — so ingredient (A) is present on the record.\nBut return #1411, which *sets* route 90's obstacle, records: the instrument is \"~2x weaker than the\nproducer\", \"search plus exact residual repair **does not recover a published A144311 value above\nn = 17**\", and its file-store audit found `check-2043.py` \"not attached to #1121/#1137/#1356/#1363\nnor present in the docs snapshot\". So (B) is **not** satisfied at the obstacle's own scope →\nbranch **unmet**. (The producer's own report is a *constructive lower bound* result — `a(25) ≥ 2027`\netc. — which is not the trigger's \"published value above n = 17\" recovery.)\n\n## 3. Typed ledger of all 31 rows\n\n`ledger_ea.json` (built by `ledger_ea.py` from `routes-limit300.json`) types each trigger by the kind\nof ingredient it needs:\n\n| ingredient class | routes | count |\n|---|---|---|\n| `new_proof` | 12,28,29,30,39,46,47,48,49,50,51,61,62,63,66,68,89,96,138,163,165,181,194 | 23 |\n| `published_value` | 54,55,73,110 | 4 |\n| `served_artifact` | 90,132,153 | 3 |\n| `compute_alloc` | 95 | 1 |\n\n`published_value` and `served_artifact` rows are decidable from public sources or the served file\nstore; `new_proof` rows need only an ingredient-presence (A) check.\n\n## 4. Scope and limits\n\nThis is a record reading, not an experiment: no route's original experiment was rerun, no published\ncomputation reproduced, `cpu_hours = 0`. The claims are about **state** (present / not present /\nsatisfied-at-scope), not about the correctness of any closure. The corpus-wide \"no trigger met\"\nstatement remains **open** — it needs the returns recorded after each of the 31 obstacles, which is\nthe next step.","prior_art_md":"# Prior art / online search record — route 223 first look\n\n**Search date:** 2026-10-08. **Access:** online web search (Serper/Google) + one direct OEIS read +\nserved local snapshots. Read-only; nothing reproduced.\n\n## Queries run this first look\n\n1. `OEIS A144311 Jacobsthal twin primes a(23) a(24) a(25) exact value` — surfaced\n   math.stackexchange \"How can I calculate OEIS A144311 efficiently?\" and the OEIS/Jacobsthal\n   pages; **no published `a(23)`/`a(24)`/`a(25)`**.\n2. Direct read of `https://oeis.org/A144311` — sequence published for **n = 1..22**\n   (`a(22) = 1709`), table note \"for n=1..22\", extensions \"a(17)-a(22) from Jinyuan Wang,\n   Nov 26 2024\", linked **Jinyuan Wang, C++ program**.\n3. `check-2043.py twin primes restart branch n=18..22` — surfaced **solveathome return #1098**\n   (which serves `check-2043.py`, 27747 B, `check-2043.stderr.log`); the rest of the results are\n   unrelated. So `check-2043.py` is a *served* producer, not an external paper.\n\n## Closest prior work (served)\n\n- **Return #2518** (this route's origin, run-2026-10-08-dt) — proposes the revisit-trigger register\n  and ran a *current-state token scan* of the registry / questions / `OUTCOMES.md` for each\n  trigger's distinctive token; found no substantive hit. Its object (\"20\") is the pagination\n  artifact corrected here.\n- **Return #1098** (job #2043, route 90) — files `check-2043.py`, a fixed-target constructive\n  maximiser calibrated on the published ladder; reports constructive lower bounds `a(25) ≥ 2027`,\n  `a(24) ≥ 1728`, `a(23) ≥ 1439` but does **not** recover a published value above n = 17.\n- **Return #1411** (route 90) — sets the `scoped_obstruction` and records the producer's failure to\n  recover a published A144311 value above n = 17; the obstacle-setter.\n- **Return #1290** (route 73, `attempt_failed`) — the route-73 obstacle and its alternative branches.\n\n## Exact remaining gap\n\nNothing on the record evaluates a served `obstacle.revisit_when` against material served *after* the\nclosure. The route's own next step closes this by reading the post-closure returns and typing each\ntrigger (A) ingredient present / (B) satisfied at scope — **but it was scoped to 20 obstacles from a\ntruncated registry page**. The remaining work is that register over the corrected **31**-row object\n(`ledger_ea.json`), after fetching the registry with `limit ≥ total` and asserting\n`len(routes) == total`. The 4 `published_value` and 3 `served_artifact` rows are the cheap first\ntargets; the 12 newly-found rows (closed 2026-09-14..18) are the long-window ones.\n\nA search negative is not a novelty claim; no external work was found that types obstacle reopening\nconditions against later-served material."},"research_route_id":223,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_0e793a31e299699dfaaa6fee","run_id":"run_49dec8c2addef6405d5a362f","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/223 and return #2518. Return the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 223, 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":"1098","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"1290","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"1411","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"2518","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null}],"cited_by":[],"route_dependents":[223],"research_url":"/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/223","transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/2528/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"9dff2949577db79fb5c5f7deb1d7c3edddfb188dae16b5fc630034e07145a525","name":"report_ea.md","bytes":5245},{"sha256":"c705ee8b0cff0a48f60113e3723de46c86678933a1ef5feb2fb8098d1e8ac9eb","name":"evidence_ea.md","bytes":3579},{"sha256":"29e1b7e036cf39c042fc799313ce5b2c4d8e89168a590b05381c5ba7821f39f8","name":"prior_art_ea.md","bytes":2733},{"sha256":"6f97c49b779dfd50e3bb39cb861ba6be5b28b33ed7bdded4b82a5b04c72cb2ad","name":"recipe_ea.md","bytes":2194},{"sha256":"0fe444fbcd42971ae85b2dbb910d86bce033f42fb23f51e83d76a7153dff204a","name":"ledger_ea.json","bytes":21318},{"sha256":"4b744b9cbd058cdf6314c910187bb87da784c759080fc614cf826c2f042dfadd","name":"ledger_ea.py","bytes":3638},{"sha256":"70c77e782a40d35737a431fb1c6b3c5a055fd567731d394a5257f9eeaee2eecd","name":"ledger_ea.out","bytes":391},{"sha256":"4359084e09f9e839e69573bd34d9dfb28b231f89dfcb810313602e769182a716","name":"check_ea.py","bytes":5380},{"sha256":"e09b2f65277929e0f69badf6c8f60bca4e8a00beb32647d4d32ef7308912405b","name":"check_ea.out","bytes":1104},{"sha256":"83f334ddcbc3eb25a372e41db40b35b129309e622bf1ff9124682167e3de64c7","name":"check_ea.control.out","bytes":1356},{"sha256":"b945a8085e21c5c0aa677d73f94ab0000aa4307f0d0bcc5f710245ae63d2222f","name":"fetch_ea.py","bytes":1314},{"sha256":"c7892650013c57d45073f6ccf79f07bcd624611ffa55c1aac483ab665bfb845a","name":"pagination_ea.py","bytes":2458},{"sha256":"972fd1e545c2f994c6308e6a5a97c4aab8f0c3afdcba6765368f0afbbcfa010b","name":"pagination.json","bytes":381},{"sha256":"7229b4e7202fdf3401a732be805abd2d412fb661affd5b1b4ad0854db609cb85","name":"probe_ea.py","bytes":2653},{"sha256":"969fc8d21d8b4467c3c252944d56b821df45688f2b1549c293318be126cba277","name":"redact_ea.py","bytes":3834},{"sha256":"aae63d1e9aae2e606111872d932d09df701c496e8a9a734534b4c4b767583e7a","name":"residual_ea.py","bytes":2483},{"sha256":"c2d1253385372e45498b4f4e0be04f0b67d7b0bbe9d64fb1abc2eb34e8ae37a1","name":"residual.out","bytes":55},{"sha256":"21a1d3556191bf54458b13fa0ebe41b4550fb92a33ab9bee6518d82ef222c843","name":"sah.py","bytes":56280},{"sha256":"a51d9d08e4fb8facbef5434f7568a9091a9b3034ec5d7e823d1c5ce8fdafebae","name":"research-routes-all.json","bytes":962493},{"sha256":"2cd3e5629f21346eb872e52088a48112571906f2a2063de79c09f2a1d5370396","name":"routes-limit200.json","bytes":882154},{"sha256":"b8ed12cbcd0efd214d221fd19255cfef1e0231fc3a5290e24704a2228837983f","name":"route-223.json","bytes":34498},{"sha256":"ac6ced277b80abe6b7f4632d35d3c0dd3bc583c84182bdd91b912ad754f710ee","name":"return-2518.json","bytes":34117},{"sha256":"2b9aea27c5727495dd861ebd448531040ddf06be10f5c96aa9fde9fdbc9d93ef","name":"return-1098.json","bytes":48529},{"sha256":"cedbe9416e8b7faec30819ef882a42b553683b84ec2a17800a9a951b0d5bc1d5","name":"return-1411.json","bytes":19053},{"sha256":"1c186df58b09d50862679c52a5ef87e8b2b265ac78535d42ca245b102c5f0c8c","name":"research-protocol.json","bytes":52062},{"sha256":"7251ad0a9c915d7926c3c7e40e1e8b37797d3e724f3d0ad3fd6db62eb04ac509","name":"questions.json","bytes":29264},{"sha256":"5d6c056efaac319c2914b218eede82c839bcfa58b60f611b68918f53d0a085ae","name":"oeis-a144311.json","bytes":801}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}