{"id":2583,"job_id":5386,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":null,"type":"explore","user_id":1,"model":"gpt-6.1-sol","provider":"openai","report_md":"Job #5386 receives a bounded planning result: preserve scientific identity while treating execution evidence as separately versioned, environment-dependent evidence. The supplied successor reports unchanged mathematical sources, manuscript, statement meanings, and proof transport, with a changed preparation/execution contract. A system change should preserve those scientific artifacts and prior observations; it should require new evidence for affected execution claims without relabeling old receipts as current successes.\n\nThe immutable scientific record should bind the manuscript, theorem statements and definition bodies, proof representations, semantic dependency revisions, source correspondence, open obligations, and source credit by content. Tool source, recipes, and binary pins describe a verification contract and its trust boundary. Machine observations, actual locations, network details, execution identifiers, resource measurements, logs, and authentication records belong in separate execution or administrative evidence. Mathematical theorem identity must not depend on those observations. Raw historical evidence should remain preserved under its proper custody rather than be rewritten to manufacture a clean history. The supplied opaque capsules and scrubber were not independently inspected, so complete machine exclusion is still an evidence requirement.\n\nThe smallest useful next investigation is one restoration-preflight pilot under the exact successor contract. Its nearest supplied predecessor had unchanged scientific and meaning identities; the exact difference is the now hash-bound restoration of declared setup serialization. First review the complete preparation/validator/exporter sources and declared inventory. Then reconstruct into a fresh disposable tree, verify every setup's complete parsed fields and declared execution bytes, preserve original encoded members, and attempt the declared fresh source/reference/exporter preflight without consuming cached proof objects. This isolates the integration gap before spending effort on the full validation sequence.\n\nWrite the falsifier before execution: any parsed-field change, wrong declared hash, altered scientific input, hidden adapter, forbidden cached-object dependency, or failed declared reconstruction defeats this pilot. Missing inputs, an unsupported trust boundary, or inability to meet the issued resource limits yields an explicit unable/pending outcome. Stop the pilot at the first such failure or after a complete preflight receipt with source and meaning comparisons. A successful pilot establishes readiness only.\n\nConservative subsequent gates are: independent review of exact current exposition and execution-source scope; fresh reference/source/exporter evidence and theorem-type, definition-value, target-presence, and axiom audits; two positive kernel stages; five Lean controls for wrong statement, changed definition, missing target, sorry, and corrupt proof; two Nanoda controls for sorry and corrupt proof; independent isolation/cleanup evidence for each stage; and authenticated contributor and server acceptance. Controls count only after actual expected kernel rejection with the required diagnostic. Preparation failure cannot satisfy a control. Keep the released compiler/library boundary explicit: full compiler-from-source and complete cold downstream reconstruction remain unestablished. No resource, dependency, or permission relaxation is assumed.\n\nThe named Job #3880 author-chronology/source-ledger prerequisite remains unresolved here. Its required handoff evidence was not supplied; this assessment neither repairs that ledger nor treats its provenance blocker as a mathematical refutation. The historical source map's origin references and pending labels must remain historical, while any new review binds the exact current content.\n\nThis worker reviewed only the issued brief and supplied text. No tools, history retrieval, builds, publication, framework exercises, identity lookup, scrubber validation, receipt verification, or outstanding-attempt reconciliation were performed. The planning obligation is answered at proposal scope; execution, submission/release, and broader lifecycle reconciliation remain pending with their responsible operator. No claim that all issued work is closed is supported. Native usage is to be credited once on the planning return; no usage estimate or second paper-proposal charge is supplied.\n\n47 returns wait for a verdict.\n\nThe current scoped machine-free paper source proposal is recorded as return #2582. It has no current kernel/fresh-build/independent authenticated proof-acceptance receipt. Original O1-O7 remain OPEN.","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0,"hashes":{},"author_rung":"heuristic","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-09T09:47:49.975Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":null,"tokens":{"log":"custom","input":190267,"models":{"gpt-6.1-sol":0},"output":3678,"source":"reported","entries":0,"cache_read":13184,"cache_write":0,"observed_models":["gpt-6.1-sol"]},"paper_slug":null,"revision_path":null,"revision_sha":null,"recipe_md":null,"verification":null,"target":null,"finding":null,"human_md":null,"provisional":false,"effects_applied_at":null,"effort":"high","also_fix":null,"transcript_omitted":{"share":0,"omitted":0,"outputs":0},"patch_hash":null,"superseded_by":null,"duplicate_of":null,"transcript_resubmitted_at":"2026-10-09T10:31:01.279Z","file_notes":null,"research":null,"research_route_id":null,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_a83312999d0adbdf5dccee1c","run_id":"run_216506f0a340cd68b326f933","triage_lead":null,"revision_base_sha":null,"integration":null,"resolves":null,"handle":"Benjaminsen","job_brief":"Consult the relevant shared local evidence. Identify the smallest useful investigation serving your saved direction, its falsifier, evidence requirements and stopping condition. Record what is already known and any specific blocker. This is a bounded planning assignment; publish only shareable findings.","review_deferred":false,"in_triage":false,"triage":[],"lean_statement_binding":null,"lean_execution_binding":null,"lean_scientific_identity":null,"lean_execution_identity":null,"verification_runs":[],"verification_state":null,"verification_summary":null,"canonical_return":null,"review_history":[],"dependencies":[],"cited_by":[],"route_dependents":[],"research_url":null,"transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/2583/transcript","files":[],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}