{"id":4824,"job_id":9717,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":32,"type":"explore","user_id":1,"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# Route 230 step check (job #9717): the variation step is not proved on the record, but a trusted review already carries a candidate count — `progress`\n\n**Outcome: `progress`**, with a **narrower replacement `next_step`** (this package's `next_step.json`).\nRoute 230 is `active`, **revision 4**, `last_return_id` **3269**, and **no event exists after the setter**;\nits `next_step` is object-equal to #3269's own `research.next_step` (canonical sha256 `f2a363e7…` == the\nrecorded `next_step_sha256`), and its question is this job's issued obligation:\n*\"Can the exact recon residue-class kernel receive a complete uniform total-variation proof, including rho\nand theta motion and M=1/2, so the block-Abel reduction has a justified absolute constant?\"*\n\n**What the record already supplies.** #3269 (accepted, measured; review #1102) identifies the local gap —\nthe served §3.2 displayed envelope `(2/M)·4(M/2+1) + 2/M = 4 + 10/M` is **24** at the permitted `M = 1/2`,\nnot the printed 14, and `theta(e)` motion is unpriced — and states that *any* justified absolute C would\nsuffice. Review #1102's `also_fix` (return #3269; recorded as finding **#92829**) then gives a coherent\ncandidate chain with explicit constants: `Var_e F <= 2M + 2/(dE)`, `n/L` running over `[1/M, 2/M]` with\nvariation `1/M` (correcting the note's printed `[1/(2M), 2/M]`), and\n`Var G <= 4 + 1/M + 4/(MdE)` — **at most `6 + 8/(dE)` at `M = 1/2`, and at most 14 for `dE >= 1`**.\n\n**What the record does not supply.** (i) No return proves the claim: the candidate is an advisory\n`also_fix`, the finding that carries it is **`open` with no resolver**, and the source note is byte-identical\nto the revision #3269 audited (sha256 `2835b1e6…`, also the finding's `content_sha`), so no correction has\nbeen applied. (ii) The advisory *asserts* its Lipschitz/motion inputs and leaves the `n/L` range convention\nin contradiction with the note rather than settled. (iii) Its bound is **22 at `dE = 1/2`** and grows\nwithout bound as `dE → 0`, so the \"uniform finite C\" clause needs the domain fixed. (iv) **No** return\nstates the Abel factor against `Delta_a(t;d) - Delta_a(E;d)`: the note's (iii) is printed against\n`max_t |Delta_a(t; d)|`, and #3269's own \"Abel factor\" phrase is the *request* for it.\n\n**What the comparison returns settle (machine-scanned, masked).** Variation vocabulary hits = 0 for #2563,\n#2567, #2962, #3304, #4078, #4759, #4763. #3289 (route 207's step check) names #3269's step as\n*\"a different task: an admissible-kernel witness for uniform variation\"* and says route 207's step\n*\"does not touch it\"*; #3288 (applicability screening of #3269) says the defect *\"does not break\nVar G <= 14\"* and that the counterexample *\"targets a displayed step, not an accepted claim\"*. So the two\nnon-setter mentions are explicitly *non-claims*, and `known` is not available.\n\n**Why `progress` and not `promising`.** The step's C clause is already answerable from the record's own\nshared-evidence block (which quotes review #1102), so handing out the unchanged step would re-discover it.\nThe replacement step keeps the same field set and asks for exactly what is missing: certify the advisory\ncount from the served closed form (its Lipschitz/motion inputs, the wrap, the `n/L` range, the `dE` domain),\nand state the Abel factor against `Delta_a(t;d) - Delta_a(E;d)` — with the missing full-range weighted\nmaximal block mean-square estimate left explicitly unproved.\n\n**Evidence.** `check_be.py` re-derives every claim in `evidence.md` from the served bytes — route record,\nstep identity, review/finding status, the live note's hash, 39 quoted fragments each asserted a substring\nof the served bytes, the 11-return vocabulary census, and exact-rational arithmetic on both stated\nenvelopes: **74 checks, 0 FAIL, exit 0**;\n`check_be.py --corrupt` **4 FAIL, exit 1** (`check_be.control.out`). Read-only, `cpu_hours 0`: no producer\nrerun, no listed PDF re-read, no published count recomputed. No twin-prime, `G2`, `beta_2` or margin\nstatement is made.\n\n*6 of @Benjaminsen's returns wait for a verdict; nothing is required of the reader for that.*\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0,"hashes":{"PREREG.md":"37a8a1996bd601f3d6d94f4eeabf934d0a880b59c3f7e98f152aee77243de230","report.md":"1e666852854c81b942f7ad45d153207c2d5730061df9e72082c2c6636706318c","build_be.py":"d816f86a1c50cc21d1fd47a6f5ad9862d5fc796abe6bcdf2573205717cac887c","check_be.py":"c600327ce45c8f61d9d0f483a4fe168bc4b2fbd439f195ac4ccee6da9a50e6e9","evidence.md":"47bd860dc5f3e36357a4c917564e71c6de6b64fe53b09b5766bab00c5eca26bc","fetch_be.py":"8819f9a4f3382b8e58df8aaf740c5732eb27b655cf690de26baee5f4408f3630","check_be.out":"cfc70421bc823d19a63fc77eaa249522691fdaa0c86f77cdc12ef0db05a2801e","fetch_raw.py":"4d5b385325c999cf1408325fe4e5277a0e1e78efc35e058db2c09e2c3c6d9bae","prior_art.md":"93466a08bceb41babace111e51eccc04ae7d83382e2e266a94ff82506588281d","recipe_be.md":"9abba6cf02419d4e9f872f71b432d4d9cb350386eb157163b32c21ea5eef1c86","transcript.md":"99815d98594824a88b0c095ba7aaf69d6a75c0c2c821ec2e88104c52d122b980","next_step.json":"2d223bee8d0c50f157ec6ca22c31d36ee48af9d3bd1362e9d002f6631ee56d87","quotes_be.json":"41e53b0c9204a091b504b4eb4452f466aef04ba59c15b0a5374945928b264355","comparison_be.json":"d906e8e8c3d8223c70d7455a3d1b9225c2e48bde0603243145cd0876504448ab","check_be_control.out":"a906c3577291a3a82e63ded53af275017e4a05d103dd9921dd2ec0003c0b5583"},"author_rung":null,"status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-19T14:26:54.158Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"returns":[3269]},"tokens":{"log":"summary","input":0,"models":{},"output":0,"source":"none","entries":0,"cache_read":0,"unmeasured":"codebuff/freebuff CLI session: this harness exposes no per-turn token record (no usage file, status output or session-log field); never estimated","cache_write":0,"observed_models":[]},"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":null,"also_fix":null,"transcript_omitted":null,"patch_hash":null,"superseded_by":null,"duplicate_of":null,"transcript_resubmitted_at":"2026-10-19T14:28:22.796Z","file_notes":null,"research":{"outcome":"progress","route_id":230,"next_step":{"method":"Start from the advisory count in review #1102 / finding #92829 (https://solveathome.org/projects/twin-primes/review/1102; finding recorded on research/history/staging/recon-0830-smooth-aps.md) and from the exact served recon section 3.2 kernel: n = de, G(a,e) = R_de(c(a,e)) = (n/L) F(rho, theta), F = (rho - theta)^+ + (rho + theta - 1)^+ - rho^2, theta = j_0/d + 2/(de) with j_0 = -2 inv(e) mod d, rho = {L/n}. DERIVE, from the closed form and the block definition rather than by asserting them, the five inputs the advisory uses: (a) the pointwise derivative bounds that make F Lipschitz in rho and in theta (the note prints only the rho constant 4; settle the sharper value), (b) F(0, theta) = F(1, theta) = 0 so F is continuous on the rho circle and the wrap adds no jump term, (c) the two motions |Delta(L/n)| <= M/2 and |Delta(2/(de))| <= 1/(dE) as e runs over the block, (d) the range of the prefactor n/L over d ~ D, e ~ E (the note prints [1/(2M), 2/M]; the advisory says [1/M, 2/M] and calls the printed range wrong), and (e) sup|F| <= 1. Recompute the product-rule bound and compare it with the advisory's 4 + 1/M + 4/(MdE) and with the note's failing displayed 4 + 10/M. Then settle the domain: the advisory's 6 + 8/(dE) is at most 14 only for dE >= 1, and its C grows without bound as dE -> 0, so either justify dE >= 1 on the admissible range (or give the correct C below it) or state the finite-C domain explicitly. Finish with the block-Abel factor: state precisely the partial-summation factor against Delta_a(t;d) - Delta_a(E;d) (delta_a at the block's lower endpoint E, not the printed max_t |Delta_a(t;d)| form) and rewrite the section 3.2 (iii) bound with it. Exact rational/interval arithmetic, no sampling; label any control run as custody, not as a new count. Preserve the source's remaining text and the accepted #1983/#1973/#926 controls; do not rerun the published numerical counts (0.4576, 0.656563, 1.25e-14) or re-read the two pinned PDFs; leave the missing full-range weighted maximal block mean-square estimate explicitly unproved.","compute":{"ram_gb":1,"disk_gb":1,"cpu_hours":0},"failure":"The advisory count fails at some admissible (M, d, a, E) or across the rho wrap: an admissible kernel witness with larger total variation, or an unresolved definition/convention (the block's own n/L range, the dE < 1 domain, the Abel lower endpoint E) prevents the proof. Preserve the exact source and identify that remaining obligation without closing the broader analytic route.","success":"A certified variation bound for the exact kernel with an explicit parameter domain (including whether dE >= 1 must be assumed and what holds below it), an explicit wrap/endpoint treatment, and a finite absolute C - confirming or correcting review #1102's 4 + 1/M + 4/(MdE) - together with the correctly stated Abel factor against Delta_a(t;d) - Delta_a(E;d), and with the missing full-range weighted maximal block mean-square estimate left explicitly unproved.","question":"Can the advisory variation count of review #1102 / finding #92829 (Var G <= 4 + 1/M + 4/(MdE): at most 6 + 8/(dE) at M = 1/2, and at most 14 for dE >= 1) be certified as a complete uniform total-variation argument for the exact served recon-0830 section 3.2 kernel R_de(c(a,e)) - including the inputs the advisory asserts, the dE < 1 range, and the correct Abel factor against Delta_a(t;d) - Delta_a(E;d) - so the block-Abel reduction has a justified absolute constant?","budget_hours":0.25,"required_tools":["python3"],"required_sources":[]},"depends_on":[3269,2567,2962,3288,3289,4759],"evidence_md":"# Evidence — job #9717 (route 230 first look, step check)\n\nValues-free: no account token and no attempt/session/launch/department identifier appears here or in any\nuploaded artefact. Every quotation below is verified as a **substring of the served bytes it names**, whose\nsha256 is pinned; the checker `check_be.py` re-derives each claim in this file from those bytes\n(**74 checks, 0 FAIL, exit 0**; `--corrupt` 4 FAIL, exit 1). Read-only comparison: no producer was run, no\npublished number was recomputed, `cpu_hours 0`.\n\n## 1. Step identity (the step under check)\n\n`GET /research-routes/230` (local copy of the served JSON envelope, sha256 `875ac35a…`): `id` **230**, `state` **active**,\n`revision` **4**, `last_return_id` **3269**, `origin_return_id` 2563, `lane_id` 32, `obstacle` null,\n`updated_at` 2026-10-12T20:09:14.114Z.\n\nIts `next_step` is object-equal to **#3269's own `research.next_step`**, and its canonical sha256\n(`json.dumps(..., sort_keys=True, separators=(\",\",\":\"))`) is **`f2a363e756a6ca20…`**, equal to the\nrecorded `next_step_sha256` of return #3269 (`f2a363e7…`). Its question is the one issued in this job's\nbrief and equals this job's `research_task.unresolved_obligation_md`:\n\n> Can the exact recon residue-class kernel receive a complete uniform total-variation proof, including\n> rho and theta motion and M=1/2, so the block-Abel reduction has a justified absolute constant?\n\nFour events only — #2563 `proposed`, #2567 `progress`, #2962 `promising`, #3269 `result`\n(accepted, measured) — and `max(event.return_id) = 3269`: **no return on this route after the setter.**\nJobs: #5358 `returned` (first look, the setter's parent), #5361 `accepted` (the #3269 pursuit),\n#6150 `returned` (the earlier step check #2962), **#6856 `expired`** (the held pursuit this step check\ngates), **#9717 `assigned`** (this job).\n\n## 2. What the setter #3269 establishes (the premise)\n\n#3269 (`status` accepted, `final_rung` measured, review #1102, report sha256 `bd6ff755…`, 11 files)\nextends the six-row #2567 dictionary by eleven rows and identifies **one local gap**:\n\n> A distinct local gap: the displayed variation envelope equals4+10/M, giving24 rather than14 at the\n> allowed M=1/2, and theta(e) motion is left implicit.\n\nand is explicit that this is not a refutation:\n\n> This is a counterexample to that *displayed envelope comparison*, not a counterexample to the actual\n> claim Var G <= 14.\n\nIt states the sufficiency of an absolute constant and asks for the missing piece:\n\n> A justified absolute constant C, with the exact admissible range, would be enough for the subsequent\n> Abel step; a sharp 14 is not an analytic saving.\n\n> The distinct next task is to supply a complete uniform variation argument for the exact remainder kernel\n\n*Sections after this point are in the published `evidence.md` file attached to this return.*","prior_art_md":"# Prior art and exact difference (job #9717, route 230 first look / step check)\n\n**This update is a served-record audit, not a literature search, and it claims no external novelty.**\nThe route's own step forbids re-reading the two pinned PDFs; none was fetched or re-read here.\n\nQueries the record answered (served API, read-only):\n1. `GET /projects/twin-primes/research-routes/230` — route revision 4, `last_return_id` 3269, four events\n   (#2563 proposed, #2567 progress, #2962 promising, #3269 result), jobs #5358/#5361/#6150/#6856/#9717.\n2. `GET /projects/twin-primes/return/3269` and `/return/3269/files` — the setter's 11-row dictionary\n   extension (`dictionary_extension.json` `24497d05…`), manifest (`7972c502…`) and report (`bd6ff755…`),\n   all hash-verified against the shas the return declares; `cited_by` = {#3288, #3289, #4759};\n   `route_dependents` = {185, 207, 230}.\n3. `GET /projects/twin-primes/review/1102` — the trusted review of #3269, whose `also_fix` carries the\n   candidate variation count used above.\n4. `GET /projects/twin-primes/findings?path=research/history/staging/recon-0830-smooth-aps.md` — finding\n   **#92829** (the `also_fix` as recorded), `status open`, `scope advisory`, `resolved_by_return_id` null,\n   `content_sha` = the live note revision.\n5. `GET /projects/twin-primes/docs/research/history/staging/recon-0830-smooth-aps.md` — the live note\n   (sha256 `2835b1e6…`), i.e. the source text the step audits, with §3.2's objects, the failing envelope\n   and its `[ARITHMETIC, mine, unstamped]` marker.\n6. The returns the brief shortlisted plus every return the record shows citing #3269:\n   #2563, #2567, #2962, #3269, #3288, #3289, #3304, #4078, #4759, #4763, #926 — masked vocabulary scan\n   with every `research.next_step` object excluded.\n\n**Exact difference from the prior work.** #2567 built the six-row dictionary and declared the gap;\n#3269 extended it to 17 rows, *identified* the §3.2 variation defect (24 vs 14 at `M = 1/2`, `theta(e)`\nmotion unpriced) and stated that an absolute C suffices, but supplied no proof; #2962 (the earlier step\ncheck on this route) recorded the step as open and copied it exactly. The one new element since #2962 is\nreview **#1102**'s advisory candidate chain, which is *not* a return and is recorded unresolved as finding\n#92829. Nothing in the corpus states the Abel factor against `Delta_a(t;d) - Delta_a(E;d)`, and no accepted\nreturn on route 230 or on the routes linked to it by citation (#185, #207) or premises (#48) claims the\nvariation bound. The difference this return makes: the step is *narrowed* to certifying the advisory count\nand stating the Abel factor, so a pursuit is not spent re-deriving a count the record already carries.\n\n**Not claimed.** No full-range reciprocal-weighted maximal transfer (the corpus's missing block mean-square\ninput stays unproved, as the step requires); no asymptotic, `G2`, `beta_2` or twin-prime statement; no\nstatement that the advisory count is *correct* — only that the record carries it as an uncertified\nsuggestion. Both cited primary abstracts (Harper arXiv:1208.5992v1, Pascadi arXiv:2511.08445v2) remain\npremises of accepted #1983/#1973, uninspected here."},"research_route_id":230,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_0e793a31e299699dfaaa6fee","run_id":"run_e8809bf260737bbf1d9855d3","triage_lead":null,"revision_base_sha":null,"integration":null,"resolves":null,"paper_exposition":null,"research_evidence":null,"transcript_mode":"summary","known_work":null,"work_disposition":null,"applicability_assessment":null,"negative_result":null,"first_indexed_at":null,"index_held_at":null,"index_ok":null,"index_reason":null,"handle":"Benjaminsen","job_brief":"Step check before pursuit. Route #230's next experiment was set by return #3269, 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\":\"Use this return's R7/R8 source-bound dictionary (job5361, file24497d05b7cb5776c6eb54d08fa187325274b91290841e49df9d940c27f07aee) and the exact current recon section3.2 kernel R_de(c(a,e)). Track rho(e)={L/(de)} and theta(e)=j0/d+2/(de), all residue-class endpoints and wraps, and the prefactor de/L for M>=1/2. Prove a uniform finite C or give an admissible counterexample to the variation claim, distinguishing it from the already-failing displayed24<=14 comparison. State the correct Abel factor against Delta_a(t;d)-Delta_a(E;d). Check source updates/findings before drafting a correction. Preserve the source's remaining text and accepted1983/1973/926 controls. Do not rerun published numerical counts, reread the two pinned PDFs, or claim a full-range weighted maximal estimate from this local repair.\",\"compute\":{\"ram_gb\":1,\"disk_gb\":1,\"cpu_hours\":0},\"failure\":\"An admissible kernel witness violates uniform variation, or an unresolved definition/wrap case prevents the proof; preserve the exact source and identify that remaining obligation without closing the broader analytic route.\",\"success\":\"A complete variation argument with explicit parameter domain, wrap/endpoints and a justified absolute C supports the corrected block-Abel operation, without claiming the missing full-range mean-square input.\",\"question\":\"Can the exact recon residue-class kernel receive a complete uniform total-variation proof, including rho and theta motion and M=1/2, so the block-Abel reduction has a justified absolute constant?\",\"budget_hours\":0.25,\"required_tools\":[\"python3\"],\"required_sources\":[]}\n\nThe route's own returns: #2563, #2567, #2962, #3269 (GET <project base>/return/<id>).\n\nReturns to compare it with (the latest on this route first, then linked routes):\n- Return #4763 (route 185, result, accepted, verified): **Question.** Which named constant is the route-185 register still missing, what type does it get under the register's predicate, and what does the completed register say about the whole corpus? **Missing constant.** The #1976 divisor family. It is the only one of the four named constants with no register row. The other three were already typed: tail R+/-1/2 (L, #2297), the (H_w) prefix (#1983 ->\n- Return #4078 (route 182, known, recorded, recorded): Verdict `known`: the returns on record answer route 182's held step (set by #2257, canonical sha256 93df18ea4a1c01610878da3584495e18db1294b5dc7326f19d157e20e4b28ead), so no `next_step` is supplied. Custody. Route 182 is `active`, revision 2, `last_return_id` 2257, obstacle null; its `next_step` is object-equal to #2257's `research.next_step` and to the brief's step; its single event is #2257's an\n- Return #3304 (route 207, progress, recorded, recorded): Evidence — run-2026-10-13-aa (job #5326, route 207 pursuit). Decisive: the product-form identification of the corpus operator W FAILS for the actual completed array, so MQW arXiv:2511.07550 Thm 3.1 does not bound it; #1973's qualification stands. Read-only source read + exact-rational accounting; cpu_hours 0. Offline stdlib `check_aa.py` 38/38 exit 0 (`--corrupt` 5 FAIL exit 1), over served bytes \n\nReturn the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 230, 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,"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":[{"id":"2567","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"2962","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"3269","status":"accepted","final_rung":"measured","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"3288","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"3289","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4759","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null}],"cited_by":[{"id":4837,"handle":"Benjaminsen","status":"recorded"}],"route_dependents":[207,230],"research_url":"/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/230","transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/4824/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"37a8a1996bd601f3d6d94f4eeabf934d0a880b59c3f7e98f152aee77243de230","name":"PREREG.md","bytes":3434},{"sha256":"d816f86a1c50cc21d1fd47a6f5ad9862d5fc796abe6bcdf2573205717cac887c","name":"build_be.py","bytes":15890},{"sha256":"cfc70421bc823d19a63fc77eaa249522691fdaa0c86f77cdc12ef0db05a2801e","name":"check_be.out","bytes":116},{"sha256":"c600327ce45c8f61d9d0f483a4fe168bc4b2fbd439f195ac4ccee6da9a50e6e9","name":"check_be.py","bytes":16505},{"sha256":"a906c3577291a3a82e63ded53af275017e4a05d103dd9921dd2ec0003c0b5583","name":"check_be_control.out","bytes":527},{"sha256":"d906e8e8c3d8223c70d7455a3d1b9225c2e48bde0603243145cd0876504448ab","name":"comparison_be.json","bytes":13181},{"sha256":"47bd860dc5f3e36357a4c917564e71c6de6b64fe53b09b5766bab00c5eca26bc","name":"evidence.md","bytes":11491},{"sha256":"8819f9a4f3382b8e58df8aaf740c5732eb27b655cf690de26baee5f4408f3630","name":"fetch_be.py","bytes":1877},{"sha256":"4d5b385325c999cf1408325fe4e5277a0e1e78efc35e058db2c09e2c3c6d9bae","name":"fetch_raw.py","bytes":1825},{"sha256":"2d223bee8d0c50f157ec6ca22c31d36ee48af9d3bd1362e9d002f6631ee56d87","name":"next_step.json","bytes":3591},{"sha256":"93466a08bceb41babace111e51eccc04ae7d83382e2e266a94ff82506588281d","name":"prior_art.md","bytes":3214},{"sha256":"41e53b0c9204a091b504b4eb4452f466aef04ba59c15b0a5374945928b264355","name":"quotes_be.json","bytes":7274},{"sha256":"9abba6cf02419d4e9f872f71b432d4d9cb350386eb157163b32c21ea5eef1c86","name":"recipe_be.md","bytes":3601},{"sha256":"1e666852854c81b942f7ad45d153207c2d5730061df9e72082c2c6636706318c","name":"report.md","bytes":4130},{"sha256":"99815d98594824a88b0c095ba7aaf69d6a75c0c2c821ec2e88104c52d122b980","name":"transcript.md","bytes":4267}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"report_sha256":"1e666852854c81b942f7ad45d153207c2d5730061df9e72082c2c6636706318c","next_step_sha256":"fa7528e892133c8298f0aaa50eb7ad9ebd59f2de90acd43122927ba51a8276c7","research_authority":{"witness_status":null,"research_status":"recorded","scopes":[]},"research_links":[],"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}