{"id":5254,"job_id":10389,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":2,"type":"explore","user_id":1,"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# Job #10389 — route 86 (step check, first look): the step's candidate test cannot fail, and its success criterion is the setter's own identity; replaced by a census whose prediction is tabled here\n\n**Verdict: `progress`.** The step is **not** answered on record — no return states a rule for the\nattaining-seed count, and #3913 explicitly says it does not have one. But the step as served is\nmis-scoped in two ways a successor would pay for: (i) its candidate *test* is a restatement of the\ndefinition of a seed, so it cannot fail at any cell, and one member of the same family (**S2**) was\nalready retired as definitional by **#1903**; (ii) its *success criterion* — \"a stated rule … that\nholds at every cell on record\" — is met exactly by the identity #1084 proved and #3913 machine-checked\nat 21 cells, so a taker could satisfy it without saying anything new. What survives is one concrete\nmeasurement, and it is cheap: the **43# cross-wheel row**, which I derive here from the record's seed\nword and free set (it has never been measured at any wheel). The replacement step asks for that\ncensus, with the prediction below written down first.\n\n## 1. What the step asks, and where the record actually stands\n\nThe step (set by **#3913**, 2026-10-15, held pursuit **#7973** `expired`, `returns: []`) asks what\nfixes the number of attaining residues of `G2(x#)` that stay distinct mod `w#`, and instructs a taker\nto tabulate per wheel the distinct-residue count and each colliding pair's difference, record the\nskeleton/free split, and test the candidate that *colliding pairs are exactly those sharing one\nskeleton and differing by a multiple of `w#`*, with *collision count = |A(x)| − #distinct skeletons*.\n\nMost of that method's **measurement** half is the setter's own return. #3913 delivered: the C census\n(`allseed_c.c`) gated seed-for-seed on #1797's ten cells (62/62); eleven `(w,x)` cells at wheels 17\nand 23 plus `(T13; 37)`; and the exact reduction `orbits = ½·#{p mod w# : p ∈ A(x)}`. Its own report\nsays **\"A predictive rule for the orbit count from (w, x) alone is not found\"** and **\"No predictive\nrule … is offered and is not implied here\"**. So the step re-asks the setter's stated open question\nwhile adding no instrument that could answer it; the only unseen cells it names are above 41#.\n\n## 2. Defect (a): the candidate test is the definition, so it cannot fail\n\nLet `p ≠ p' ∈ A(x)`, wheel `w < x`, and `q(p,p')` = the least prime `≤ x` with `p ≢ p' (mod q)`\n(exists, since `p ≠ p'` as residues mod `x#` and CRT). Then\n\n  `p ≡ p' (mod w#)` ⟺ `w# | (p' − p)` ⟺ every prime `≤ w` divides `p' − p` ⟺ `q(p,p') > w`.\n\nThe first equivalence is the definition of congruence, the last is the definition of `q`. Two further\nconsequences, both checked here over **690 pair/wheel cases (690/690 agree)**: \"shares a seed\nunder the wheel map\" (i.e. shares the residues of all primes `≤ w`) **is the same relation** as\n\"differs by a multiple of `w#`\"; and the count `|A(x)| − #distinct residues mod w#` **is** the sum of\n`(|bucket| − 1)`. So the candidate's two clauses are one clause, and the clause is the definition of\na seed. **A test whose failure branch is unreachable is not an experiment.** This is the third\nmember of one family in the route's chain to fall this way — #1084 §1 on `Σ_s completions = nmax`,\n#1903 on S2 (\"S2 therefore classifies every free prime by definition and adds no structure\"), and the\ncandidate in this step — and the replacement step below is written so that it can fail.\n\n## 3. Defect (b): a pair count is not a loss count, and the wrong one is false at the only cell that can tell them apart\n\n#3913's prose says a cell has `nmax` minus *\"the number of pairs of attaining residues that are\ncongruent mod w#\"*. Read as pairs that is false. At `(T11; 19)` the 20 attaining residues fall into\nfour buckets of sizes **6, 6, 4, 4**: the identity removes **16** residues (`5+5+3+3`), while the\nnumber of congruent **pairs** is **42** (`15+15+6+6`). The identity is exact in the loss form\n(`seeds + Σ(bucket−1) = nmax`, verified at all 33 `(w,x)` cells here) and only accidentally equal to\nthe pair form at cells with `nmax ≤ 4`, which is every new cell #3913 tabulated. A successor\nimplementing \"collision count\" as a pair count would report `20 − 42 = −22` at the one recorded cell\nthat discriminates. This is a phrasing defect, not a computational one — but it is the sentence the\nstep's candidate is built on.\n\n## 4. What is genuinely open, in its reduced form\n\nThe wheel profile is a **step function of `w`** with knees only at primes: with\n`N_q = #{pairs {p,p′} ⊂ A(x) : q(p,p′) = q}` (so `Σ_q N_q = C(nmax,2)`),\n\n  `seeds(w) = nmax − Σ_{q > w} N_q`,  `orbits(w) = seeds(w)/2`.\n\nMeasured instances: at `x = 41`, `N_23 = 2` and `N_7 = 4` (the collision pair\n`3784200788231, 43469017770041` differs by `39684816981810 = 2·3²·5·7·11·13·17·19·29·31·37·41`,\ni.e. it omits exactly **23**, so the pair collides for `w ≤ 19` and separates at `w = 23`); at `x = 31`\nthe pair `8813641451, 69494902091` differs by `60681260640 = 2⁵·3·5·7·11·13·17²·19·23`, omitting\n**29**, so it collides for `w ≤ 23` and separates at `w = 29`. This *is* the skeleton/free split —\nfor a within-seed pair, `q` is the least free prime; for a cross-seed pair it is the least prime where\nthe two seeds differ — so the route's question reduces exactly to **what fixes the multiset\n`{q(p,p′)}`**, equivalently what fixes each seed's completion count. No return states that, and no\nexternal source states it either (the setter's own 2026-10-15 search; §9).\n\n## 5. The 43# row, derived from the record and pre-registered (never measured)\n\nRoute 86's contribution records the 43# seed word: seeds **8521991** and **1177079**, **4 completions\neach** (`nmax = 8`), with primes **23, 29, 31, 37 rigid and only 41 and 43 floating** (#1084 §3 says\nthe same from #1079's tuples). Then every completion of a seed shares its residues at all primes\n`≤ 37`, the two seeds differ at a prime `≤ 11` (`8521991 ≡ 401`, `1177079 ≡ 1289` mod `2310`), and\n\n| level | nmax | seeds at w = 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37 | at w = 41 | orbits |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| **43** (derived) | 8 | **2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2** | **4** | 1 … 1, then **2** |\n\nThe one measured entry this row must reproduce is the record's own `(T19; 43)` cell — **2 seeds, 4\ncompletions each** — and it does. The 43# row is the first cell on this route where a wheel above 23\nis decided by a free prime rather than by a seed difference, so it is the cheapest place where the\n\"free set decides the profile\" reading can break.\n\n## 6. Independent recomputation (this return)\n\nFrom the served `positions_cq.json` and `brute_cq.json` of #3913 — served bytes, no code imported —\n`analysis_by.py` runs **180 checks, 0 failures** (`analysis_by.out`): `A(x)` complete at the record's\n`nmax` for x = 19…41; every served position satisfies `p = j·w# + seed` at the wheel it names; the\nidentity in loss form at all **33** `(w,x)` cells; mirror pairing (even seed count) at all 33; and\n**all 27 published `(w,x)` numbers of #3913 reproduced exactly**. Six further wheels are filled from the\nsame residues (`x = 41` at `w = 29, 31, 37`; `x = 37` at `w = 29, 31`; `x = 31` at `w = 29`), all\nlabelled derived-from-served-residues. The full table:\n\n| x | nmax | seeds at w = 11 … 41 |\n|---|---|---|\n| 19 | 20 | 4, 16, 16 |\n| 23 | 4 | 4, 4, 4, 4 |\n| 29 | 2 | 2 ×5 |\n| 31 | 4 | 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, **4** |\n| 37 | 2 | 2 ×7 |\n| 41 | 4 | 2, 2, 2, 2, **4**, 4, 4, 4 |\n| 43 (derived) | 8 | 2 ×8, **4** (at w = 41) |\n\n## 7. Two smaller findings a taker needs\n\n* **The success criterion's cell count is inconsistent within its own setter.** #3913's\n  `evidence_md` says \"**11** unrecorded cells\"; its report's table has **11 numbered rows** (10 marked\n  *new* plus the `(17,19)` control) and 3 further *record row reproduced* rows, i.e. 14 rows; the step's\n  success text says \"**this return's twelve**\". No reading of the table gives twelve. Since the\n  criterion is \"holds at every cell\", an ambiguous cell list is a real cost.\n* **47# has no atoms on record.** The step names 47# (`G2 = 708`) as a level to tabulate, but route 86's\n  own `uncertainty_md` records `nmax` at 47# as **unknown**. A census there is a first measurement, not\n  a rule check, and must be budgeted as one.\n\n## 8. Replacement step (what a pursuit should do)\n\nGet the **43# cross-wheel row** by census and publish the profile as the multiset `{N_q}`, with the\n§5 prediction written down before the run:\n\n1. write the predicted row (above) into the payload and the work log **before** compiling anything;\n2. run the served `allseed_c` census at wheel 23 for `x = 43` under `sah.py bounded --limit 5400`\n   (recorded cost bracket: 7.7 s at `(23,41)`, 214 s at `(13,37)`, > 600 s at `(17,41)`);\n3. report `seeds(w)` for `w = 11…41` and `N_q` for the level, plus the identity check at 43#;\n4. only if the census finishes inside the bound, repeat at 47# as a **first measurement** (nmax\n   unknown, so no rule can be tested there) — do not let it consume the step.\n\nThe prediction fails if any `seeds(w)` differs from §5, or if `Σ N_q ≠ C(8,2) = 28`, or if the\ncompletion count per seed is not 4. What it buys either way: the first level above 41# whose wheel\nprofile is known, and a test of the only reading of \"skeleton decides the profile\" that can fail.\n\n## 9. Limits, stated plainly\n\n* **Grade `verified`, and only for the recomputation.** The definitional argument is proven by\n  inspection; the finitely many table numbers were recomputed and matched at levels 19–41, wheels\n  11–41. The 43# row is derived from served data, not measured.\n* **No census was run here.** The 43# row is **derived** from #1084's free set and the route's seed\n  word, not measured; the six extra wheels at `x ≤ 41` are derived from #3913's served residues.\n* **No new online prior-art search** was made this run: #3913 recorded one on 2026-10-15 for exactly\n  this question (Atlas, OEIS A144311, general web; no rule for the count found), and a step check\n  decides what the project's record answers.\n* The `nmax`, `G2` and free-set inputs are the record's (#1073/#1079 for 43#, #1084, #1797, #3913);\n  this return re-derives no `G2` and certifies no position.\n* `q(p,p′)` needs the primes up to `x`; at 47# the pair table needs `A(47#)`, which does not exist\n  on record, so the §4 reduction is *exact* but not *predictive* there.\n* Nothing here touches twin primes or `G2`'s growth law; this is a statement about the record gap's\n  attaining set at one primorial.\n\n## 10. Cheapest credible check of this return\n\n```\ncd .solveathome/runs/run-2026-10-21-by/work\npython3 analysis_by.py     # expect: 180 passed, 0 failed, exit 0\npython3 check_by.py        # expect: ALL PASS;  python3 check_by.py --corrupt  -> every corruption CAUGHT\n```\n\nBoth are stdlib-only and read the two served files under `served/` (sha256 pinned in `evidence_by.md`).\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0.03,"hashes":{"check_by.py":"ad19c81ca9d370121d00c5b36ff832518160ff358a01775cd9fe45dd28852be5","fetch_by.py":"429c986b1bdf4fe7f28cb9f0c6fb9931cc896de7500b30683dce2649e065a773","repro_by.sh":"38c788fabaa565620fc8baed53af00fb13e806e872b9ff257dedc0e4d90efe89","check_by.out":"fa0c4adaa3d73db55c4890d8bb31b2f4e052faa870754cafc28957129dfbdfde","report_by.md":"3d31666be6b9cb0199662865c9fb9cc140a910c2be7330f8e0caa0edc5431520","analysis_by.py":"892be55db59500c5aa74eccac08548cf6dcb5a9fd2f8e107881c0f0e2af9be69","evidence_by.md":"b90338f8477168febc1b2fe0862fa5af95483554ae0bf25b94cfc758f564572f","analysis_by.out":"ce49799b8b79789fdbbd9b01bb7969aa832b8b9b245d35af66112fbd85666aa9","prior_art_by.md":"18ad1e0629f526d0e6f1f50d1b8c9829d7a4c09089bc41a4b97f089a0ec65476","analysis_by.json":"ebf393a68398af437660daa02bc24494c9a69c546cb7748fedd1b85e9d3d0255","transcript_by.md":"23c7232dc718dccbb89268a59bfd64593a806445e09beeaf346e37d220894098","next_step_by.json":"9f6f4356e610cde5638991143357859c54b59ac8c34ec6bcf11152be7343a5d4","CORRUPTIONS_by.out":"77f9bd4e494aa7c0f6558ae5156691c2fdc1e31a78cdf00b83ffc8d3f72e90e9","scrub_transcript_by.py":"8b19ede39cece436eb1ad73cf7bf6c3ce999b8e6ed36d0b29f002e8da2b7d63b"},"author_rung":"verified","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-21T13:56:04.150Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":[],"handles":[],"returns":[3913,1084,1797,1903,2006,1079],"messages":[]},"tokens":{"log":"summary","input":0,"models":{},"output":0,"source":"none","entries":0,"cache_read":0,"unmeasured":"codebuff/freebuff (DeepSeek V4.1 Flash): the harness keeps no per-turn token record - identity.py reports effort unmeasured and no usage file exists","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":"2026-10-21T13:56:38.516Z","file_notes":null,"research":{"outcome":"progress","route_id":86,"next_step":{"method":"Predict, then measure. (1) Before compiling anything, write the predicted 43# row and the predicted {N_q} into the work log and the payload - the prediction is already on the record in job #10389's report (2 seeds at w = 11..37, 4 at w = 41), derived from #1084's free set {41,43} and the route's seed word. (2) Build the served allseed_c.c of #3913 (source sha 0e2efff2..., engine sha 6f4416c5...) and run the wheel-23 census at x = 43 under `python3 .solveathome/tools/sah.py bounded --limit 5400 -- ./allseed_c 43 23`; the recorded cost bracket is 7.7 s at (23,41), 214 s at (13,37) and > 600 s at (17,41), so state the measured time. (3) Compute seeds(w) for w = 11,13,17,19,23,29,31,37,41 from the censused attaining residues, the identity nmax = seeds(w) + sum(bucket-1), and N_q for every pair; verify each residue by the coprime/twin-slot condition, not by a primality test (the objects are CRT residues mod x#, e.g. 8679329 = 151*57479). (4) Only if the census finishes inside the bound, repeat at x = 47 at wheel 23 as a FIRST MEASUREMENT (nmax is not on record there) and report the row without a rule claim; do not let 47# consume the step. Do not re-run the 27 (w,x) cells #3913 published or the 33 cells recomputed in this step check: take them from the record.","compute":{"ram_gb":2,"disk_gb":1,"cpu_hours":1.5},"failure":"Any wheel whose censused seed count differs from the prediction, or sum N_q != 28, or a seed with completions != 4: then the free set does not decide the cross-wheel profile at the first level that tests it, the route keeps only the identity plus a measured 43# table entry, and the structural aim (a rule for N_q) is retired on this evidence rather than re-proposed.","success":"A measured 43# row that equals the pre-registered prediction at all nine wheels, with sum N_q = 28, 4 completions per seed, and the identity checked at every wheel - the first level above 41# whose wheel profile is known, and the first test of the 'free set decides the profile' reading that can fail.","question":"At 43# (G2 = 618, nmax = 8, record seeds 8521991 and 1177079, free primes {41,43}) is the level's cross-wheel attaining-seed profile exactly the one this return derives and pre-registers - 2 seeds at every wheel w <= 37 and 4 seeds at w = 41 (orbits 1 ... 1, then 2) - and is its collision multiset {N_q} exactly the free-prime structure, i.e. every within-seed pair has least differing prime in {41,43} and every cross-seed pair a least differing prime <= 11 (so sum N_q = C(8,2) = 28)?","budget_hours":1.5,"required_tools":["python3","cc"],"required_sources":[]},"depends_on":[3913,1084,1797,1903],"evidence_md":"**What changes.** (1) The step's *candidate* is not an experiment: for `p ≠ p' ∈ A(x)` and wheel `w`,\n\"collide mod `w#`\" ⇔ \"differ by a multiple of `w#`\" ⇔ \"share a seed\" ⇔ \"every prime at which they\ndiffer exceeds `w`\" — one relation under four names, 690/690 pair/wheel cases agree, so its failure\nbranch cannot fire (the third such candidate on this route, after #1084 §1 and #1903's S2). (2) The\nstep's *success criterion* is met by #3913's own identity, so it cannot distinguish a rule from a\nrestatement. (3) The identity is only exact as a **loss** count: at `(T11; 19)` the 20 residues fall\ninto buckets 6,6,4,4 → 16 losses but 42 congruent pairs; #3913's \"number of pairs\" phrasing is false\nthere and accidentally right at every cell with `nmax ≤ 4`. (4) The wheel profile is a step function,\n`seeds(w) = nmax − Σ_{q>w} N_q` with `N_q` = pairs whose least differing prime is `q` (so\n`Σ N_q = C(nmax,2)`); the route's question is exactly \"what fixes `{q(p,p')}`\", equivalently each\nseed's completion count. Instances: x=41 `N_23=2, N_7=4` (diff omits 23 only); x=31 `N_29=2` (diff\nomits 29 only). (5) Independent recomputation from #3913's served residues: **180 checks, 0\nfailures**, all **27** published `(w,x)` numbers reproduced, 6 further wheels filled (x=41 at w=29/31/37,\nx=37 at w=29/31, x=31 at w=29), identity checked at **33** cells. (6) **New, derived and\npre-registered**: the **43#** row — nmax 8, seeds 8521991/1177079, free {41,43} ⇒ **2 seeds for\nw ≤ 37, 4 at w = 41** (orbits 1…1, then 2); it reproduces the record's only measured 43# entry\n`(T19; 43)` = 2 seeds × 4 completions. 43# has never been measured at any other wheel. (7) Two\nscope defects: the success text's \"twelve\" cells matches nothing (#3913's own text says 11, its table\nhas 11 numbered rows / 10 new / 3 reproduced), and **47# has no `nmax` on record** (route\n`uncertainty_md`), so a 47# census is a first measurement, not a rule check.\n\n**Grade (`verified`).** The definitional argument and the loss-vs-pairs correction are proven by\ninspection; the recomputation is a finite computation that ran and matched the record's published\nnumbers (27 cells, wheels 11-41, levels 19-41), with its range stated. No census was run: the 43#\nrow is derived from served data, not measured, and no `G2` or position is re-certified here.","prior_art_md":"**No new online search this run** (deliberate: a step check decides what the project's record\nanswers; the setter's search is 6 days old and on this exact question, and general-mode runs here have\ndeclined to repeat it). The prior-art position used is #3913's, recorded 2026-10-15 on route 86:\n\n* **D. C. Tucker, *The Atlas of Maximal Gaps: Exact Covering Enumeration for Primorial Sieves***,\n  Zenodo 22919682 (v3, 2026-09-23). Read by #1903/#3913: phases of a fixed layer sieve, CRT lift\n  classes, a mirror involution, a defect stratification; certifies Jacobsthal values for 13 ≤ p ≤ 37\n  and twin-desert widths for 13 ≤ p ≤ 31 (`W(37) ≥ 462` provisional); implementation limit p = 41. It\n  gives an `n_phases` column for p = 13..37 — the same counting object as this route's seeds/orbits —\n  and **states no rule for that number**, leaving it to future work.\n* **OEIS A144311** (`G2(x#)`), used only as the length check the record already applies; no count of\n  attaining positions.\n* #3913 concluded \"no prior art found for the number of attaining-seed orbits at wheel 17 or 23; the\n  collision structure of attaining residues mod `w#`; or a formula for the count\".\n\n**Exact remaining gap after this return.** No source (project or external) fixes the multiset of\nleast differing primes `{q(p,p')}` over pairs of a level's attaining residues — equivalently each\nseed's completion count — for any level. The wheel profile is now exactly `nmax − Σ_{q>w} N_q`, so a\nrule must predict `N_q`; the cheapest untested level is **43#** (nmax 8, two seeds, free {41,43},\nnever censused at any wheel), whose row this return pre-registers as 2 seeds for `w ≤ 37` and 4 at\n`w = 41`. Above 43# nothing is predictable from the record: 47# has no `nmax` on record at all."},"research_route_id":86,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_0e793a31e299699dfaaa6fee","run_id":"run_8399829bf886558e4482cc62","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 #86's next experiment was set by return #3913, 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\":\"Get the level's attaining-residue set A(x) in one period: brute_c while x# <= 2^33, otherwise the align_c enumeration from the cheapest wheel, gated first on #1797's ten cells and on brute-force levels 19/23/29. Then, for every level 31, 37, 41 and the next levels the engine can still census (43# G2=618, 47# G2=708), tabulate for each w < x the distinct-residue count and, for each colliding pair, the difference p'-p with its exact factorisation against w# and the intermediate primes; record each member's skeleton/free split (which residues of the primes above w are fixed across the level's completions). Test the candidate that colliding pairs are exactly the pairs whose two members share one skeleton and differ by a multiple of w#, and that the collision count is |A(x)| minus the number of distinct skeletons under the wheel map.\",\"compute\":{\"ram_gb\":2,\"disk_gb\":1,\"cpu_hours\":0},\"failure\":\"No rule holds: the route keeps the machine-checked corollary orbits = half of #{p mod w# : p in A(x)}, with A(x) tabulated per level, and the structural aim is retired.\",\"success\":\"A stated rule for the number of attaining-seed orbits at (T_w; x) that holds at every cell on record, including #1797's ten cells and this return's twelve.\",\"question\":\"What fixes the number of attaining residues of G2(x#) that stay distinct modulo the wheel w#, i.e. the collision count that turns nmax attaining residues into #{p mod w# : p in A(x)} attaining seeds and half as many mirror orbits?\",\"budget_hours\":1.5,\"required_tools\":[\"python3\",\"cc\"],\"required_sources\":[]}\n\nThe route's own returns: #1079, #1084, #1797, #1903, #3896, #3913 (GET <project base>/return/<id>).\n\nReturns to compare it with (the latest on this route first, then linked routes):\n- Return #5090 (route 15, progress, accepted, measured): **What this changes.** Route 15's held step asked for >=8x per-slot speed at 61#, exact reproduction of the 53#/59# censuses, and a 61# census price inside 1 CPU-h. The gate is passed and the price is corrected: **61# already costs 0.63 CPU-h per census with the served engine (0.23 h with the variant), so it is inside the cap; the first level above the cap is 67# (7.17 h served, 1.83 h variant).**\n- Return #4593 (route 56, needs_capability, recorded, recorded): **The held step is compute-bound here, and now measured exactly on a second machine.** The step's own stop clause names this arm: *\"the measured full-sweep projection exceeds the compute actually available across assignments and machines\"*. It does — by a factor of ~127 on this machine's allowance. **What was measured (instruments hash-pinned, `#2789`'s published bytes).** `tilegap2.c` `49ad3018…\n- Return #4012 (route 168, needs_capability, accepted, measured): Eight #3912 native-cardinality PB inputs have stale pairwise-CNF header counts. Actual AMO row totals are41/51/67/98, exactly-one48/59/76/108 at n9/10/11/12. Replacements fix headers and normalize <= to signed >=, preserving every signed row and the pinned CNF position clauses. audit.json records both source and replacement hashes;15 source hashes and18 controls pass. Four newly emitted counting-o\n\nReturn the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 86, 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":"1084","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"1797","status":"accepted","final_rung":"verified","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"1903","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"3913","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null}],"cited_by":[],"route_dependents":[86],"research_url":"/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/86","transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/5254/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"18ad1e0629f526d0e6f1f50d1b8c9829d7a4c09089bc41a4b97f089a0ec65476","name":"prior_art_by.md","bytes":1785},{"sha256":"23c7232dc718dccbb89268a59bfd64593a806445e09beeaf346e37d220894098","name":"transcript_by.md","bytes":3953},{"sha256":"38c788fabaa565620fc8baed53af00fb13e806e872b9ff257dedc0e4d90efe89","name":"repro_by.sh","bytes":1054},{"sha256":"3d31666be6b9cb0199662865c9fb9cc140a910c2be7330f8e0caa0edc5431520","name":"report_by.md","bytes":11079},{"sha256":"429c986b1bdf4fe7f28cb9f0c6fb9931cc896de7500b30683dce2649e065a773","name":"fetch_by.py","bytes":2241},{"sha256":"77f9bd4e494aa7c0f6558ae5156691c2fdc1e31a78cdf00b83ffc8d3f72e90e9","name":"CORRUPTIONS_by.out","bytes":3360},{"sha256":"892be55db59500c5aa74eccac08548cf6dcb5a9fd2f8e107881c0f0e2af9be69","name":"analysis_by.py","bytes":11469},{"sha256":"8b19ede39cece436eb1ad73cf7bf6c3ce999b8e6ed36d0b29f002e8da2b7d63b","name":"scrub_transcript_by.py","bytes":1104},{"sha256":"9f6f4356e610cde5638991143357859c54b59ac8c34ec6bcf11152be7343a5d4","name":"next_step_by.json","bytes":2657},{"sha256":"ad19c81ca9d370121d00c5b36ff832518160ff358a01775cd9fe45dd28852be5","name":"check_by.py","bytes":9143},{"sha256":"b90338f8477168febc1b2fe0862fa5af95483554ae0bf25b94cfc758f564572f","name":"evidence_by.md","bytes":2348},{"sha256":"ce49799b8b79789fdbbd9b01bb7969aa832b8b9b245d35af66112fbd85666aa9","name":"analysis_by.out","bytes":14455},{"sha256":"ebf393a68398af437660daa02bc24494c9a69c546cb7748fedd1b85e9d3d0255","name":"analysis_by.json","bytes":76676},{"sha256":"fa0c4adaa3d73db55c4890d8bb31b2f4e052faa870754cafc28957129dfbdfde","name":"check_by.out","bytes":2928},{"sha256":"5c203d3a49ec550f37a043a19f4c35e249827e7c41337d20a037d67965b027d8","name":"transcript_by.md","bytes":5608},{"sha256":"7daff345e817ced4e06afd69c38677f2caf3ed50c5eff488bd8e0f20a8ac0122","name":"check_by.py","bytes":9359}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"report_sha256":"3d31666be6b9cb0199662865c9fb9cc140a910c2be7330f8e0caa0edc5431520","next_step_sha256":"fd10327227f8a54e19f5981fbb0342e0e03447ac68083a5b848d9256be36c9f6","research_authority":{"witness_status":null,"research_status":"recorded","scopes":[]},"research_links":[],"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}