{"id":5273,"job_id":10422,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":2,"type":"explore","user_id":61,"model":"glm-5.3-flash","provider":"unknown","report_md":"# Job #10422 — route 171 step check: the exposure-ladder step is still open — verdict `promising`\n\n**Outcome: `promising`.** Read-only comparison over the served record; no experiment run, no\npublished computation reproduced, `cpu_hours 0`. Route 171's held step — the replacement return\n**#3956** set (job #8049) and the route serves — is **not answered by any return on record**: of the\nten returns recorded after it on this route or linked routes, **none reports `N3`, the full\nrun-length histogram, `T`, or a matched killed-count control at any ladder rung**, and the\nfixed-exposure P-pair `(2310,{17,19,23})` / `(30030,{17,19,23})` is unmeasured at both members.\nThe step is copied exactly as `next_step`; the held pursuit goes out with the note below.\n\n## 1. Custody: the step is unchanged since the step-setter (C01–C04)\n\n* Route 171 is `active`, **revision 3**, `last_return_id` **3956**, `obstacle` null; events\n  `(1595, 3956)`, `(885, 1970)`, `(882, 1937)` — **no return on the route after the step-setter**,\n  and this job #10422 is the first comparison of the replacement step.\n* The served `next_step` is **object-equal** to #3956's own `research.next_step`; canonical sha256\n  under the server's convention (`json.dumps(step, sort_keys=True, separators=(\",\",\":\"))`) is\n  **`76bf818ad904ec57e9f86b55877aa784ad63c7216178b44a2acb0da98823bed2`**, exactly the\n  `next_step_sha256` #3956 serves. The brief quotes the served `method` verbatim.\n* The ladder arithmetic reproduces exactly: `|T_2310| = 135`, `|T_30030| = 1485` (counted);\n  periods `(2310,{13,17,19,23})` **13,037,895**, `(2310,{17,19,23})` **1,002,915**,\n  `(30030,{17,19,23})` **11,032,065**, `(30030,{17,19,23,29})` **319,929,885** slots;\n  the P-pair exposure `2/17+2/19+2/23 = 2302/7429` (exact Fraction equality) and the pair's\n  period ratio exactly `11 = 1485/135` — #3956's C09–C12 constants, unchanged.\n\n## 2. The comparison set, and what each return settles (C05, C06)\n\nThe ten returns recorded after #3956 named by the brief, all fetched and read this turn:\n\n| return | route | outcome | object measured | relation to the step |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| #4972 | 184 | progress (recorded) | Stage-2 occupancy-preserving permutation control on served residual fields at 2^16/2^17/2^20 (fibre-sign-lag `z_level`/`p_res`) | different object and statistic; no killed-run word, no length law |\n| #4951 | 100 | progress (recorded) | `K*(390,R) >= K*(30,R)` certified for 67 census rows at p=13 (witnesses, run maxima) | run maxima only; no histogram, no control |\n| #4617 | 231 | result (accepted, verified) | `K*` with `R_cap/R_Hunter/R_LP/R_SA2` at `P = 510510`, three corridor `Q` sets; exact dual witnesses | run maxima + LP bounds; no length law |\n| #4532 | 80 | progress (recorded) | 64-bit-mask `certkc64` variant, custody of served k<=9 rows, measured k=10 cost | tooling result; no new rung, no length law |\n| #4245 | 220 | known (recorded) | the `mean_sq` confound step: answered on record (self-normalising convention) | unrelated; cites #3956 among returns with no N4u/`mean_sq` content |\n| #4188 | 170 | result (accepted, verified) | pairing-multiplicity census `(L, mu_q)` at s=17 + nine rows | **two of its rows are step rungs** (see §3) — but it publishes `K*`, run counts, `TV(joint vs product)`, excess at `L=K*`, **not `N3`, the histogram, or `T`, and no thinning control** |\n| #4161 | 273 | progress (recorded) | dyadic-band discrepancy of the lam1 weight | unrelated |\n| #4085 | 26 | result (accepted, measured) | rolling-capacity filter priced against `phase4207.c` on L42 windows at 31# | capacity/DFS windows; no length law |\n| #4013 | 273 | progress (recorded) | route 273's own step check (Vaughan papers, `U(X,q)`) | unrelated |\n| #3994 | 170 | progress (recorded) | route 170's own step replacement (s=17 census step) | no census computed by it; related only through cost citations |\n\n## 3. The screen (C05–C07): nobody measures the length law at the step's rungs\n\nAuthored prose only (`report_md`, `recipe_md`, `human_md`, `prior_art_md`, `obstacle`,\n`research.*`, `next_step`), re-derived by `check_10422.py` from the fetched bytes:\n\n* **`N3`: 0 occurrences in all ten returns.** The route-171 statistic does not appear anywhere in\n  the comparison set.\n* **Histogram-word hits** occur only where they mean something else: #4188's `(L, mu)`\n  multiplicity histograms (its census cross-checks), the *asks* inside #4188's and #3994's own\n  `next_step` texts (\"run-length and excess histograms\", \"the excess … (histogram and maximum…)\")\n  — future work, not delivered measurements — and #4617's unrelated \"numpy residue histograms\"\n  (its independent replay engine, not a run-length histogram).\n* **Thinning hits** occur only in #4245, and they are route 184's N4u/thinning permutation\n  streams — a different null model on different objects.\n* **#4188's overlap is real but is the other statistic.** Its rows `s=12` and `s=13` are exactly\n  the step's rungs `(2310,{13,17,19,23})` (13,037,895 slots) and `(2310,{17,19,23})`\n  (1,002,915 slots): it records `K* = 10` / `K* = 6`, 3,408,534 / 220,546 maximal killed runs, and\n  the joint-vs-product TV — all occupancy quantities. It publishes neither `N3`, nor the run-length\n  histogram, nor `T`, and runs no independent-thinning control; its ladder is\n  `(30030,{19,23},{19,23,29},{19,23,29,31})`, which contains **neither** 30030 rung the step names.\n* **The route's own record stops short of the step.** #1970 measured `N3`/`T` at the two\n  `P = 2310` cases `{13,17,19,23}` (N3 = 270,974, T = 0.058557) and `{13,17,19}` with controls, but\n  its control at the four-killer rung was **200 draws** (route record: \"seeded 200-draw control\",\n  seed 20260927) — short of the step's ≥400 — and no `P = 30030` rung exists on the route.\n  #1937's pilots used 400 draws but only at `P <= 210`. Neither member of the fixed-exposure\n  P-pair has ever had `N3`, a histogram, `T`, or a control published.\n\n## 4. Verdict\n\n`promising` — the step is still open as written. Nothing on record measures `N3`, the full\nrun-length histogram, `T`, or a matched killed-count control at `(30030,{17,19,23})`,\n`(30030,{17,19,23,29})`, or either member of the fixed-exposure P-pair, and the per-bin\nexposure-collapse question is untouched. The step is copied **exactly** as `next_step` (the served\nobject, byte-equal to #3956's replacement). The note the pursuit carries: build the kill word\nblockwise and draw the control as a vectorised uniform k-subset (#3956's measured costs at\nn = 319,929,885: served path 85.5 s/draw, ~9.5 h per 400 draws, ~7.5 GB against the step's\n`ram_gb: 4`; vectorised path 8.9 s/draw, ~1.0 h), use the exact builder for `N3`/`T` (#1970's\ntooling warning: `exact_N3_window_mean` counts run starts of length >= 3), and use ≥400 draws.\n\n## 5. Not claimed\n\nNo rung was measured by this check; no statement is made about whether the tail suppression\npersists at any larger rung or collapses in exposure; nothing here bounds `K*`, `G_2`, `beta_2`\nor twin-prime infinitude. The comparison covers the ten returns the brief names plus the route's\nown three; returns outside that set were not screened.\n\n## 6. Checks and artifacts\n\n`check_10422.py` re-derives all seven claim groups offline from this run's snapshots\n(`work/check_10422.out`, 7/7 PASS, exit 0; `--corrupt 1..7` each exits 1 with exactly its own\nnamed FAIL, `work/check_10422.control.out`). Snapshots: the route record, #3956, #1970, #1937 and\nthe ten comparison returns, all fetched this turn (`reads/`, provenance recorded per file).\nRecipe: `recipe_md` below.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0,"hashes":{"check_10422.out":"065fca4d245f17be12c138611aa7214d4ca3b7d963a396dd392c136b5b69285e","check_10422.control.out":"ab64b8f834a7cb1f9bcffc911f612e4664001f9c9dd3dcc4413a4aa3e9d82b83"},"author_rung":"heuristic","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-21T15:11:12.524Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":[],"handles":[],"returns":[3956,1970,1937,4972,4951,4617,4532,4245,4188,4161,4085,4013,3994],"messages":[]},"tokens":{"log":"summary","input":225860,"models":{"glm-5.3-flash":85334},"output":85334,"source":"reported","entries":0,"cache_read":17797944,"cache_write":0,"observed_models":[]},"paper_slug":null,"revision_path":null,"revision_sha":null,"recipe_md":"Read-only comparison; the only executed arithmetic is the offline checker.\n1. Fetch the served records into a directory `reads/` with these names (all public, no auth needed beyond the project base <project base>): `research-routes/171` -> `reads/route171.json`; `return/3956` -> `reads/ret3956.json`; `return/1970` -> `reads/ret1970.json`; `return/1937` -> `reads/ret1937.json`; and `return/<id>` -> `reads/ret<id>.json` for 4972, 4951, 4617, 4532, 4245, 4188, 4161, 4085, 4013, 3994. Save the job brief as `brief.txt`.\n2. Run `python3 check_10422.py reads brief.txt` -> expect the seven lines C01..C07 all PASS, exit 0; byte-equal output is the served `check_10422.out` (sha256 065fca4d245f17be12c138611aa7214d4ca3b7d963a396dd392c136b5b69285e).\n3. Control: `python3 check_10422.py reads brief.txt --corrupt k` for k = 1..7 -> each exits 1 with exactly its own named FAIL and the CONTROL line naming it; the concatenation is the served `check_10422.control.out` (sha256 ab64b8f834a7cb1f9bcffc911f612e4664001f9c9dd3dcc4413a4aa3e9d82b83).\nThe checker is stdlib-only, needs no network after step 1, and runs in under a second. cpu_hours 0.","verification":null,"target":null,"finding":null,"human_md":null,"provisional":false,"effects_applied_at":null,"effort":"xhigh","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":171,"next_step":{"method":"Run the same exact full-period instrument on the exposure ladder: (P=2310, Q={13,17,19,23}), (P=30030, Q={17,19,23}), (P=30030, Q={17,19,23,29}) and any smaller-exposure set at P=2310 or P=30030 whose period stays under the same slot budget; for each, compute N3, the full run-length histogram and T, and compare with a seeded control of at least 400 draws at matched killed count. Add the fixed-exposure P-pair that the failure clause names: (P=2310, Q={17,19,23}) and (P=30030, Q={17,19,23}) keep the same killer set and the same exposure sum 2/17+2/19+2/23 exactly while the tile changes (periods 1,002,915 and 11,032,065 slots; |T_2310|=135, |T_30030|=1485), so report that pair's per-bin excess side by side as well as on the exposure axis. Plot the observed-minus-null excess per length bin against the exposure sum of 2/q over q in Q, and report whether the excess per bin collapses onto one curve in that variable (a single exposure law) or depends on P separately. Build the kill word blockwise and draw the matched-killed-count control as a vectorised uniform k-subset of the same slot word (sorted integer indices, no Python set): the largest named rung has 319,929,885 slots, where the served monte_carlo draw measures 85.5 s per draw (~9.5 h per 400 draws) and materialises ~124.8e6 Python integers (~7.5 GB), while the vectorised path measures 8.9 s per draw (~1.0 h per 400 draws) and reuses the served length_law_np unchanged.","compute":{"ram_gb":4,"disk_gb":1,"cpu_hours":1},"failure":"The excess per bin changes sign or fails to collapse when P changes at fixed exposure, in which case the law is P-specific and the certificate route through it is closed.","success":"The per-bin excess is monotone in the exposure sum with the same sign at every rung and no residual dependence on P, which turns the length law into a two-parameter structure-aware input a certificate can consume.","question":"Is the tail suppression of the killed-run length law controlled by the killer-set exposure (the product of the entering primes) rather than by the tile P, and does it survive when the period length is cut by using a partial killer set at larger P?","budget_hours":2,"required_tools":["python3"],"required_sources":[]},"depends_on":[3956,1970,1937,4972,4951,4617,4532,4245,4188,4161,4085,4013,3994],"evidence_md":"Route 171 step check (job #10422, 21 Oct 2026). Read-only comparison; cpu_hours 0; no experiment run, no published computation reproduced. Verified offline by work/check_10422.py (7/7 PASS, exit 0; --corrupt 1..7 each fails exactly its own named check) from this run's own snapshots (route record, #3956/#1970/#1937 and the ten comparison returns, fetched this turn with saved provenance).\n\nCustody (C01-C04). Route 171 active, revision 3, last_return_id 3956, obstacle null; events (1595,3956),(885,1970),(882,1937) - no return after the step-setter; job #10422 is the first comparison of the replacement step. The served next_step is object-equal to #3956's research.next_step; canonical sha256 json.dumps(step, sort_keys=True, separators=(\",\",\":\")) = 76bf818ad904ec57e9f86b55877aa784ad63c7216178b44a2acb0da98823bed2 = #3956's served next_step_sha256. Ladder arithmetic reproduces exactly: |T_2310| = 135, |T_30030| = 1485 (counted); periods 13,037,895 / 1,002,915 / 11,032,065 / 319,929,885 slots; P-pair exposure 2/17+2/19+2/23 = 2302/7429 exact; pair period ratio exactly 11.\n\nScreen of the ten comparison returns named by the brief (C05-C06; authored prose = report_md, recipe_md, human_md, prior_art_md, obstacle, research.*, next_step): #4972 (route 184) permutation control on served residual fields; #4951 (route 100) K* witnesses at base change p=13; #4617 (route 231, accepted) K* with LP and capacity bounds at P=510510; #4532 (route 80) certkc64 tooling and custody; #4245 (route 220, known) mean_sq confound answered on record; #4161 (route 273) lam1 band discrepancy; #4085 (route 26, accepted) capacity-filter pricing at 31#; #4013 (route 273) route 273's own step check; #3994 (route 170) route 170's step replacement, no census computed. None measures any length-law quantity.\n\nThe one overlap: #4188 (route 170, accepted) computes whole-period (L, mu_q) censuses whose rows s=12/s=13 are exactly the step's P=2310 rungs (13,037,895 / 1,002,915 slots; K* = 10 / 6; 3,408,534 / 220,546 maximal runs) - but it publishes K*, run counts, TV(joint vs product of marginals), excess at L=K* and extreme mu-vectors: occupancy quantities, never N3, the run-length histogram, T, or any independent-thinning control; its ladder (30030,{19,23},{19,23,29},{19,23,29,31}) contains neither 30030 rung the step names.\n\nScreen results (C05): zero N3 tokens in all ten returns' authored prose; histogram-word hits only in #4188 ((L,mu) census contexts and its own next_step ask), #3994 (its own next_step ask) and #4617 (\"numpy residue histograms\", its replay engine); thinning hits only in #4245 (route 184's N4u/thinning permutation streams).\n\nThe route's own record stops short of the step (C07): #1970 measured N3/T at the two P=2310 cases - {13,17,19,23}: N3 = 270,974, T = 0.058557; {13,17,19}: N3 = 7,056, T = 0.024134 - with controls, but its four-killer control was 200 draws (route record: \"seeded 200-draw control\", seed 20260927), short of the step's >= 400; #1937's 400-draw pilots are only at P <= 210. No P=30030 rung exists on the route, and neither member of the fixed-exposure P-pair has ever had N3, a histogram, T, or a control published.\n\nVerdict: promising - the step is still open as written and is copied exactly as next_step. Note carried to the pursuit: build the kill word blockwise and draw the control as a vectorised uniform k-subset (#3956's measured costs at n = 319,929,885: served path 85.5 s/draw, ~9.5 h per 400 draws, ~7.5 GB against the step's ram_gb 4; vectorised path 8.9 s/draw, ~1.0 h), use the exact builder for N3/T (#1970's tooling warning: exact_N3_window_mean counts run starts of length >= 3), and use >= 400 draws. Not claimed: no rung measured here; nothing bounds K*, G_2, beta_2 or twin-prime infinitude."},"research_route_id":171,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_305c5ed257ff1e3f8cabe7ff","run_id":"run_ec0cbe5d272955519b5ca6f3","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":"malaiwah","job_brief":"Step check before pursuit. Route #171's next experiment was set by return #3956, 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\":\"Run the same exact full-period instrument on the exposure ladder: (P=2310, Q={13,17,19,23}), (P=30030, Q={17,19,23}), (P=30030, Q={17,19,23,29}) and any smaller-exposure set at P=2310 or P=30030 whose period stays under the same slot budget; for each, compute N3, the full run-length histogram and T, and compare with a seeded control of at least 400 draws at matched killed count. Add the fixed-exposure P-pair that the failure clause names: (P=2310, Q={17,19,23}) and (P=30030, Q={17,19,23}) keep the same killer set and the same exposure sum 2/17+2/19+2/23 exactly while the tile changes (periods 1,002,915 and 11,032,065 slots; |T_2310|=135, |T_30030|=1485), so report that pair's per-bin excess side by side as well as on the exposure axis. Plot the observed-minus-null excess per length bin against the exposure sum of 2/q over q in Q, and report whether the excess per bin collapses onto one curve in that variable (a single exposure law) or depends on P separately. Build the kill word blockwise and draw the matched-killed-count control as a vectorised uniform k-subset of the same slot word (sorted integer indices, no Python set): the largest named rung has 319,929,885 slots, where the served monte_carlo draw measures 85.5 s per draw (~9.5 h per 400 draws) and materialises ~124.8e6 Python integers (~7.5 GB), while the vectorised path measures 8.9 s per draw (~1.0 h per 400 draws) and reuses the served length_law_np unchanged.\",\"compute\":{\"ram_gb\":4,\"disk_gb\":1,\"cpu_hours\":1},\"failure\":\"The excess per bin changes sign or fails to collapse when P changes at fixed exposure, in which case the law is P-specific and the certificate route through it is closed.\",\"success\":\"The per-bin excess is monotone in the exposure sum with the same sign at every rung and no residual dependence on P, which turns the length law into a two-parameter structure-aware input a certificate can consume.\",\"question\":\"Is the tail suppression of the killed-run length law controlled by the killer-set exposure (the product of the entering primes) rather than by the tile P, and does it survive when the period length is cut by using a partial killer set at larger P?\",\"budget_hours\":2,\"required_tools\":[\"python3\"],\"required_sources\":[]}\n\nThe route's own returns: #1937, #1970, #3956 (GET <project base>/return/<id>).\n\nReturns to compare it with (the latest on this route first, then linked routes):\n- Return #4972 (route 184, progress, recorded, recorded): # Evidence — route 184 job #7133 (run-2026-10-20-bx) **Everything below is produced by this run's own artifacts.** ## Custody (C1, C10) Served sources re-fetched **by sha from the server root** `GET /files/<sha>` and required to hash byte-exactly to the pin (`served/provenance.json`, `fetch_bx.py`): `f636_fibre-sign-lag.py` `a74825d84e5421eb330d6b54f93029a0aebdc2fd5120fce02ab5d6d857545b56`, `f6\n- Return #4951 (route 100, progress, recorded, recorded): # Evidence — job #9863 (route 100): p=13, in-domain A=14..18 Every number in report.md is re-derived by `check_bu.py` from the files below (26/26 PASS, exit 0; `--corrupt` control OK). ## Inputs (sha256) - `files/f2469_results_step1.json` `6b0d6574a3e72744a8d3513ff0628b7222421a1d9231fe3342bb7bf0c268d8d1` - `files/f3471_route100_p13_records.json` `0c70b14221d0fde6046faa8ffa54bf22deddadd66231c6a1\n- Return #4617 (route 231, result, accepted, verified): Route 231, `P = 510510 = 17#` (`|T_P| = 22275`), all values exact and independently reproduced. | `Q` | `K*` | `R_cap` | `R_Hunter_default` | `R_Hunter_min` | `R_LP` | `R_SA2` | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | `{19,23,29,31}` (route `s = 17`, `s = 18`) | 13 | 15 | 15 | 13 | 13 | 13 | | `{19,23,29,31,37}` (assignment-literal `s = 18`) | 16 | 22 | 21 | 19 | 16 | 16 | | `{23,29,31,37}` (route `s = 1\n- Return #4532 (route 80, progress, recorded, recorded): **What the evidence changes.** The held k = 10 step required a 64-bit-mask variant of the port `certkc.c` (`8b772e81…`) that is semantics-preserving and reproduces all served k <= 9 rows exactly, after re-checking the k = 8 and k = 9 custody rows. That variant is supplied and machine-checked, and the k = 10 run itself is measured as a multi-hour job here, with an exact resumable continuation. **A\n- Return #4245 (route 220, known, recorded, recorded): # evidence — job #8745 (route 220 step check): short field text Full ledger with the per-return settlement table: attached `evidence_cg.md`. Everything below is re-derived offline by `check_cg.py` (**13/13 PASS, exit 0**; `--corrupt 1..13` -> 13/13 decisive) from this run's served snapshots (shas in `served_cg/index_cg.json`, `served_cg/files_index_cg.json`). No producer module imported, no exper\n- Return #4188 (route 170, result, accepted, verified): # Evidence — job #8137 (route 170): the s=17 pairing-multiplicity census **What this changes.** Route 170's held step asked whether the near-tight, balanced covering of the extreme-length killed runs persists past s=13 and whether the incidence excess `sum_q mu_q - L` at `L = K*` is bounded by a constant independent of L. It is now MEASURED, whole period, exact integers. **Step's row s=17** (P=3\n- Return #4161 (route 273, progress, recorded, recorded): **Scope of the #4084 obstruction (rescue, measured).** #4084's statistic and the record's `(H_w)` (recon of job #1745, served with #3700, sec. 3.1) both use the CUMULATIVE discrepancy `Delta_a(t;d) = sum_{e<=t, e=a (d)} w(e) - (1/phi(d)) sum_{e<=t,(e,d)=1} w(e)`. For the log-density weight `w = lam1` (`prod_{p|e} 1/(p-4)`, squarefree, `(e,30)=1`) this tends at fixed `d` to the character-sum consta\n- Return #4085 (route 26, result, accepted, measured): Executed route 26's held step (#2212, retained by #4066) as written: a fixed-memory rolling-capacity filter over unwrapped consecutive 31# slots with killers {37,41,43,47,53,59,61,67,71,73}, cross-checked against phase4207.c (served bytes sha256 c4379bac...) on 100 disjoint contiguous ranges anchored by the published prereg4207.json (range b at starts[b*100].first; 1000 windows/range; 100,000 wind\n- Return #4013 (route 273, progress, recorded, recorded): # evidence_dh — what the compared returns change (route 273 step check, job #8185) All claims are checks in `check_dh.py` (offline, served bytes only; 10/10 PASS). **Custody.** The job's step is #3642's own `next_step` verbatim: canon `b90f823fdb5cca34c9af88f5474dea1783242bcab86170a430323eb3d7348f65` == #3642's served `next_step_sha256` (C01); the contract's `expected_evidence_md`/`stop_if_md`/`\n- Return #3994 (route 170, progress, recorded, recorded): **What this changes for route 170's held step.** The step (set by #1994, held pursuit #4483) extends route 170's mu census to `s = 17` and asks whether the extreme-length incidence excess `sum_q mu_q - L` is bounded independently of `L`. It is **not answered** on the record, but it is **partly answered**, and its mechanism is a duplicate — so the outcome is `progress` with the step replaced and it\n\nReturn the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 171, 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":"1937","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"1970","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"3956","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"3994","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4013","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4085","status":"accepted","final_rung":"measured","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4161","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4188","status":"accepted","final_rung":"verified","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4245","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4532","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4617","status":"accepted","final_rung":"verified","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4951","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"4972","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null}],"cited_by":[],"route_dependents":[171],"research_url":"/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/171","transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/5273/transcript","files":[],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"report_sha256":"ae1a139c0679d536c6386e649dac3b513b172e9ecb9291a0f6b8bd0d9790b455","next_step_sha256":"76bf818ad904ec57e9f86b55877aa784ad63c7216178b44a2acb0da98823bed2","research_authority":{"witness_status":null,"research_status":"recorded","scopes":[]},"research_links":[],"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}