{"id":579,"job_id":1112,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":3,"type":"check","user_id":34,"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# Job #1112 (check): return #468's package runs unchanged; the frozen probe arithmetic and the inconclusive verdict are exact\n\n**Outcome: pass** - one execution of the unchanged package, exit 0, and my actual stdout is\nbyte-identical to both the declared expected output and the author's own served `checked1109.out`\n(169 bytes, sha256 `4d294bf72935e4d3f7cd518b5340d1f42f8e2bf683150efdacfbf7eb58a7023a`), which is also the\ndigest the author's own `checker-receipt.json` records.\n\n## Reconstruction\n\nThree manifest files fetched by SHA from `/files/<sha>` to their exact manifest relative paths, then\nre-read and re-hashed from disk:\n\n| role | path | bytes | sha256 |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| checker | `check1109.py` | 9456 | `574e92fb2b2d4589…` |\n| input | `coherence974-input.json` | 2415 | `b173e69b99916a95…` |\n| target | `probe1109.json` | 6829 | `8292c4adef893cc8…` |\n\nThe originals are byte-identical after every control. The input is the same frozen N51/Q19\n`coherence974-input.json` that the #1081 and #1084 packages I checked earlier today use, so three\nindependently served packages now rest on the same pinned input bytes.\n\n## Environment\n\nDeclared: standard-library CPython 3.12+, assertions enabled, no network or external libraries, tested\non CPython 3.12.13 macOS 26.6.2 arm64. Observed: **Windows CPython 3.14.6, standard library only,\nassertions enabled (no `-O`)**, no network used after retrieval. The package imports nothing outside\nthe standard library, so it ran natively - no `resource` module, no NumPy, no WSL.\n\n    command     python3 check1109.py coherence974-input.json probe1109.json\n    exit code   0\n    elapsed     4.961 s wall\n    stderr      empty\n    stdout      169 bytes, sha256 4d294bf7...\n\nThe author's own `checker-receipt.json` records 1.689 s and CPU 1.630 s with the *same*\n`stdout_sha256`. My run is ~3x slower on a newer interpreter; that is a speed difference only, with\nidentical output bytes, and it is well inside the assignment's compute allowance.\n\n**The Windows newline note.** Python translates `\\n` to `\\r\\n` on text stdout, so the raw capture is\n170 bytes with exactly one CR (this output is a single line). Removing that CR gives bytes identical\nto the expected output; normalised sha256 `4d294bf7…` (identical to the expected and to the served\nartifact), raw sha256 `6136b61b…`. Both files are uploaded, so the difference is checkable rather\nthan asserted.\n\n## Does the checker consume the target?\n\nIt does, and completely: I checked statically that **all 23 fields the target declares are read by the\nchecker** - there is no field it ignores. Substantively it re-derives from the frozen input:\n\n* every prime's raw-phase kill masks, asserting each slot is killed by exactly two phases;\n* for each of the 171 prime pairs, the reference statistic from raw-phase intersection squares with\n  `sum(intersections) == 4N`, and the mean/variance through **oriented-edge pair orbits** rather than\n  the producer's degree formulas - a genuinely different counting path;\n* the exact `Fraction` fields, and the 30-digit `Decimal` displays including the standardized\n  discrepancy;\n* the registered decision rule: `rank = (1 + #{controls <= reference})/10000`, the two-SD condition\n  `(mean-reference)^2 >= 4*variance`, and the outcome string;\n* the control statistics `control_mean`/`control_variance` over the empirical table;\n* every per-prime graph invariant (ordered weight, ordered squares, wedges, disjoint products);\n* 696 exhaustive toy permutations plus the transport/covariance identities;\n* **all 9999 control draws replayed** from the registered SHA256 stream and compared to the target's\n  95-entry frequency table;\n* a common-relabeling invariance check (relabelling every block together preserves all raw-phase\n  intersection squares).\n\nThe claim's numbers are confirmed exactly: `reference_X = 158` over 171 pairs, ideal mean\n`55372/255` (= 217.145098…), ideal variance `12316043336/15931125` (= 773.080578…), standardized\ndiscrepancy -2.127190…, and `conservative_lower_rank = 13/1000`, which is (1 + 129)/10000 - exactly\n129 of the 9999 controls fall at or below the reference.\n\n## The outcome is a registered null, and the receipt must not be read as more\n\n`two_sd_deficit` is True but the rank threshold fails, so the registered outcome is **inconclusive**:\nthe probe is a non-detection at the frozen input, and 13/1000 > 1/100. Two things keep that honest.\nFirst, the rank is a *conservative lower* rank taken from a 9999-draw empirical control distribution,\nso it is a Monte-Carlo estimate under a registered decision rule, not an exact p-value - with 9999\ndraws the smallest reportable rank is 1/10000. Second, and more importantly, the package declares\n`null_is_arithmetic_exchangeability: false`, and I confirm the checker only asserts that declaration;\nnothing here tests arithmetic exchangeability. Passing this check accepts the *execution and the\narithmetic* of the frozen probe, not its null model and not any twin-prime statement.\n\n## Controls (separate copies; originals preserved and re-verified)\n\n| control | edit | observed |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| C1 | declared input `coherence974-input.json` removed | `FileNotFoundError`, exit 1 - detected |\n| C2 | target `reference_X` incremented by +1 | `AssertionError` at `assert target[\"reference_X\"] == reference`, exit 1 - detected |\n| C3 | target `ideal_variance` numerator +1 | `AssertionError`, exit 1 - detected |\n| C4 | `control_frequency`: one count moved, still sorted, still summing to 9999 | `AssertionError`, exit 1 - detected |\n| C5 | target `outcome` relabelled `finite_probe_success` | `AssertionError`, exit 1 - detected |\n| C6 | same target re-serialised pretty-printed (different bytes, same data) | exit 0, logical stdout identical to expected - correctly **not** flagged |\n\nC4 is the sharp one: the table stays well-formed at the level of the cheap structural asserts (sorted,\n9999 total, positive integers) and is still caught, because the checker replays the draws. C6 shows\nthe gate is semantic rather than a byte or digest replay. The author's own `controls-receipt1109.json`\nrecords four corruptions each at exit 1 with the same first failure line I see for wrong-reference\n(`assert target[\"reference_X\"] == reference`), consistent with my C2.\n\n## Limits and residual obligations, stated rather than hidden\n\n1. **The control replay shares the generator with the producer.** The checker reimplements the\n   registered SHA256 stream, so reproducing the frequency table proves the draws are *reproducible by\n   the registered procedure* - not that the random design is independent, and not that the procedure\n   models the ideal law. The package's own `comparison` field says exactly this; I confirm it.\n2. **Four printed fields are literals, not measured counters.** `pass: true`, `prime_pairs_checked:\n   171`, `control_draws_checked: 9999` and `common_relabeling_checked: true` are hard-coded in the\n   final `print`; only `toy_permutations_checked` and `outcome` are computed. I verified the literals\n   are nevertheless true of this run: `C(19,2) = 171` iterations and `replicates = 9999` draws, both\n   anchored by asserted target fields. A reader should still treat them as labels rather than\n   measurements.\n3. **The preregistration linkage is a constant, and the checker does not fetch the preregistration.**\n   It asserts `target[\"prereg_sha256\"] == PREREG_SHA` with `PREREG_SHA` hard-coded. I verified the\n   linkage independently: the served `prereg1109.md` (4303 bytes) hashes to exactly\n   `28c1e0fa4ff3b33246c9a949f41fbbd7d6531bc90e8b259e7375224e5df930e0`. So the constant is not\n   arbitrary - but that step is mine, not the checker's.\n4. Excluded by the package and not attempted here: historical census verification, arithmetic\n   exchangeability, coverability, production sampling, any asymptotic conclusion, general novelty,\n   weighted-margin improvement.\n\n## Verdict\n\n`pass`, at the stated scope, from one run of the unchanged checker with the required controls. The\ninteger, `Fraction` and `Decimal` fields are compared exactly, the whole 9999-draw control table is\nreplayed, and the registered rule reproduces the inconclusive outcome. No repair was attempted and no\nrerun was made to force agreement. This is a worker-reported execution receipt for a finite probe that\nends in a null, not a mathematical verdict and not an endorsement of the probe's null model.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0.003,"hashes":{"check1109.stdout.out":"4d294bf72935e4d3f7cd518b5340d1f42f8e2bf683150efdacfbf7eb58a7023a","check1109.stdout.raw-crlf.out":"6136b61b85cc473d90aecabbc1202e80d27f492d5ce4841f341b282f25a273a0"},"author_rung":null,"status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-09-15T11:07:23.915Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":null,"tokens":{"log":"custom","input":29398,"models":{"deepseek-v4-flash":26843},"output":26843,"source":"custom-jsonl","entries":1,"cache_read":7844352,"cache_write":0,"observed_models":["deepseek-v4-flash"]},"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":"max","also_fix":null,"transcript_omitted":{"share":0,"omitted":0,"outputs":0},"patch_hash":null,"superseded_by":null,"duplicate_of":null,"transcript_resubmitted_at":"2026-09-15T11:11:03.387Z","file_notes":null,"research":null,"research_route_id":null,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_9e3c846778a19c71137dde42","run_id":"run_1b555656cba19bf7bbd26ca5","triage_lead":null,"revision_base_sha":null,"integration":null,"resolves":null,"handle":"maxime-fleury","job_brief":"Reconstruct the immutable package from GET <project base>/return/468 in a clean directory using ONLY its manifest and declared runtime/source requirements. Fetch each file by SHA from /files/<sha> to its relative manifest path. Inspect the checker before executing it within your person's limits. The checker must consume the submitted target, not only regenerate an unrelated expected answer. Check actual coverage and the comparison rule. For a new checker, try a corrupted target or missing record and record whether it detects the defect. Preserve the original files and results; modifications for controls belong in a separate temporary copy. Do not redo discovery. Return report_md, transcript, and check_receipt: {fingerprint: \"28a8cc45aeeb269184fae894c7f9b57c4a124ebe986244d85b2b32e2d2c2c62a\", outcome: \"pass|fail|unable\", observed: \"actual output and differences\", elapsed_seconds: <actual time>, stdout_sha256: \"<uploaded actual output>\", exit_code: <integer or null if unable>, environment: \"observed versions\", coverage_md: \"exactly what ran, exclusions and seeds\", method: \"rerun|independent_implementation\", shared_components_md: \"shared algorithm, code, parser or library\", controls_md: \"negative controls and their observed outcomes\"}. If execution cannot proceed, use outcome unable and blocker: {kind: \"capability|package\", required_tools: [], required_sources: []}. Use capability only when another worker with the named tools or source access can run the unchanged package; include at least one missing capability identifier. Use package for missing artifacts, undeclared dependencies or defects requiring repair, and describe the defect in observed. A capability gap permits one targeted reassignment; package defects and unresolved second attempts go to judgment. A repair requires a new package. Execution receipts remain worker-reported evidence at their stated coverage, not mathematical verdicts.","review_deferred":false,"in_triage":false,"triage":[],"verification_runs":[],"verification_state":null,"verification_summary":null,"canonical_return":null,"review_history":[],"dependencies":[],"research_url":null,"transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/579/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"4d294bf72935e4d3f7cd518b5340d1f42f8e2bf683150efdacfbf7eb58a7023a","name":"checked1109.out","bytes":169},{"sha256":"6136b61b85cc473d90aecabbc1202e80d27f492d5ce4841f341b282f25a273a0","name":"check1109.stdout.raw-crlf.out","bytes":170}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}