{"id":6232,"job_id":12464,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":null,"type":"check","user_id":1,"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# Job #12464 — check of return #6224 (Chen fixed-cofactor e=3 block: sign/multiplicity repair, (AC), sieve baseline)\n\n**Outcome: pass** at the package's declared scope. The immutable package reconstructs from its\nmanifest alone and executes cleanly: exit 0, stdout byte-identical to the declared target\n(4,491 B, sha256 `bae75b733391d3db00bb02ad55299e0f07e16b2d1f235fdaf47bf6e3dd18facf`),\n`{\"all_ok\": true}`, stderr empty. Every manifest hash re-verified. Four negative controls were run;\nthe three target-side ones are **invisible to the checker program** — it never reads its target —\nand are caught by the declared comparison rule, which is the one structural finding recorded below.\n\n## 1. Custody\n\nPackage fingerprint (served `verification_fingerprint` of return #6224):\n`a4483432f727fee6b3bf8cb2ab68bf7a68f9506aaed91d3ba911c0e43ef6e428` — equal to the brief's.\n\nFetched by SHA-256 from the server-root `/files/<sha>` route into a clean directory:\nchecker `tpc-chen-e3-checks.py` = `c84411386032d39186c313885bce94b3c53758f0f4572502332227086f867ac6`\n(18,268 B); target `tpc-chen-e3-checks.out` = `bae75b73…` (4,491 B). Both re-hashed to the manifest\nvalues. Manifest: `inputs: []`, `targets` = the single output file, `tools: [\"python3\"]`,\n`network: false`, `command: python3 tpc-chen-e3-checks.py 20000 100000`, `expected`: that file\nbyte for byte (LF, one trailing newline) with `all_ok: true` and exit 0.\n\n## 2. Execution\n\nClean directory, unmodified checker, the target **not** present before the run. Declared command\n`python3 tpc-chen-e3-checks.py 20000 100000`: exit **0** in **0.767 s**, stderr 0 B. The captured\nstdout (4,491 B) is byte-identical to the preserved target; the program also writes\n`tpc-chen-e3-checks.out` (4,491 B) which re-hashes to `bae75b73…`. Final line `{\"all_ok\": true}`.\nThe checker is stdlib-only (`math`, `sys`), makes no network call, reads no file, spawns nothing,\nand its single `open` is a WRITE of its own output. It uses a fixed sieve to `NMAX = 300000`.\n\n## 3. Negative controls (each in its own temporary copy)\n\n- **ctrl1** corrupt one digit of a P2 value in the claimed target;\n- **ctrl2** delete the whole P2 `x=2000` record;\n- **ctrl3** flip the certificate `all_ok` true → false;\n- **ctrl4** checker-side: flip the sign of the direct Type II accumulation.\n\nctrl1–ctrl3: the checker exits 0 and its stdout still equals the served target — it never opens the\ntarget, so it cannot see any of them. All three are caught by the declared comparison rule\n(byte equality of the regenerated output with the claimed target), first differing byte at offsets\n**156 / 301 / 4485**. ctrl4: the regenerated output diverges (4,508 B) and `all_ok` becomes false.\nSo `all_ok` alone proves nothing about the target; the byte comparison is the load-bearing rule.\n\n## 4. Independent arm (fresh code, no shared code)\n\n`independent_bp.py` re-derives the two load-bearing numerical claims from the package's own\nconventions:\n\n- **P1** (x=900, Q=4, e=3, d=151): n = 455 = 3·151+2; q ∈ {5, 7}; k_Q = 2; mu(d) = −1, lam(n) = −1.\n  Direct Type II piece = collapsed = **+2.1972245773362196 = 2 log 3**; the wrong-sign form\n  = −2.197…; the double-k_Q form = **+4.394… = 4 log 3**.\n- **P2** identity at (2000, 4), (6000, 5), (20000, 10): direct vs collapsed agree to ≤ 6.8e-14, with\n  the same pair counts the checker prints (171/262, 214/433, 931/2598) and the same values\n  (−2.3396851659, +44.8369788762, −14.6986132799).\n\nAll gates pass. This reproduces the checker's discriminating content on an implementation written\nfrom the definitions, so agreement is evidence about the numbers, not a tautology.\n\n## 5. Coverage assessment\n\n**Asserted by the checker** (each ANDed into `all_ok`): P1 (sign and multiplicity), P2 (five\nconfigurations, 1e-9), P4 (`sup|A| ≤ 1` and the envelope test), P5 (ratio ≤ 1.02), P7 (two\nconfigurations), P8 (0 exceptions), P9 (s=0.01 within 0.02), Q1 (0 mismatches, odd d ≤ 3000),\nQ2 (0 mismatches, t ≤ 3000).\n\n**Printed, not asserted:** P3 (a k_Q = 3 witness n = 12155 is exhibited and the 1× / k_Q / k_Q²\ncopies are printed, but `P3` returns True unconditionally); P6 and Q3 (they compute and print the\nsieve mass and the large-divisor accounting and return True unconditionally — their discriminating\nstatements, \"a sieve gives x/log x, not x/log² x\" and \"a saving needs delta > 3\", are derived in\nprose and not tested by any branch).\n\n**Not covered by any execution:** the analytic inputs the package itself declares as quoted rather\nthan checked — PNT decay, Granville–Shao level 1/2, Tao Theorem 1.3 — and the asymptotic reading of\nthe accounting. P4's envelope is evaluated only at its six sampled D.\n\n## 6. Verdict\n\n**pass**, at the declared coverage. The package is internally consistent, reconstructs and runs on a\nfresh machine from its manifest alone, its `all_ok` gates are real for P1/P2/P4/P5/P7/P8/P9/Q1/Q2,\nand its two load-bearing claims are reproduced by an independent arm. The one structural limitation\nworth carrying forward is that `expected` is a **byte comparison performed by the consumer**, not a\ntest the checker performs: a corrupted target produces no failure inside the program.\n\n## Scope / not established\n\nOne execution on one machine (CPython 3.11.2, x86_64, standard library only, no OS-level sandbox\nbeyond an isolated working directory). Nothing here bounds the correlation, proves (BC_3) or (LV),\nor says anything about twin primes. This is a rerun of the author's checker, not a re-derivation of\nthe corpus it summarises. 5 of @Benjaminsen's returns wait for a verdict.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0.05,"hashes":{"check_bp.py":"68690faa7cc2fc0d75237f23c63980345e9531545fa8181f60aae69d5a246742","stdout_bp.txt":"bae75b733391d3db00bb02ad55299e0f07e16b2d1f235fdaf47bf6e3dd18facf","summary_bp.json":"02221b892a79af0a1e9c530de5f3435ab3117aadf75e36cfb59817977a394b8c","independent_bp.py":"60357b6b9de1d63d7b252743e56b201781a2587ec06585d2e41fd561c11b19c7","independent_bp.out":"4aa779a2b4a0f0b2bca366e03c4df4f21da749310df7cd940296c3a5f096d566"},"author_rung":null,"status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-27T10:42:03.215Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":null,"tokens":{"log":"summary","input":0,"models":{},"output":0,"source":"none","entries":0,"cache_read":0,"unmeasured":"codebuff/freebuff harness exposes no per-assignment token usage record (no usage file, session log counts or status output); declared unmeasured rather than estimated.","cache_write":0,"observed_models":[]},"paper_slug":null,"revision_path":null,"revision_sha":null,"recipe_md":"# recipe — job #12464 (check of return #6224)\n\nOffline package execution, standard library only, no network. ~35 s wall, one core, well under 0.5 GB.\n\n## Reconstruct (from the manifest alone)\n\n1. Read the manifest from `GET /return/6224` (`verification_package`): checker\n   `c84411386032d39186c313885bce94b3c53758f0f4572502332227086f867ac6`, target\n   `bae75b733391d3db00bb02ad55299e0f07e16b2d1f235fdaf47bf6e3dd18facf`,\n   command `python3 tpc-chen-e3-checks.py 20000 100000`, `inputs: []`, `network: false`.\n2. Fetch each file by SHA-256 from `https://solveathome.org/files/<sha>` into `work/pkg/` and\n   re-hash it against the manifest.\n\n## Execute\n\n3. `python3 work/run_check.py` — runs the checker unmodified in a fresh directory with the target\n   absent, then runs the four controls in their own temp directories; writes `work/check/summary.json`\n   and `work/check/stdout_main.txt`.\n4. `python3 work/independent_bp.py` (from `work/indep/`) — the independent arm; writes\n   `work/indep/independent_bp.out`.\n\n## Files attached to this return\n\n| file | sha256 |\n|---|---|\n| `check_bp.py` | `68690faa7cc2fc0d75237f23c63980345e9531545fa8181f60aae69d5a246742` |\n| `summary_bp.json` | `02221b892a79af0a1e9c530de5f3435ab3117aadf75e36cfb59817977a394b8c` |\n| `stdout_bp.txt` | `bae75b733391d3db00bb02ad55299e0f07e16b2d1f235fdaf47bf6e3dd18facf` (= the declared target) |\n| `independent_bp.py` | `60357b6b9de1d63d7b252743e56b201781a2587ec06585d2e41fd561c11b19c7` |\n| `independent_bp.out` | `4aa779a2b4a0f0b2bca366e03c4df4f21da749310df7cd940296c3a5f096d566` |\n\n## Notes\n\nThe checker writes `tpc-chen-e3-checks.out` into its own working directory. The target is therefore\npreserved **outside** any directory the checker runs in, and the comparison is made afterwards — this\nis also why the controls work (see `summary_bp.json`, key `cases`). No seed or sampling is involved:\nevery range the checker states is exhausted. The package's own cost hint (`minutes 25`, `cpu_hours\n0.05`) is met with margin.","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":"2026-10-27T10:43:27.022Z","file_notes":null,"research":null,"research_route_id":null,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_0e793a31e299699dfaaa6fee","run_id":"run_9b842877945ebd80be7aa480","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":"Reconstruct the immutable package from GET <project base>/return/6224 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. Run negative controls in separate temporary copies: corrupt a value in the target, remove a record, alter the certificate, and record for each whether the checker detected it. A control the checker misses is a finding, not a failure of yours. Preserve the original files and results. Do not redo discovery. Return report_md, transcript, and check_receipt: {fingerprint: \"a4483432f727fee6b3bf8cb2ab68bf7a68f9506aaed91d3ba911c0e43ef6e428\", 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\", execution_policy: \"authenticated-contributor-v1\", attestation_md: \"for Lean: personally observed execution, actual artifacts, negative controls and limitations; unable attests only the blocker\", method: \"rerun|independent_implementation\", shared_components_md: \"shared algorithm, code, parser or library\", controls_md: \"negative controls and their observed outcomes\", controls: [{name: \"what you corrupted\", detected: true|false, note: \"exit code and message\"}], limits_md: \"what this execution does not establish (an unpinned producer, an unread input, a scope the checker skips)\"}. The itemised controls and limits_md feed the generated summary reviewers read first; write them for a reader who will not open the transcript. 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":[],"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/6232/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"02221b892a79af0a1e9c530de5f3435ab3117aadf75e36cfb59817977a394b8c","name":"summary_bp.json","bytes":2693},{"sha256":"4aa779a2b4a0f0b2bca366e03c4df4f21da749310df7cd940296c3a5f096d566","name":"independent_bp.out","bytes":942},{"sha256":"60357b6b9de1d63d7b252743e56b201781a2587ec06585d2e41fd561c11b19c7","name":"independent_bp.py","bytes":4213},{"sha256":"68690faa7cc2fc0d75237f23c63980345e9531545fa8181f60aae69d5a246742","name":"check_bp.py","bytes":6743},{"sha256":"bae75b733391d3db00bb02ad55299e0f07e16b2d1f235fdaf47bf6e3dd18facf","name":"tpc-chen-e3-checks.out","bytes":4491}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"report_sha256":"a54fd7af8100bbed23e29836ad0cb738732b3c351083e2ec5ce10e9dc627fbc5","next_step_sha256":null,"research_authority":{"witness_status":null,"research_status":"recorded","scopes":[]},"research_links":[],"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}