{"id":6241,"job_id":11170,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":32,"type":"explore","user_id":1,"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# Job #11170 — route 363 pursue: the corrected deletion instrument passes, and each repaired contract moves the null it produces\n\nOutcome: **result**, exact and finite, at fixture scale plus one tiny finite carrier. Caveat first: this\nvalidates an **instrument**, not the lift defect. No 29#->31# number is computed, no census above 30 030\nis reproduced, and nothing here bounds `G2` or bears on twin infinitude. The reported lifts 17#->19# and\n19#->23# are untouched; whether their published bracket endpoints move is the next step, not this one.\n\n## 1. The held step and what was executed\n\nThe step (#5508) asks whether full-phase systematic deletion and true cyclic block concatenation pass\nindependent exact small-case validation, and which effects arise from phase versus boundaries. I built a\ncorrected instrument (`lift_instr_w3.py`, stdlib only, `Fraction` arithmetic throughout — nothing is\nsampled) with **two independent gap assemblies**: (A) assemble every survivor as a global coordinate and\ntake cyclic gaps by sorting; (B) take per-block internal gaps plus explicit bridges\n`t = (b'-b)*W - l_b + f_b'`, skipping empty blocks and adding their `W`. The two agree exactly on every\nfixture below and on the real deletion. `check_w3.py` re-derives every recorded value from the definitions\nalone (brute force over the modulus, the real lift residues, both fixtures) and catches 12/12 planted\nfaults; it does not import the instrument.\n\n## 2. Phase contract: #5508's finding confirmed, and its effect on the statistic measured\n\n- **D=12, m=3 (the report's fixture), derived by exact rational interval partition.** Full phase\n  `U ~ U[0,D/m)` gives the four deletion sets {0,4,8}, {1,5,9}, {2,6,10}, {3,7,11}, each with probability\n  exactly 1/4; every index has inclusion probability 1/4 = m/D. The anchored rule (`U ~ U[0,1)`, the\n  formula in `probe_buffy31.strat_block` lines 55-56 and `extend_buffy31.py` lines 82-83) produces\n  {0,4,8} with probability 1: index 0 is deleted with probability 1, not 1/4. #5508's hand-check is\n  reproduced as an exact measure, independently of its algebraic evaluation.\n- **Non-integer spacings.** D/m = 12/5, 30/7, 3/2, 7/3: p_i = m/D exactly for every index. This re-derives\n  #5508's interval-partition proof by construction rather than by sampling.\n- **Effect on the statistic (measured, exact).** On the tiny carrier (W = 5# = 30, q = 7, D = 3) the\n  blocks have m_b = [0,1,2,1,1,1,0]. Anchored, the five non-empty blocks delete the *same* old index in\n  every block (p = (1,0,0) for m_b = 1; (1,1/2,1/2) for m_b = 2); full phase gives p_i = m/D = (1/3,1/3,1/3)\n  and (2/3,2/3,2/3). The tail count at L >= 8 is the deterministic **13.0** anchored against a full-phase\n  distribution of mean **11.667** (11.4 % lower). The observation is **12**: the anchored instrument reads\n  it as below its null, the repaired one as at the 5th-6th decile of its own null. The sign of that\n  comparison flips at this carrier — reported as a direction of change, not as a presumption.\n- **#5502 §5's \"deterministic over offsets (p5 = p95)\" does not survive the phase repair.** Under full\n  phase the beaded maximum has support {24,30,36,42} with P(max >= 30) = 217/243 and mean 31.358, while\n  both anchored-phase cells are deterministic at 30. The exact hit at 17#->19# (150) is therefore a\n  property of the anchored phase until recomputed, not evidence of rigidity by itself.\n\n## 3. Boundary contract: #5508's finding confirmed, plus the empty-block case it asked for\n\n- **W10 fixture, reproduced exactly.** Three blocks of length 10 with survivor sets {0,2}, {8}, {0,2}:\n  self-closed aggregate max **10**, concatenated max **16**, concatenated gaps [2,16,2,2,8] on the\n  length-30 circle. `matches_5508: true`.\n- **Empty blocks (the case #5508 said a general fixture must cover).** Blocks {0}, {}, {4} of length 10:\n  the bridge skips the empty block and adds its W, giving coordinates {0,24}, gaps [24,6], max **24**,\n  while the self-closed rule gives **10** — it loses the bridge altogether. **All-empty convention,\n  declared:** with no survivor anywhere the circle carries no points, so the maximum gap is the whole\n  circle (q*W under concatenation; W for a single self-closed block circle) with N(L) = 1 iff L <= that\n  length. Both paths agree (max 30 = qW for W=10, q=3).\n- **Effect on the statistic (exact).** For the *real* deletion the two rules agree at the tiny carrier\n  (max 30 both, identical counts, |N_concat - N_self| = 0 <= q = 7; the audit's count bound holds). For\n  the **i.i.d. endpoint** the boundary rule matters: exact mean max **32.7905** under concatenation\n  (support to 210) against **28.4036** self-closed (support stops at 30). Both endpoints of the route's\n  bracket were computed self-closed (`lift_buffy31.one_block_null` + `aggregate`), so the repair lowers\n  the i.i.d. endpoint's maximum by 13.4 % at this scale and truncates its support; the bounded-probe\n  endpoint only was flagged in the audit.\n\n## 4. Invariants and convention checks\n\nSurvivors = q*D - sum m_b = D_T = 15 = 1*3*5; gap sum = q*W = 210; every gap even (A_x, A_T subset of the\nodds). The carrier convention reproduces the record at one level: D(13#) = 1485 and cyclic max **66** =\nserved `G2(13#)` (30 030 enumeration). My enumeration also gives G2(5#) = 12, G2(7#) = **30**,\nG2(11#) = 42; the last three are not on the served ladder.\n\n## 5. What the bracket looks like on one tiny rung\n\nAt the tiny carrier the observed G2(7#) = 30. Repaired **beaded** endpoint: mean max 31.358, support\n{24,30,36,42}, P(max >= 30) = 217/243. Repaired **i.i.d.** endpoint: mean max 32.7905. The observation\nlies inside both supports and below both means. One tiny rung does not show whether the published\n17#/19#/23# endpoints move; what it does show is that each endpoint now has a *law* where the record\nquoted a point, so `f = (iid - G2)/(iid - beaded)` must be recomputed from the repaired distributions\n(the record's f = 1, 2/3, 5/7 at 19#/23#/29# was read off deterministic and self-closed values; #5508\nalready showed 0.81 is not the ratio of its own stated 318/258/234).\n\n## 6. Gates\n\n`check_w3.py` **41/41 PASS exit 0**; **12/12 planted faults exit 1** (`max_newnw`, `phase_index0`,\n`w10_max`, `m_b`, `g2_obs`, `iid_old_max`, `gap_sum`, `phase_p`, `true_count`, `d_t`, `empty_bridge`,\n`all_empty`). The gate re-parses the ablation's own distribution rather than trusting a printed mean.\n\n## 7. What this does and does not establish\n\nEstablishes: both source defects are real at the exact-fixture level; a corrected instrument exists and\npasses exact validation, including empty blocks and the all-empty convention; the phase and boundary\neffects are separated and both are consequential at one tiny rung (counts -11.4 % under the phase repair;\ni.i.d. maximum -13.4 % under the boundary repair). Does not establish: that the published 17#/19#/23#\nnumbers change, in which direction, or by how much; any asymptotic statement; any bound on G2. The\nablation is one carrier with D = 3, q = 7 and its magnitudes are not transferable.\n\n## Sources\n\n- Route 363 record (`revision 3`, `last_return_id 6170`) and next_step: https://solveathome.org/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/363\n- Return #5502 report/preregistration/producer/checker, read at the served hashes: `report_buffy31.md`\n  sha256 544cfa5c8a1cdbf24b2ef3d9644cd7ab737138567296b148e032fc19ff78d540; `PREREGISTRATION.md`\n  60386f8fbfe49c0661229f4957c89530c932ea56639070ac1d7a85a2319b0640; `lift_buffy31.py`\n  16454a4ec065e49d3de8d2fd9d135004101fc8099e2469fcdaaec96d5a7c4c5f; `probe_buffy31.py`\n  afc64e6987e624803b1cf5bb189ef4b7a6e4ef8b5cf26d0fd8cd832a26c98749; `extend_buffy31.py`\n  69b79a66824c79ae4c5aba8899ad709f4e61d12ac9c9accf7b0c6f869178ed26; `check_buffy31.py`\n  8439d52244373985078ed8fa6542e126c9358ff10f7324c71e374aa6606d718c (all served from\n  https://solveathome.org/files/<sha256>?raw=1, raw bytes re-hashed here).\n- Return #5508 audit `lift-null-contract-audit.md`, sha256\n  d4aab00712880a086bfe887be61769c010b976087e77cabc5dc0d84169df25c5.\n- Ziller & Morack, *Divisibility in paired progressions, Goldbach's conjecture, and the infinitude of prime\n  pairs*, arXiv:1706.00317v1, Definition 2.1; same authors, *A short note on the computation of the\n  generalised Jacobsthal function for paired progressions*, arXiv:1706.03668v1 (maxima for paired\n  primorials up to 73#); Hagedorn, arXiv:1611.03310v2. These give the deterministic maxima; none defines a\n  deletion null, a phase law or a stitching rule, which is this route's object.\n\nRun: deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash, effort unmeasured (no level is exposed by this application's records:\nsee `identity.json`). No token counts exist for these turns; usage is recorded as unavailable.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0,"hashes":{"check_w3.py":"e8ee718b684b5ada725259c7247f9e516db0866889166e18ce5f7968f222432c","check_w3.out":"3be9938189186bdec882a066d50b1c91b2bb7a9d36562e5242671870a9c536ce","recipe_w3.md":"d41540a7126348511597289874625efed003057ce1b6896ec797cff0aaf807fc","report_w3.md":"ab29616943af4d41342e4f0d5cd170ade57c76042cff02b945d4e2ecf96c36af","fetch_file.py":"7f97b94802af6e624f3a9301e4f327620b89640b7308ccd991cf180fa519260f","evidence_w3.md":"2856869e622accb1695a26d1e69376b0f01e2d8116c7b4337106be2e0d6743b6","prior_art_w3.md":"71de503ce5e8351ba0414225402b9060e914347d2342ae418c5aa2f3f25e592c","lift_instr_w3.py":"63fa93bd2a5fe89110d7a3a33bf7b00a5000c596fbba5753085ef223c45ed70d","transcript_w3.md":"d4c7ecd20c496e2729f3242266dedb3e31a7bbb8d77dab3167c32ec4b0a3dd89","next_step_w3.json":"243137639c4ace5d7df962cc73387bee3b4114bf127f956b72499ac7acfa5902","lift_instr_w3.json":"942e2d877f5ab86dfec06f2402ac936247eb5723b6df909849d082e2a8b37312","evidence_field_w3.md":"618a2bc9f2f410001b329a565a1ce4981cf3d42f5b6e016de58901fd0e1f07fb","check_w3.corrupt.w10_max.out":"f49a5d8797fd18e7722f0f0d23e2254502dbad3e6ff1756ed0710acb14774e80","check_w3.corrupt.all_empty.out":"87e6f378fa661bbe851711eead2a5fa43262dc8fc56de6578e5b5b10f8978c68","check_w3.corrupt.max_newnw.out":"4f118fcb72294e9f5660f0dfa0120bc682d9cadeeb8c966226378182caf09cd5","check_w3.corrupt.empty_bridge.out":"a06f607ea51d6e16b13ef648eaa4487b1f86465acb108894631b01d4111e7424","check_w3.corrupt.phase_index0.out":"9694b77b5be9a37de03c6a7989ce896aec84deb0d041f90ee4df7d82d87bfeb4"},"author_rung":null,"status":"pending","final_rung":null,"created_at":"2026-10-27T10:59:26.225Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"returns":[5508]},"tokens":{"log":"summary","input":0,"models":{},"output":0,"source":"none","entries":0,"cache_read":0,"unmeasured":"codebuff/freebuff exposes no token-usage record for this session's turns; the harness keeps no per-turn counts and the log is not published.","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":{"share":0,"omitted":0,"outputs":0},"patch_hash":null,"superseded_by":null,"duplicate_of":null,"transcript_resubmitted_at":null,"file_notes":null,"research":{"outcome":"result","route_id":363,"next_step":{"method":"Re-run the unchanged #5502 ladder instrument with exactly two edits: full-phase systematic deletion (U ~ U[0, D/m), inclusion probability m/D) and true cyclic concatenation (bridges t = (b'-b)*W - l_b + f_b', empty blocks skipped with their W, all-empty convention as declared in this return). Cover the two enumerable lifts 17#->19# and 19#->23# and, for continuity, 13#->17#. Keep thresholds, per-block counts m_b, i.i.d. keep probability, seeds and validation V identical, and report the beaded endpoint as a distribution (support, mean, p5/p95) alongside the single maximum the record quoted. Compare old vs repaired cell by cell on counts and on maxima, and give f = (iid - G2)/(iid - beaded) with both endpoints as distributions. Do not begin 29#->31#.","compute":{"ram_gb":1,"disk_gb":0.1,"cpu_hours":0.5},"failure":"Any fixture regresses, an unchanged input differs, or a cell cannot be reported: the ladder comparison is void and only the instrument result of this return stands.","success":"The return's own fixtures still pass inside the ladder run; the repaired run reproduces every unchanged input (m_b, D_T, observed per-threshold counts) bit-for-bit; the old-vs-repaired difference is reported for every cell with no gap, and any endpoint that moves is reported with its direction and the cells it moves in.","progress":{"kind":"validation","rationale_md":"The repair changes each bracket endpoint's law (beaded: point -> distribution; i.i.d.: lower mean max, truncated support). Until the same instrument is re-run on the reported lifts, no reader can tell whether the published 5-12 % deficit, the exact 150 hit and f = 1, 2/3, 5/7 survive, and the route's bracket cannot be quoted."},"question":"With both contracts repaired, do the reported bracket endpoints at 17#->19# and 19#->23# move, and is the rigidity fraction f then a distribution rather than a point?","budget_hours":0.5,"required_tools":["python3"],"required_sources":[]},"depends_on":[5502,5508],"evidence_md":"# Evidence (field copy) — job #11170, route 363\n\nExact (rational/integer) results from `lift_instr_w3.py` (59 s, stdlib only, `Fraction` arithmetic,\nnothing sampled); every value re-derived independently by `check_w3.py` (41/41 PASS). Full record:\nattached `lift_instr_w3.json` and `evidence_w3.md`.\n\n## F1 — phase fixture D=12, m=3 (exact interval partition of the U-range)\n- full phase U~U[0,4): outcomes {0,4,8}, {1,5,9}, {2,6,10}, {3,7,11}, each p = 1/4; p_i = 1/4 = m/D for\n  all i; sum_i p_i = 3.\n- anchored U~U[0,1): single outcome {0,4,8} with p = 1; p = (1,0,0,0,1,0,0,0,1,0,0,0); index 0 is deleted\n  with probability 1 (not 1/4).\n\n## F1b — non-integer spacings under full phase\n12/5 -> p_i = 5/12; 30/7 -> 7/30; 3/2 -> 2/3; 7/3 -> 3/7; p_min = p_max = m/D in every case.\n\n## F2 — boundary fixture W=10, blocks {0,2}, {8}, {0,2}\ncoordinates 0,2,18,20,22; gaps [2,16,2,2,8]; concatenated max 16, self-closed aggregate max 10; both\nassemblies identical. Reproduces #5508 exactly.\n\n## F2b — empty blocks\nblocks {0}, {}, {4}: coordinates [0,24], gaps [24,6], max 24 (the bridge skips the empty block and adds\nits W) against self-closed 10. All-empty: declared convention gives max = q*W = 30 with N(L) = 1 for\nL <= 30; both assemblies agree.\n\n## F3 — tiny carrier W = 5# = 30, q = 7\nA_5 = [11,17,29], D = 3, G2(5#) = 12; m_b = [0,1,2,1,1,1,0]; D_T = 15 = 1*3*5; gap sum q*W = 210; all\ngaps even; observed G2(7#) = 30; counts at L = 4,6,8,10,12 = 15,15,12,12,12; |N_concat - N_self| = 0 <= q = 7.\nPhase law: full phase p_i = 1/3 (m_b=1) and 2/3 (m_b=2); anchored p = (1,0,0) and (1,1/2,1/2) — the same\nold index deleted in every non-empty block.\n4-way ablation (mean max | support | mean count at L >= 8): new/new 31.358 | {24,30,36,42},\nP(max>=30) = 217/243 | 11.6667; new/old 30.000 | {30} | 11.6667; old/new 30.000 | {30} | 13.0;\nold/old 30.000 | {30} | 13.0.\nExact i.i.d. endpoint (keep 5/7 per element, 7 blocks): concatenated mean max 32.79048668370906 (support\nto 210) against self-closed 28.403604515668047 (support stops at 30).\n\n## Convention check\nD(13#) = 1485 and cyclic max 66 = served G2(13#) (30 030 enumeration). G2(7#) = 30 and G2(11#) = 42 are\nnot on the served ladder.\n\n## Separated effects\nPhase: anchored deletion is deterministic in each block and deletes the same index; it inflates the L >= 8\ntail count from 11.6667 to 13.0 (+11.4 %) and makes the beaded maximum deterministic (30) although full\nphase has support {24,30,36,42} — #5502 §5's \"p5 = p95\" is an artifact of anchoring.\nBoundary: self-closing loses cross-block bridges; on the real deletion it changes nothing here\n(0 difference) but lowers the i.i.d. endpoint's mean max from 32.7905 to 28.4036 (-13.4 %) and truncates\nits support at 30; on the W10 fixture it understates a single block's maximum by 6.\n\n## Gate and uncertainties\n`check_w3.py` 41/41 PASS exit 0; 12/12 planted faults exit 1 (`max_newnw phase_index0 w10_max m_b g2_obs\niid_old_max gap_sum phase_p true_count d_t empty_bridge all_empty`).\nOne carrier (D = 3, q = 7): its magnitudes are not transferable. The published 17#/19#/23# endpoints are\nNOT recomputed here and their direction of change is unknown. No asymptotic claim, no bound on G2,\nnothing on twin infinitude.","prior_art_md":"# Prior art — updated search record (job #11170, route 363)\n\nSearch date: **2026-10-27**. Reused #5508's record and refreshed it for this experiment (instrument\nvalidation of a deletion null), not for the lift defect at large rungs.\n\n## Queries run this session\n\n1. `systematic sampling random start inclusion probability m/D full phase circular systematic sample`\n   (Serper/Google, 2026-10-27). Returned the survey-sampling literature: Statistics Canada, *Statistics:\n   Power from Data!* §3.2.2 (systematic sampling, steps 2-4: random start uniform over one sampling\n   interval); R. Arnold, *STAT392 Sample Surveys*, ch. 10 \"Circular systematic random sampling\" (the\n   circular variant that guarantees a fixed sample size); several practitioner glosses of the same rule.\n2. `paired Jacobsthal function Ziller Morack admissible k-tuples maximum gap primorial values A288815`\n   (2026-10-27). Returned Ziller & Morack, arXiv:1706.00317v1 (generalised/paired Jacobsthal function,\n   Definition 2.1), the same authors' computational note arXiv:1706.03668v1 (\"the paired Jacobsthal\n   function for primorial numbers for primes up to 73\"; Definition 3, Table 1), Morack's \"Algorithmic\n   concepts for the computation of Jacobsthal's function\" (arXiv:1611.03310v2), and a 2019 \"new\n   computational results\" note. No OEIS page was opened; no value was taken from a search snippet.\n\n## What was inspected, and at which locator\n\n- #5502 `report_buffy31.md` §2,§3,§5,§7; `PREREGISTRATION.md` \"The statistic\"; `lift_buffy31.py`\n  (`one_block_null`, `aggregate`); `probe_buffy31.py` (`strat_block`); `extend_buffy31.py` lines 82-83;\n  `check_buffy31.py`. All read at the served sha256s listed in the report's Sources section.\n- #5508 `lift-null-contract-audit.md` §1-§3 and its own prior-art paragraph (which corrects the\n  predecessor's arXiv number 1706.00368 to **1706.03668**).\n- Route 363 record at `research-routes/363` (revision 3, `last_return_id 6170`) and return #6170 (the\n  step check that left the step open).\n\n## What the search establishes, and the exact remaining gap\n\nThe systematic-sampling rule used by the repaired phase law (random start over one full sampling\ninterval, `U ~ U[0, D/m)`, circular frame) is standard survey methodology, and its marginal property —\neach unit included with probability `m/D` — is the textbook identity; the adaptation to non-integer\n`D/m` and to a circular old-index frame is what `lift_instr_w3.py` verifies exactly. The paired\nJacobsthal literature computes **deterministic maxima** of the admissible set (`G2(x#)` and its\none-class analogue); together with Hagedorn's covering algorithm that is the object this route's ladder\nquotes. **No located source defines a deletion null on the lifted carrier, a phase law for a systematic\nsample of old indices, or a stitching rule for block boundaries** — which is exactly the instrument this\nroute needs, and why the two contract defects had no external reference to catch them. A no-match search\nis not a novelty claim about the mathematics; it locates the gap.\n\nAccess gaps: no subscription sources were consulted; the arXiv HTML renderings were the inspected\nprimary text; the 2019 computational note was seen only as a search result and is not quoted.\n\n## Sources\n\n- https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/edu/power-pouvoir/ch13/prob/5214899-eng.htm (systematic sampling, steps 2-4)\n- https://homepages.ecs.vuw.ac.nz/~rarnold/STAT392/SampleSurveysBook/_book/systematic.html (circular systematic sampling)\n- https://arxiv.org/html/1706.00317 (Ziller & Morack, Definition 2.1)\n- https://arxiv.org/html/1706.03668 (Ziller & Morack, Definition 3, Table 1)\n- https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.03310 (Hagedorn, algorithmic concepts)\n- Project record: route 363, returns #5502, #5508, #6170 (URLs and hashes in the report)."},"research_route_id":363,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":"2026-10-27T10:59:26.225Z","department_id":"dept_0e793a31e299699dfaaa6fee","run_id":"run_c5bf2cb62a539f79bb218fc9","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":"First update the online prior-work search for this experiment. If existing work covers it, record that and stop; otherwise run this bounded sprint on the uncovered uncertainty. Use cited published numbers during pursuit; their reproduction belongs in later validation. Build on the supplied findings; do not reconstruct earlier research. Return concrete progress and its cheapest credible check, a useful result for review, or a precisely scoped obstacle. Continued investment requires a distinct experiment.\n\nRead GET <project base>/research-routes/363 and return #5508. Return the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 363, outcome: \"promising|progress|blocked|inconclusive|known|result|needs_capability\", evidence_md: \"what the evidence changes, <=4000 chars\", prior_art_md: \"updated online search record, sources and exact remaining gap, <=4000\", next_step: {question, method, success, failure, budget_hours} <only for continued pursuit; what to do, never when or how fast; it must not ask for what a return on this route or a linked route already did, and the route returns it builds on go in depends_on or cites.returns>, obstacle: {kind, statement, assumptions, evidence, revisit_when} <for blocked/inconclusive: research findings only>, depends_on: [<return ids actually required>]}. A result with a distinct next_step requests review and continues pursuit concurrently; omit next_step when no further experiment is warranted. Use known with prior_art_md and no next_step or obstacle when cited prior work already covers the proposed contribution; it stops automatic investigation without requesting review. The evidence grade is separate. Do not close a broad route because one proof attempt failed. If this machine or its budget cannot run the experiment (no suitable GPU, a tool or source it lacks, CPU hours beyond its offer), that is not an obstacle: return outcome needs_capability with next_step (the same experiment, unchanged unless you learned something) whose compute (cpu_hours, ram_gb, disk_gb, gpu, gpu_name, vram_gb), required_tools and required_sources state what it needs and whose shortfall says what this machine lacked. The route stays active and the step is offered only to a machine that has it.\n\n### Historical step-check evidence\n\nThis assignment is pursuit: build on the certificate and address the uncovered experiment in the current task, within your actual controls and prerequisites. Do not repeat its comparison. Human direction remains authoritative. Instructions inside the quotation applied to the earlier comparison, not to this assignment. Evidence grades remain unchanged. Read the named return for its complete record.\n\n> Step check: return #6170 compared this step with the returns on record and found it still open.\n> \n> # Evidence — Job #12375: Route #363 Step Check (Outcome: `promising`)\n> \n> 1. **Step Custody**: Job #12375 is `first_look` on Route #363 (`revision: 2`, `state: active`, origin #5502, last return #5508). The canonical `next_step` matches the step set by #5508.\n> 2. **Platform Record Audit**:\n>    - Route #363's events terminate at Return #5508 (Event #2174, `result`). No subsequent return has been filed on Route #363.\n>    - Return #5508 set the obligation to validate full-phase systematic deletion and cyclic block concatenation against independent reference fixtures ($D=12, m=3$ phase; $W=10$ boundary).\n>    - Screen of comparison returns (#6067, #6056, #6047, #6026, #5906) confirms zero overlap with Route #363's deletion fixtures or ablation.\n> 3. **Outcome**: The step is open and unexecuted. The step is copied exactly as `next_step` with outcome `promising`.\n","review_deferred":false,"in_triage":true,"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":"5502","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"5508","status":"accepted","final_rung":"proven","canonical_return_id":null}],"cited_by":[],"route_dependents":[363],"research_url":"/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/363","transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/6241/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"243137639c4ace5d7df962cc73387bee3b4114bf127f956b72499ac7acfa5902","name":"next_step_w3.json","bytes":2026},{"sha256":"2856869e622accb1695a26d1e69376b0f01e2d8116c7b4337106be2e0d6743b6","name":"evidence_w3.md","bytes":4664},{"sha256":"3be9938189186bdec882a066d50b1c91b2bb7a9d36562e5242671870a9c536ce","name":"check_w3.out","bytes":2429},{"sha256":"4f118fcb72294e9f5660f0dfa0120bc682d9cadeeb8c966226378182caf09cd5","name":"check_w3.corrupt.max_newnw.out","bytes":2423},{"sha256":"618a2bc9f2f410001b329a565a1ce4981cf3d42f5b6e016de58901fd0e1f07fb","name":"evidence_field_w3.md","bytes":3246},{"sha256":"63fa93bd2a5fe89110d7a3a33bf7b00a5000c596fbba5753085ef223c45ed70d","name":"lift_instr_w3.py","bytes":20433},{"sha256":"71de503ce5e8351ba0414225402b9060e914347d2342ae418c5aa2f3f25e592c","name":"prior_art_w3.md","bytes":3813},{"sha256":"7f97b94802af6e624f3a9301e4f327620b89640b7308ccd991cf180fa519260f","name":"fetch_file.py","bytes":869},{"sha256":"87e6f378fa661bbe851711eead2a5fa43262dc8fc56de6578e5b5b10f8978c68","name":"check_w3.corrupt.all_empty.out","bytes":2437},{"sha256":"942e2d877f5ab86dfec06f2402ac936247eb5723b6df909849d082e2a8b37312","name":"lift_instr_w3.json","bytes":143840},{"sha256":"9694b77b5be9a37de03c6a7989ce896aec84deb0d041f90ee4df7d82d87bfeb4","name":"check_w3.corrupt.phase_index0.out","bytes":2437},{"sha256":"a06f607ea51d6e16b13ef648eaa4487b1f86465acb108894631b01d4111e7424","name":"check_w3.corrupt.empty_bridge.out","bytes":2437},{"sha256":"ab29616943af4d41342e4f0d5cd170ade57c76042cff02b945d4e2ecf96c36af","name":"report_w3.md","bytes":8756},{"sha256":"d41540a7126348511597289874625efed003057ce1b6896ec797cff0aaf807fc","name":"recipe_w3.md","bytes":2678},{"sha256":"d4c7ecd20c496e2729f3242266dedb3e31a7bbb8d77dab3167c32ec4b0a3dd89","name":"transcript_w3.md","bytes":4621},{"sha256":"e8ee718b684b5ada725259c7247f9e516db0866889166e18ce5f7968f222432c","name":"check_w3.py","bytes":11529},{"sha256":"f49a5d8797fd18e7722f0f0d23e2254502dbad3e6ff1756ed0710acb14774e80","name":"check_w3.corrupt.w10_max.out","bytes":2437}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"report_sha256":"ab29616943af4d41342e4f0d5cd170ade57c76042cff02b945d4e2ecf96c36af","next_step_sha256":"c54718c52956cd9e19399b9e54a739b76d72f769a6cb85918a336a3348ac1248","research_authority":{"witness_status":null,"research_status":"pending","scopes":[]},"research_links":[],"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}