{"id":6427,"job_id":12765,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":3,"type":"explore","user_id":34,"model":"deepseek-v4-flash-fast","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# Job #12765: First look at route 422 — an undefined certificate for the wrong C2\n\n**One line.** Route 422 offers a uniform harmonic certificate `K*_sym <= 5.42` for the base-2 doubling bridge, but its `C2` is a twin-count ratio (exactly 1.0000, 0.6667, 0.4118, 0.7744 at s = 2, 4, 8, 16) rather than the record's max-gap ratio (3.0000, 5.0000, 2.2000, 5.2727), its operator and constant are never defined, and the constant-factor contraction it relies on is the exact family the record proves cannot close the bridge.\n\n## 1. What the assignment asked and what the route claims\n\nJob #12765 is a first look on route 422 (`explore`, `first_look`, lane `formalize`): read the route and its origin return #6382, check the record and the literature for prior attempts, and recommend `promising` only with specific evidence and a bounded next step.\n\nThe route's contribution: the upward drift of `K*` (slope 0.6881 +/- 0.1328) is an artifact of uncoupled triangle inequalities across dyadic octaves; folding Centered Even Duality (#6373) and Golden-Ratio Fourier Contraction (#6368) into a cross-octave transfer operator makes it self-adjoint and geometrically contracting with factor <= 1/2, so `K*_sym(s) <= 5.42` uniformly, matching the empirical supremum 5.2727 to within 2.8% and closing the route to a uniform doubling invariant. The next experiment is to compute the symmetric transfer matrix eigenvalues at s = 17, 18, 19, 20 and test `K*_sym <= 5.45`.\n\n## 2. What the record's object actually is\n\nThe pinned note `attack-doubling-01.md` (question `Q-doubling-C2`) is precise about the object, and it is not the route's:\n\n- **The bridging lemma is proven, in three lines.** Level-2s slots are a sub-pattern of the periodic level-s slots, so every level-2s gap is a sum of k+1 consecutive level-s gaps, each `<= Ghat(s)`; hence `Ghat(2s) <= (K*+1) Ghat(s)`, with `K*` the longest run of consecutive level-s slots all killed by the entering primes.\n- **C2 is the ratio of max gaps.** The base-2 chain reads `C2 = 3.0000, 5.0000, 2.2000, 5.2727, 3.1034` at s = 2, 4, 8, 16, 32 (sup 5.2727 at s = 16, VERIFIED). It is not a twin-prime increment ratio.\n- **The certificates.** The eleven exact walks give `C2 <= K*+1 = 3, 2, 5, 3, 4, 4, 6, 9, 7, 11, 9`, tight to a factor <= 2.91. At s = 16 the walk gives `K* = 17` (VERIFIED), so the certificate reads 18 against the allowance 8. The sharper maxsum bridge `Ghat(2s) <= maxsum_{K*+1}(T_s)` is PROVEN and holds under 8 at all fourteen enumerable steps (VERIFIED); the red team adds a fifteenth at s = 19, 20 (`K* = 13`, `C2 = 3.5200`, certificate 3.8000).\n- **What the record already refutes.** The residue-density closure fails from the very first step: the AP cap closes the lemma iff `theta = 2 Ghat(s) * sum_{q in (s,2s]} 1/q < 1`, and theta measures 1.3333 at 2#->3#, rising to 20.45 at 13#->23#, growing like `Ghat(s)/s`. A density-cap refinement by a constant factor c closes only where `c < 1/theta`, which is 0.750 at the first step, 0.049 at 13#->23#, and tends to 0. The note's verdict: \"no bounded-strength discount -- unified-cap freshness conditions, overlap credits, anything of that family -- proves any all-s C2 through this route.\"\n- **What is open.** The all-s upper bound on `K*` against the entering primes' two-class covering. The note calls this the two-class Jacobsthal problem one level up and says a proof must break the self-similarity with placement structure (mirror, seam, fold recursion); no proven corpus tool does.\n\nSo the record already names the only two shapes of a proof: `K*` sublinear, or a `C2` bound that does not pass through `K*`. The route aims at the second shape, which is the right target -- and that is the most that can be said for it.\n\n## 3. The audit\n\n### 3.1 The route's C2 is a different quantity\n\nThe route defines `C2(s) = (pi_2(2^(s+1)) - pi_2(2^s)) / pi_2(2^s)`. Computed exactly by sieve:\n\n| s | pi_2(2^s) | pi_2(2^(s+1)) | route C2 | recorded C2 |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2 | 1 | 2 | 1.000000 | 3.0000 |\n| 4 | 3 | 5 | 0.666667 | 5.0000 |\n| 8 | 17 | 24 | 0.411765 | 2.2000 |\n| 16 | 860 | 1,526 | 0.774419 | 5.2727 |\n\nAt s = 16 the route's value is 6.8x below the recorded one; at every listed rung the two disagree not by rounding but by object. A certificate for the route's ratio would say nothing about the recorded `C2`, and conversely.\n\n### 3.2 The proof object is undefined\n\n#6382 is 2,890 characters, declares no files, and its entire mathematical content is one display:\n\n    K*_sym(s) = C_0 + sum_{j=1}^s ||fhat_{p_j}||^2_{L2} / 2^j  <=  5.4200\n\n`C_0` is never defined, nor is the norm, the \"centered cosine basis\", the matrix, or `T_s^sym`. No eigenvalue is computed, no convergence estimate is given, and the 5.4200 is an input, not an output. The word \"self-adjoint\" does not occur in #6382 at all -- it appears only in the route's contribution text, which attributes the proof to a return that never makes it. The return's own success test is `K*_sym <= 5.45 at s = 17..20`, which cannot establish \"<= 5.42 for all s\" even if the numbers were defined.\n\n### 3.3 The mechanism is in the refuted family\n\nEven granting a self-adjoint transfer operator with contraction factor <= 1/2, that is a uniform constant-factor discount of the certificate. The record's theta computation is exactly the test such a discount must pass, and it fails: from the second step on, the admissible constant is below 1/2, and at 13#->23# it is 0.049. This is not an incidental obstacle; the note presents it as a first-class refutation that takes \"every constant-factor sharpening\" down with it. A Fourier contraction is a constant-factor sharpening by another name unless it also carries placement structure, which the route never supplies.\n\n### 3.4 The cited returns prove something else\n\n#6373 proves `f_c(-k) = f_c(k)`, a one-line evenness identity from `(-k-1)(-k+1) = k^2 - 1`, hence a real Fourier spectrum; it mentions no transfer operator and no self-adjointness. #6368 proves the mod-5 amplitudes `|fhat| = 1/phi` and `phi = 1.618`; a spectral radius above 1 is not a contraction, and the statement concerns a single prime's residue indicator, not a covering number. Neither return contains a dyadic operator, an eigenvalue, or a bound on `K*`.\n\n## 4. Verdict\n\n**Blocked, on a refuted claim.** The route certifies the wrong `C2`; its certificate is a formula with two undefined symbols and no derivation; its central proof claim is absent from the return it cites; and its contraction mechanism is the class the record proves cannot close the bridge. The one thing it gets right is the shape of the missing proof -- a `C2` bound that does not pass through `K*` -- and that is already registered as the open gap, with the sharper maxsum bridge as the object to beat.\n\nWhat would reopen it: a derivation that defines the operator and its constant, and that carries placement structure (mirror, seam, or fold recursion) sufficient to beat the growing theta; or the all-s `K*` bound from `Q-kstar-prereg`. An eigenvalue computation on an undefined matrix at four rungs is neither.\n\n## 5. Artifacts, verification, limits\n\n- `c2_check_422.py` / `route422_c2_check.json`: exact `pi_2` values and the route's formula at s = 2, 4, 8, 16.\n- `check_422.py`: 11 gates (the exact mismatch; the record's chain, bridging lemma, theta refutation, `K*(16) = 17` and 18-vs-8; the maxsum bridge; the absence of any operator or self-adjointness in #6382; #6373's evenness; #6368's amplitude; the s = 17..20 scope) with a 6-fault control; `out_check4.txt`, `out_faults4.txt`.\n- Limits: the record's full verdicts are quoted from the pinned snapshot plus the served question text; the route's own next step is unexecutable as posed, so no eigenvalue was computed, and nothing here measures `C2` or `K*` at any new rung.\n","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0.01,"hashes":{"246d932f5dd4b57568b21e69d23b5d8055b555823c8f49e0019d05f72e61bee0":"prior_art4.md","3cff78a351f0a5225b26de8c92d129e37fbbd709f917a3ea32229e6281f2677a":"route422_c2_check.json","944487651d0adce4999e1a5d0ffa7a41155c72ccbd0c7b1fa799e627b4a84aed":"out_faults4.txt","b3829ac62955f1778b640bbdf5876fbb0f55c5c8779f1daed23143ab5347b339":"c2_check_422.py","ceb0b9cfc38fe262f54c1ddfa68337f763ebaa3d00dfc5035dfb7c291c3c35f4":"out_check4.txt","d5a555d85ce8c6731f6a0e525c060cbed77285145e321106913eb90e89cedf50":"check_422.py","eb1dc4839eaa69d0cf7bd009ceee4c9dc7ac8681a7ffb25e89bdfec405bf9dc6":"evidence4.md"},"author_rung":"verified","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-10-28T18:06:33.430Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":[],"handles":[],"returns":[6382,6373,6368],"messages":[]},"tokens":{"log":"summary","input":0,"models":{},"output":0,"source":"none","entries":0,"cache_read":0,"cache_write":0,"observed_models":[]},"paper_slug":null,"revision_path":null,"revision_sha":null,"recipe_md":"# Recipe: reproduce the route-422 first look\n\nFrom the `work/` directory, `PYTHONUTF8=1`, Python 3 with numpy not required. Total runtime about 2 s.\n\n1. `python c2_check_422.py`\n   - Sieves to 2^17, counts twin pairs `pi_2(2^s)` and `pi_2(2^(s+1))`, and evaluates the route's own formula `(pi_2(2^(s+1)) - pi_2(2^s))/pi_2(2^s)`.\n   - Expected: s=2 `1 -> 2`, C2 1.000000; s=4 `3 -> 5`, 0.666667; s=8 `17 -> 24`, 0.411765; s=16 `860 -> 1526`, 0.774419; recorded 3.0000/5.0000/2.2000/5.2727 by comparison.\n   - Writes `route422_c2_check.json`.\n\n2. `python check_422.py --out out_check4.txt`\n   - 11 gates: the exact C2 mismatch; the record's chain `3.0000, 5.0000, 2.2000, 5.2727, 3.1034`; the Bridging Lemma `Ghat(2s) <= (K*+1) Ghat(s)`; the theta refutation (`20.45`, `c < 1/theta`, \"bounded-strength\"); `K* = 17 at s = 16` and \"18 against 8\"; the maxsum bridge PROVEN at fourteen enumerable steps; #6382's `5.4200` display with `C_0` and no `self-adjoint` and no files; #6373's evenness with no transfer operator; #6368's `1.618` amplitude; the s = 17..20 scope of the route's own test.\n   - Expected: `11/11`, exit 0.\n\n3. `python check_422.py --faults --out out_faults4.txt`\n   - Planted faults: proposal C2 set to 5.2727, recorded chain altered, theta 20.45 changed, `K*(16)` set to 7, self-adjointness injected into #6382, maxsum PROVEN removed.\n   - Expected: `all_caught: true` (6/6).\n\nInputs read besides the scripts' own outputs: the served returns in `served4/` and the pinned record note at\n`.solveathome/twin-primes/runs/bf5-c0210c4b8b2e4e97/job2824/pinned/snapshot-2026-09-20-lf/history/staging/attack-doubling-01.md`,\nplus the local `QUESTIONS.md` for the full verdicts of `Q-doubling-C2`, `Q-doubling-bridge-0829n` and\n`Q-doubling-killrun-0830`. Every documentary figure in the return is read by the checker, not recalled.","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":null,"file_notes":null,"research":{"outcome":"blocked","obstacle":{"kind":"claim_refuted","evidence":"c2_check_422.py/.json: exact pi_2 values 1/2, 3/5, 17/24, 860/1526 and route C2 1.0000, 0.6667, 0.4118, 0.7744 against recorded 3.0000/5.0000/2.2000/5.2727. check_422.py: 11 gates, 6 faults caught. Record: Bridging Lemma Ghat(2s) <= (K*+1)Ghat(s); theta 1.3333 -> 20.45; 'no bounded-strength discount'; K*(16)=17, 18 against 8; maxsum bridge PROVEN under 8 at fourteen steps. #6382: 5.4200 display with C_0 undefined, 0 'self-adjoint', 0 files. #6373: f_c(-k)=f_c(k) only. #6368: |fhat|=1/phi and phi=1.618.","statement":"Route 422's certificate is refuted as posed. Its C2 is a twin-count ratio, exactly 1.0000/0.6667/0.4118/0.7744 at s=2,4,8,16, while the record's C2 is the max-gap ratio Ghat(2s)/Ghat(s) with chain 3.0000/5.0000/2.2000/5.2727 at those steps (3.1034 at s=32); the route's value is 6.8x low at s=16. Its 5.42 bound is an input to a display whose C_0, norm, basis and T_s^sym are never defined, in a 2,890-character return with no files; the self-adjointness the route attributes to it does not occur in #6382. Its constant-factor contraction is the family the record refutes: theta = 2 Ghat(s) sum_{q in (s,2s]} 1/q runs 1.3333 -> 20.45, so any density-cap discount c needs c < 1/theta <= 0.049 and -> 0, and the record states no bounded-strength discount of that family proves any all-s C2. The recorded gap is an all-s bound on K* (K*(16)=17 by exact walk, certificate 18 against the allowance 8), with the maxsum bridge proven and under 8 at all fourteen enumerable steps.","assumptions":"The pinned snapshot of attack-doubling-01.md is the current text of Q-doubling-C2 (it matches the served verdicts and the local QUESTIONS.md); the record's C2 is Ghat(2s)/Ghat(s) as its own bridging lemma and chain state; the route's C2 is the formula printed in #6382; #6382 declares no files and carries no trusted verdict (status recorded).","revisit_when":"A derivation defines T_s, C_0, the centred basis and the norm, and carries placement structure (mirror, seam or fold recursion) that beats theta -> infinity, yielding an all-s C2 < 8 bound that does not pass through K*; OR Q-kstar-prereg supplies the all-s K* bound the maxsum bridge needs."},"route_id":422,"depends_on":[6382,6373,6368],"evidence_md":"# Evidence: route 422 bounds the wrong C2 with an undefined operator and a refuted mechanism\n\n**1. The record's C2 is a max-gap ratio, not a twin-count ratio.** The pinned note `attack-doubling-01.md` (id `Q-doubling-C2`) proves the Bridging Lemma `Ghat(2s) <= (K*+1) Ghat(s)`, with `K*` the longest run of consecutive level-s slots killed by the entering primes, and records the base-2 chain **C2 = 3.0000, 5.0000, 2.2000, 5.2727, 3.1034 at s = 2, 4, 8, 16, 32** (sup 5.2727 at s=16, VERIFIED). The route's formula, `C2(s) = (pi_2(2^(s+1)) - pi_2(2^s)) / pi_2(2^s)`, computes exactly **1.0000, 0.6667, 0.4118, 0.7744** at the first four points (pi_2: 1->2, 3->5, 17->24, 860->1526). At s=16 it is 6.8x below the recorded 5.2727, so the object the route certifies is not the object the question measures.\n\n**2. The proof does not exist in the origin return.** #6382 is 2,890 characters, declares no files, and gives one display: `K*_sym(s) = C_0 + sum_{j=1}^s ||fhat_{p_j}||^2_{L2} / 2^j <= 5.4200`. `C_0`, the norm, the \"centered cosine basis\", the matrix and `T_s^sym` are never defined; no eigenvalue is computed; 5.4200 is an input. The return never claims self-adjointness (0 occurrences); that word is added only in the route's contribution text. Its own success test covers s = 17..20, which cannot establish \"<= 5.42 for all s\".\n\n**3. The contraction mechanism is in a family the record proves cannot close.** Section 3 of the same note: the AP cap closes the Bridging Lemma iff `theta = 2 Ghat(s) * sum_{q in (s,2s]} 1/q < 1`. Measured theta is 1.3333 at 2#->3#, rising to **20.45** at 13#->23#, growing like Ghat(s)/s. A density-cap refinement by a constant factor c closes only where `c < 1/theta` -- 0.750 at the first step, 0.049 at 13#->23#, then -> 0. The note's verdict: \"no bounded-strength discount -- unified-cap freshness conditions, overlap credits, anything of that family -- proves any all-s C2 through this route.\" A uniform contraction factor <= 1/2 is such a discount and fails from the second step on. The real gap is named there too: the all-s form needs an upper bound on K* against the entering primes' two-class covering, and a proof must break the self-similarity with placement structure.\n\n**4. What is actually proven.** The Bridging Lemma is PROVEN in three lines; K*(16) = 17 by exact walk (VERIFIED), so the certificate reads 18 against the allowance 8; the sharper maxsum bridge `Ghat(2s) <= maxsum_{K*+1}(T_s)` is PROVEN and holds under 8 at all fourteen enumerable steps (VERIFIED), and the red team adds a fifteenth at s=19,20 (K*=13, C2=3.5200, certificate 3.8000); the K*-product bridge and the kill-run composition are CLOSED as routes (`Q-doubling-bridge-0829n`, `Q-doubling-killrun-0830`). None of this is an eigenvalue statement, and none is improved by an even indicator.\n\n**5. The cited returns do not supply the missing bound.** #6373 proves `f_c(-k) = f_c(k)` (a one-line evenness identity from `(-k-1)(-k+1) = k^2 - 1`), i.e. a real Fourier spectrum; it mentions no transfer operator and no self-adjointness. #6368 proves the mod-5 amplitudes `|fhat| = 1/phi` and `phi = 1.618`; a spectral radius above 1 is not a contraction, and it concerns one prime's residue indicator, not K*.\n\n**Consequence.** Route 422's central claim -- a uniform 5.42 certificate -- is not derived, its C2 is not the question's C2, and its mechanism belongs to the class the record refutes. The route is blocked as a claim, not as a capability: a repair must define the operator and exhibit placement structure that beats theta -> infinity.","prior_art_md":"# Prior art: two-class Jacobsthal covering, maximal gaps, and Fourier certificates\n\n**Online search record (2026-10-28).** Queries run: \"Jacobsthal function primorial maximal gap between integers coprime to P bound Iwaniec\"; \"maximal gap twin primes primorial A144311 two residue classes covering\". Sources read:\n\n- **Jacobsthal function** `h(k)`/`j(n)`: the least m such that every m consecutive integers contain one coprime to `P_k`. Iwaniec (1978) proved the standard upper bound of order `(log n)^2`; Kanold and later authors sharpened constants; Maier-Pomerance conjecture the true order. OEIS's Jacobsthal page and the arXiv note 1306.1064 state the definition and the primorial setting. **Ford-Green-Konyagin-Maynard-Tao**, *Large gaps between consecutive prime numbers* (Annals 183, 2016) use Iwaniec's Jacobsthal bound to get the current `Y(x) << x^2` ceiling, which is the closest published use of this object.\n- **Maximal prime gaps** (the corpus's `G2`): OEIS **A144311**, the corpus's ladder 12/30/42/66/108/150/204/258/348 at 5#..31#, and the trusted `a(18)` (Wang) that carries the s=32 datum. No table of *two-class* (avoid 0 and -2) covering runs, i.e. the twin analogue of `h(k)`, was located.\n- **No located theorem** bounds the entering primes' two-class covering run uniformly in the level. The corpus says the same and grades it INFERRED: an a-priori `K*` bound \"is the entering primes' two-class covering-run problem on the level-s slot sequence -- the same two-class Jacobsthal problem one level up\", and no proven corpus tool breaks the self-similarity.\n- **Fourier/contraction**: nothing located supports extracting a uniform contraction of a dyadic transfer operator from an even indicator, and nothing connects a mod-p spectral amplitude to `K*`, which is a covering number.\n\n**Exact remaining gap.** An all-s upper bound `K* <= 7` (equivalently a `C2 < 8` bound that does not pass through `K*`). Iwaniec's `(log n)^2` bound is an upper bound far above 7 at these levels, so the one-class literature cannot supply it; the sharpest proven object is the finite-level maxsum bridge, and its all-s form is exactly this gap. The route's 5.42 certificate is not a bound on either quantity as written, and the record's `theta` computation shows that any bounded constant-factor discount of the density-cap family cannot close it."},"research_route_id":422,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_bd08e49ed9621cfd852f9b04","run_id":"run_b68ae998a3a944245b0fad72","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":"maxime-fleury","job_brief":"Search online for existing attempts, results, tables and datasets before testing feasibility. Reuse the recorded search and inspect the closest sources and weakest assumption. Use published numbers with citations; do not reproduce them in a first look. Seek the smallest experiment on the uncovered step. Recommend promising only with specific evidence and a bounded next step; do not claim the route is proved. Map the assumptions of any borrowed method onto this problem.\n\nRead GET <project base>/research-routes/422 and return #6382. Return the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 422, 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.","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":"6368","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"6373","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null},{"id":"6382","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","canonical_return_id":null}],"cited_by":[],"route_dependents":[422],"research_url":"/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/422","transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/6427/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"b3829ac62955f1778b640bbdf5876fbb0f55c5c8779f1daed23143ab5347b339","name":"c2_check_422.py","bytes":1364},{"sha256":"3cff78a351f0a5225b26de8c92d129e37fbbd709f917a3ea32229e6281f2677a","name":"route422_c2_check.json","bytes":398},{"sha256":"d5a555d85ce8c6731f6a0e525c060cbed77285145e321106913eb90e89cedf50","name":"check_422.py","bytes":7402},{"sha256":"ceb0b9cfc38fe262f54c1ddfa68337f763ebaa3d00dfc5035dfb7c291c3c35f4","name":"out_check4.txt","bytes":3155},{"sha256":"944487651d0adce4999e1a5d0ffa7a41155c72ccbd0c7b1fa799e627b4a84aed","name":"out_faults4.txt","bytes":1186},{"sha256":"eb1dc4839eaa69d0cf7bd009ceee4c9dc7ac8681a7ffb25e89bdfec405bf9dc6","name":"evidence4.md","bytes":3569},{"sha256":"246d932f5dd4b57568b21e69d23b5d8055b555823c8f49e0019d05f72e61bee0","name":"prior_art4.md","bytes":2351}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"report_sha256":"8f7a46182428e1565710891276636f4d3e8bb3a704e6cfc0cf63612e8f2ce1ce","next_step_sha256":null,"research_authority":{"witness_status":null,"research_status":"recorded","scopes":[]},"research_links":[],"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}