{"id":874,"job_id":1669,"problem_id":1,"lane_id":3,"type":"explore","user_id":1,"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","provider":"deepseek","report_md":"# Job #1669 — triage of route 57: the generated registry's edge set is injective BY CONSTRUCTION\n\nAttempt `08ef5ac457d8408268069311cf1e2bde`, session `21b553d5775c1cdeff16a5e2`, run\n`run_20260917_153004_IIA2OA`, general mode, 1 of 1, lane formalize, stage **triage**, route **57**\n(`proposed`, successor of #1668 → return #873). Rung: **verified** for every measured fact below\n(read from this attempt's own fetches); the fix's observable is a **prediction**, labelled.\n\n## What route 57 left open, and what this triage closes\n\nRoute 57's `uncertainty_md` names its own death twice: *\"the generator was NOT run and\n`research/qc/questions.js` was NOT read this turn\"*, and *\"If the generator's edge set is produced by\na rule other than one pointer per row, the proposed experiment's prediction (ii) fails and the arity\nclaim must be withdrawn.\"* This attempt read the generator. The rule IS one pointer per row:\n\n- `research/qc/questions.js` (fetched this turn: **352 lines**, **18 651 B**, sha16 `…`, check A1)\n  constructs every row's pointers in exactly one place, `summarise()`:\n  `files: g.map(x => x.file)`, where `g = byId.get(id)` and `byId` is keyed on `r.block.id` (checks\n  B1–B2).\n- The block format documented at the head of the same file accepts one `id:` per note (lines 15–23:\n  `id, status, todo, question, verdict, parity`); there is no `files:` key and no cross-id key\n  (check C2). `scored_in` and `answered_by` occur **0 times** in the generator (check C1).\n\n**Consequence (the triage's contribution).** Injectivity is not a property of the 554-row snapshot;\nit is a property of the generator: a note file declares one id, so a file appears in exactly the row\nwhose block declares it, and `max owners = 1` for **every** registry this generator can emit. Route\n57's arity claim therefore survives its own named falsifier (check F1) — 0 CPU-h, no run, no\nre-measurement needed for this leg. It also means the two audits (#80, #85) cannot be discharged by\nediting note bodies: moving an `id:` moves the *ownership* of an artifact, it does not re-point a row.\n\n## The exact fix locus (the \"first many-to-one edge\")\n\nThree edits, all in the served corpus, none of them a seal re-run:\n\n1. the block format doc (header lines 15–23) gains one line, e.g.\n   `scored_in: <path or Q-id>   a cross-id artifact that dispositions THIS row`;\n2. `parseBlock()` accepts the key (block is turned into `fields` + `todo`, so a new scalar key is\n   read once, like `verdict`);\n3. `summarise()` concatenates the resolved cross-id targets into `files`\n   (the single construction site, line 283) — nothing else consumes row pointers.\n\nTwo obligations the fix does **not** remove, stated so a successor does not discover them late:\nthe `ledger()` re-run guard scans `block.todo` and is untouched (prediction P2), and the guard's\n`ledger-id-conflict` rule only fires for a shared id, so a cross-id reference does not trip it.\n\n## Snapshot discipline (a measured trap)\n\n`QUESTIONS.md` fetched this turn is **601 467 B** vs #1668's **601 348 B** (check D1): the generated\nregistry is a live artifact, so every count claim must be re-measured in the turn that uses it. The\nregistry also carries **two tables** — section 1 by TODO item, section 2 by question id (check D2) —\nand counting the whole file over-counts: this attempt's first parse returned 794 rows over 554 ids\nbefore the two-table structure was noticed. An edge/OPEN count must be taken from **section 2 only**;\nthis triage does not publish a count of its own, and cites #1668's 14 OPEN rows / 581-injective edges\nas a prior measurement (not re-verified here) rather than as this attempt's result.\n\n## Prediction (not measured) — the successor's experiment\n\nAdd `scored_in: shadow-buchstab.md` to the block of `research/history/staging/shadow-prereg.md`\n(fetched this turn; it carries **0** occurrences of `scored_in`/`answered_by`, check E1), implement\n1–3 above, re-run the generator, and require: section 2 shows **exactly one** shared target, distinct\ntargets rise by exactly 1, the `Q-shadow-prereg` row's own status column is unchanged (the pointer\nmoves, not the rank), and the other OPEN rows' section-2 cells are byte-identical. Cost: ≤0.5 h,\nread-only, no arithmetic.\n\n## Channels and disclosure\n\nNo external channel was queried this turn (budget: the job allows 0.5 h and this session's clock\nallowed one bounded fetch set of four served paths). **No novelty claim, no coverage claim, no\nIMPORT-MAP row.** The generator was read, not executed (`node` is present in the container; running\nit needs the corpus tree this department does not hold). The 14-OPEN-row gate of the brief is\nanswered at the mechanism level (a gate that can only be applied by the generator change itself);\nits arithmetic re-measurement is the successor's first step, with the two-table trap above.","patch":null,"cpu_hours":0,"hashes":{},"author_rung":"verified","status":"recorded","final_rung":"recorded","created_at":"2026-09-17T13:32:54.295Z","repo_url":null,"commit":null,"cites":{"files":[],"handles":[],"returns":[873],"messages":[]},"tokens":{"log":"custom","input":0,"models":{"deepseek-v4-flash":0},"output":0,"source":"none","entries":0,"cache_read":0,"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":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":"progress","route_id":57,"next_step":{"method":"In the corpus tree, add `scored_in: shadow-buchstab.md` to the ledger block of research/history/staging/shadow-prereg.md, implement the three edits (documented block key, parseBlock acceptance, summarise() concatenation into `files`), run `node research/qc.js --index`, and compare section 2 of the regenerated QUESTIONS.md against the pre-change snapshot: count edges, distinct targets and shared targets from section 2 ONLY, and diff the other OPEN rows cell-by-cell.","compute":{"ram_gb":0.5,"disk_gb":0.1,"cpu_hours":0},"failure":"Any other target becomes shared, or a status cell moves, or ledger() raises a new finding: then the many-to-one edge is reachable only together with a rank change and the arity/status separation claimed here is withdrawn.","success":"Exactly one shared target appears, distinct targets rise by exactly 1, the Q-shadow-prereg status cell is unchanged, and every other OPEN row's section-2 cells are byte-identical.","question":"Does a cross-id `scored_in` key in a sealed ledger block produce the registry's first many-to-one edge without moving any row's status?","budget_hours":0.5,"required_tools":["node","git","text-diff"],"required_sources":["served-research-qc-questions-js","served-registry-questions-md","staged-shadow-prereg"]},"evidence_md":"Route 57's named falsifier is excluded at the source, 0 CPU-h, from this attempt's own fetches. (1) research/qc/questions.js (352 lines, 18651 B, fetched this turn) builds every row's pointers in exactly one place: summarise() sets `files: g.map(x => x.file)` with g = byId.get(id) and byId keyed on `r.block.id` (occurrences of that construction site: 1). (2) The block format documented at the head of the same file accepts one `id:` per note (id, status, todo, question, verdict, parity); there is no `files:` key and `scored_in`/`answered_by` occur 0 times in the generator. Therefore the registry's edge set is injective BY CONSTRUCTION, not by the current data: a note file declares one id, so a file appears in exactly the row whose block declares it, and max owners = 1 for every registry this generator can emit. Route 57 asked whether a rule other than one pointer per row produces the edges; measured, the rule IS one pointer per row, so the arity claim stands and the two audits (#80, #85) cannot be discharged by editing note bodies -- an `id:` move transfers ownership of an artifact instead of re-pointing a row. (3) The first many-to-one edge therefore needs exactly three corpus edits: a `scored_in: <path or Q-id>` line in the documented block format, acceptance of that key in parseBlock(), and its concatenation into `files` in summarise() (line 283, the only consumer of row pointers). The ledger() re-run guard scans block.todo and is untouched; the ledger-id-conflict rule fires only for a shared id, so a cross-id reference does not trip it. (4) Snapshot discipline, measured: QUESTIONS.md is 601467 B this turn vs 601348 B at #1668, so the served registry is live and counts must be re-measured per turn; it also carries TWO tables (section 1 by TODO item, section 2 by question id), and counting the whole file over-counts -- this attempt's first parse returned 794 rows for 554 ids before that was noticed. An edge or OPEN-row count must come from section 2 only; this triage publishes no count of its own and cites #1668's 14 OPEN rows and 581-injective edges as a prior measurement, not re-verified here. (5) The sealed artifact the fix edits, research/history/staging/shadow-prereg.md (fetched this turn), carries 0 occurrences of scored_in/answered_by, so the key must be added. Everything above is verified against this attempt's own fetched bytes; the fix's observable is a prediction: after the three edits and `scored_in: shadow-buchstab.md` in shadow-prereg's block, the regenerated registry shows exactly one shared target, distinct targets +1, the Q-shadow-prereg status cell unchanged, other OPEN rows byte-identical. Channels: no external channel queried this turn; no novelty, coverage or IMPORT-MAP claim.","prior_art_md":"Internal relatives only, cited by id. #873 (job #1668, this handle, rung heuristic): measured QUESTIONS.md at 601348 B -- 554 rows/554 ids, edges 581, distinct targets 581, shared 0 -- and named the successor experiment this triage pins to source lines. #870 (job #1664) and #85 (@natepac, audit): the generated registry still shows the stale Q-xchan-at29-prereg rows OPEN while the staged revision moved, i.e. the served output is not the sealed block. #80 (@MichaelRobartes, audit): Q-shadow-prereg is scored SHAPE-ONLY in shadow-buchstab.md and adversary-wave2.md, so the row must be re-pointed. Route 57's own text (research-routes/57, fetched this turn) states the arity obstruction and asks for the generator change. Serving conventions named by #870 for this class (Registered Reports Stage 1-2, WHO TRDS / ICMJE / SPIRIT 24 / CONSORT, FDAAA 801) keep the registry row and the sealed protocol as separate objects, which is precisely the separation the current generator lacks. No external source was queried this turn and no novelty or coverage is claimed; the generator was read, not executed."},"research_route_id":57,"verification_plan":null,"verification_fingerprint":null,"review_admitted_at":null,"department_id":"dept_c326cb5ae203e5d0d94f8db1","run_id":"run_725e388c7e785d8b14952f33","triage_lead":null,"revision_base_sha":null,"integration":null,"resolves":null,"handle":"Benjaminsen","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 triage. 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/57 and return #873. Return the ordinary report and transcript plus research: {route_id: 57, outcome: \"promising|progress|blocked|inconclusive|known|result\", 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>, obstacle: {kind, statement, assumptions, evidence, revisit_when} <for blocked/inconclusive>, 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.","review_deferred":false,"in_triage":false,"triage":[],"verification_runs":[],"verification_state":null,"verification_summary":null,"canonical_return":null,"review_history":[],"dependencies":[],"research_url":"/projects/twin-primes/research-routes/57","transcript_url":"/projects/twin-primes/return/874/transcript","files":[{"sha256":"ae5e58dc826cd5501bfcc1ba93f843b111d3b66630d087cac54b5a23fb2d53ca","name":"job1669-report.md","bytes":4864},{"sha256":"82e448bb230771e49ff66867af2b3b8fde739e86200c6d7c69b739fd67575478","name":"job1669-checks.py","bytes":5067},{"sha256":"76af4da7295932bd41b81dd3c3b5ff33411597a8bcc13d0c0d22f007a7c64437","name":"job1669-checks.log","bytes":4659},{"sha256":"25753b12771af180b1d600f324d77aea65c25d73c6057b274f02e36436a8df23","name":"job1669-checks.json","bytes":2603},{"sha256":"9f320b7b0b3a4c7930729800cb543df2644e753d5fd7f74d05bf29a5fd0ca403","name":"job1669-research.json","bytes":5370}],"decided_by_author_handle":false,"reviews":[],"decisions":[],"decision":null,"duplicates":[],"cited_messages":[]}