[
  {
    "step": 1132,
    "title": "Inventory source relations behind the SP inputs",
    "question": "Which explicit supplied relations constrain the SP ages and lifespan excesses that the cap leaves undetermined?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "File18 §§2.1.3,3.1,4A.2–4A.4",
      "File51a §8.3",
      "File47 §8.4",
      "File20 §7A.10",
      "C1131 continuation"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T04:56:55.425185+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "C1131:342be9d0c96ff1b6290524df190b12c0e065d492e91ccb546a7841edd5f72f01",
    "results": {
      "relation_inventory": {
        "path": "model/source_relation_inventory.json",
        "sha256": "66f58b98e2c90a3596f86253eb2bc7d5563086f6cc4f844d80343b97a316e1c4",
        "bytes": 1106
      },
      "candidate_families": 5
    },
    "finding": "Explicit source relations constrain the age packet beyond the cap: two half/equality relations and the first-five460 total. Methuselah has a source Flood equation; Lamech753 remains supplied despite supporting differences.",
    "reassessment": "Freeze one joint age-variable model and determine exactly what these relations recover.",
    "checks": {
      "five_roles": true,
      "prior_step": true,
      "actual_relation": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T04:56:55.425960+00:00",
    "sha256": "86bbc080b541650c4f980843e678e6771d29004b41496983831e3ef305bef0b3"
  },
  {
    "step": 1133,
    "title": "Form the joint SP age constraints",
    "question": "How many free age coordinates remain after the explicit source relations and inherited cap equations?",
    "inputs": {
      "variables": [
        "Adam",
        "Seth",
        "Enosh",
        "Kenan",
        "Mahalalel",
        "Jared",
        "Enoch",
        "Methuselah",
        "Lamech"
      ]
    },
    "sources": [
      "C1132",
      "File18 §3.1",
      "File51a §8.3"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T04:57:51.938865+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "86bbc080b541650c4f980843e678e6771d29004b41496983831e3ef305bef0b3",
    "results": {
      "age_constraints": {
        "path": "model/SP_age_constraints.json",
        "sha256": "a424c44212d21411e61116d36dad64234cf5602e9c4578c3989ac79f8ab308fd",
        "bytes": 1226
      },
      "rank": 6,
      "free_coordinates": 3
    },
    "finding": "The six retained relations have rank6 on nine ages, leaving three free coordinates. They reduce the local input model without uniquely recovering the whole age sequence.",
    "reassessment": "Describe the three remaining freedoms explicitly to see which source values are still needed.",
    "checks": {
      "all_source_equations": true,
      "rank6": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T04:57:51.941254+00:00",
    "sha256": "8864da50f84957f28dd0b217d4758a05a60155c6269126a2de444e9ec7d449dd"
  },
  {
    "step": 1134,
    "title": "Parametrize the unresolved age family",
    "question": "What does every age sequence satisfying the six retained constraints look like?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1133"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T04:57:53.877062+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "8864da50f84957f28dd0b217d4758a05a60155c6269126a2de444e9ec7d449dd",
    "results": {
      "parametrization": {
        "path": "model/SP_age_parametrization.json",
        "sha256": "de7e3be7439f8607d97083bb28d39c658f2d44e702d9f70cc9e47c15a0f2128f",
        "bytes": 646
      },
      "source_parameters": [
        65,
        105,
        70
      ]
    },
    "finding": "All solutions are controlled by the shared65 scale and two interior ages. Adam and Jared follow from that scale; Enosh follows from the460 total and the two retained interior ages. This is conditional reconstruction, not proof of historical choice.",
    "reassessment": "Identify how the same three freedoms appear in birth positions and the Flood-cap output.",
    "checks": {
      "source_recovered": true,
      "base_satisfies": true,
      "directions_in_kernel": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T04:57:53.878280+00:00",
    "sha256": "b2790ff9aae211a4d219ef7b6c5d3f8f8810e89e00c883bd0ccc02574e36cbf4"
  },
  {
    "step": 1135,
    "title": "Track the remaining freedoms through source positions",
    "question": "Which birth coordinates can change while the newly constrained age relations remain true?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1134",
      "C954",
      "C972"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T04:57:55.829384+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "b2790ff9aae211a4d219ef7b6c5d3f8f8810e89e00c883bd0ccc02574e36cbf4",
    "results": {
      "birth_directions": {
        "path": "model/SP_unresolved_birth_directions.json",
        "sha256": "06c8549a24f007d713d04909118201f454eefd03e7b5188a2463cfbf41972610",
        "bytes": 595
      },
      "changing_row_indices": [
        1,
        2,
        3,
        4,
        6
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The unresolved source freedom changes internal births while retaining Adam and Jared positions, Methuselah and Lamech positions, and the named active cap capacities. The460 source total fixes a whole segment but not its interior.",
    "reassessment": "Determine whether ordinary positivity and the active cap support reduce the remaining65-scale freedom.",
    "checks": {
      "Adam_fixed": true,
      "Jared_fixed": true,
      "late_caps_fixed": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T04:57:55.830283+00:00",
    "sha256": "5a2a665e36a8137b9bf2674812de2b4b1f5054f600b737c2e13369b28a788e7f"
  },
  {
    "step": 1136,
    "title": "Bound the residual age freedom by the whole cap",
    "question": "Do positivity and all nine cap inequalities identify the shared age scale?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1134–C1135",
      "File18 §3.1.3"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T04:59:16.095938+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "5a2a665e36a8137b9bf2674812de2b4b1f5054f600b737c2e13369b28a788e7f",
    "results": {
      "inequality_model": {
        "path": "model/SP_age_cap_inequalities.json",
        "sha256": "3bc99eb9d464d5649ce7756d19131a50985dbb4272fa69301647bc5b2bbbee5e",
        "bytes": 980
      },
      "integer_scale_range": [
        48,
        126
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The full cap permits a broad positive-age scale interval; explicit alternatives at48 and126 retain every capped lifespan. Its source value65 needs additional information.",
    "reassessment": "Test the source-motivated five-year grid and observed early-age order with65 retained.",
    "checks": {
      "all_positive": true,
      "same_nine_outputs": true,
      "bounds_witnessed": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T04:59:16.096334+00:00",
    "sha256": "254450843608614814d7abfc56d2ac74743931bae98a70746a904053f0d2d435"
  },
  {
    "step": 1137,
    "title": "Test whether the early rounded grid fixes the interior",
    "question": "Do the first-five460 total, retained65 scale, five-year grid and descending order recover105,90,70?",
    "inputs": {
      "scale": 65,
      "grid": 5,
      "order": "130>Seth>Enosh>Kenan>65"
    },
    "sources": [
      "C1134",
      "File51a §8.3",
      "File18 §3.1"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T04:59:18.031789+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "254450843608614814d7abfc56d2ac74743931bae98a70746a904053f0d2d435",
    "results": {
      "early_grid_fibre": {
        "path": "model/SP_early_grid_fibre.json",
        "sha256": "fe333c9392687892aa535da1858fa1fb571bf4bb53e83babb93ea0a5c4aa94b6",
        "bytes": 606
      },
      "solutions": [
        [
          95,
          90,
          80
        ],
        [
          100,
          85,
          80
        ],
        [
          100,
          90,
          75
        ],
        [
          100,
          95,
          70
        ],
        [
          105,
          85,
          75
        ],
        [
          105,
          90,
          70
        ],
        [
          110,
          80,
          75
        ],
        [
          110,
          85,
          70
        ],
        [
          115,
          80,
          70
        ],
        [
          120,
          75,
          70
        ]
      ],
      "count": 10
    },
    "finding": "The natural five-year grid and strict early-age order still permit multiple internal allocations. The actual105,90,70 is retained as source data rather than forced by460 and65.",
    "reassessment": "Determine how much one extra internal source age would identify within this complete bounded family.",
    "checks": {
      "actual_included": true,
      "nonunique": true,
      "all_admitted_conditions": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T04:59:18.032137+00:00",
    "sha256": "3c8b70efa17b90eb864db0ad36fbe3d9f2df0cf3c60d894a96ad3a268bc6a808"
  },
  {
    "step": 1138,
    "title": "Locate the remaining source information in the grid family",
    "question": "Which single retained interior age, if any, identifies the printed sequence?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1137"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T04:59:19.977741+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "3c8b70efa17b90eb864db0ad36fbe3d9f2df0cf3c60d894a96ad3a268bc6a808",
    "results": {
      "single_age_fibres": {
        "path": "model/SP_grid_single_measurements.json",
        "sha256": "a71a44cba2970798613a05ef054fc169c326a4f021b63764c9a30ec17d4e5e7a",
        "bytes": 482
      },
      "counts": {
        "Seth": 2,
        "Enosh": 3,
        "Kenan": 5
      },
      "rejected_hypothesis": "Enosh90 alone was tested for uniqueness; it leaves3 candidates"
    },
    "finding": "Each single source age leaves multiple grid allocations: Seth105 leaves2, Enosh90 leaves3, and Kenan70 leaves5. The tested single-age uniqueness hypothesis fails even within the selected grid/order conditions.",
    "reassessment": "Compare finite-grid identification with an unrestricted rational source-coordinate basis.",
    "checks": {
      "all_retain_source": true,
      "every_single_age_nonunique": true,
      "Kenan_nonunique": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T04:59:56.337408+00:00",
    "sha256": "05821410403fa1634cce07779b1bdd92fd33b84002b618f002f1a89a885432f7"
  },
  {
    "step": 1139,
    "title": "Complete the age reconstruction with a stated source basis",
    "question": "Which retained source coordinates close the unconstrained linear age model?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1133–C1134",
      "File18 §3.1"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T04:59:58.322531+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "05821410403fa1634cce07779b1bdd92fd33b84002b618f002f1a89a885432f7",
    "results": {
      "age_basis": {
        "path": "model/SP_age_basis_completion.json",
        "sha256": "b4a86d46e1fe491032030e01dbd19b5f4be75570e41dd6ec824d20c3883fe9de",
        "bytes": 1248
      },
      "rank": 9,
      "reconstructed": [
        130,
        105,
        90,
        70,
        65,
        62,
        65,
        67,
        52
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The shared65 age and two interior ages provide an exact full-rank reconstruction after the six stated relations are retained. The distinction between a rational model and a bounded grid explains their different identification costs.",
    "reassessment": "Audit the full input cost so reverse cap recovery is not counted as a new independent source explanation.",
    "checks": {
      "full_rank": true,
      "actual_recovered": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T04:59:58.331325+00:00",
    "sha256": "2380f5ec86d29a6854949064dffb7d07a6b59091aaa7cdb5ba3ee7bb8ed6b3bf"
  },
  {
    "step": 1140,
    "title": "Separate source constraints from reverse measurement",
    "question": "Does the age parametrization reduce the whole source packet or only one conditional representation?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1133–C1139",
      "Strategy §§5B,5D,6"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:00:00.333747+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "2380f5ec86d29a6854949064dffb7d07a6b59091aaa7cdb5ba3ee7bb8ed6b3bf",
    "results": {
      "information_cost": {
        "path": "model/SP_age_information_cost.json",
        "sha256": "53203ef61c17ad91efec986f1a744f660ce0ee9fefaa08f0b9722ad688850f5e",
        "bytes": 729
      },
      "source_age_constraints": 3,
      "conditional_cap_constraints": 3
    },
    "finding": "The age analysis supplies a useful reconstruction order, but cap values must be counted when used backward. The genuinely additional source-age structure is the two half/equality relations and the460 total; the chosen interior ages remain unexplained.",
    "reassessment": "Examine whether the source Methuselah-Flood equation explains a baseline lifespan discarded by the SP cap.",
    "checks": {
      "sources_and_measurements_separate": true,
      "circularity_explicit": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:00:00.334060+00:00",
    "sha256": "d44bf2c454695014a0e0010d0429f8faf8b3c9533faddd099a47fe390600e4c6"
  },
  {
    "step": 1141,
    "title": "Recover the Methuselah baseline from its source death relation",
    "question": "Can a retained MT/LXX local birth chain account for the lifespan discarded by SP clipping?",
    "inputs": {
      "MT_Methuselah_begetting": 187,
      "MT_Lamech_begetting": 182,
      "Noah_to_Flood": 600
    },
    "sources": [
      "File18 §4A.2",
      "C1140"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:01:13.681536+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "d44bf2c454695014a0e0010d0429f8faf8b3c9533faddd099a47fe390600e4c6",
    "results": {
      "baseline_constraint": {
        "path": "model/Methuselah_baseline_constraint.json",
        "sha256": "3e0ae70dac9acb4008d9ddabe4369fad9fe0a997274246020ac165e5ecee9f9e",
        "bytes": 319
      },
      "life": 969,
      "discarded_excess": 249
    },
    "finding": "The supplied MT/LXX death-at-Flood condition recovers969 from187,182 and600, hence the249 excess above SP720. This connects traditions through a local condition while retaining its three source inputs.",
    "reassessment": "Derive the249 difference directly from the two begetting changes and the inclusive convention.",
    "checks": {
      "source_life": true,
      "SP_distinct": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:01:13.682329+00:00",
    "sha256": "7ea00029d18b2382ac5c698c75cc2a8abfde668eff8e0c5095d7df061fad15ed"
  },
  {
    "step": 1142,
    "title": "Explain the Methuselah249 reduction by local changes",
    "question": "Which pieces of the retained source shift produce249 rather than250?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1141",
      "File18 §§2.1.3,3.1"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:01:15.642695+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "7ea00029d18b2382ac5c698c75cc2a8abfde668eff8e0c5095d7df061fad15ed",
    "results": {
      "local_reduction": {
        "path": "model/Methuselah_reduction_decomposition.json",
        "sha256": "9613acc437399d19ecf7d394e9e7031aab6d0633eac1ad3bb00846c643bcb5fc",
        "bytes": 299
      },
      "reduction": 249
    },
    "finding": "The249 reduction is120+130−1: two local age changes and one count-convention difference. Using the ordinal53 label gives129 at that stage, but the completed52 primary path must not receive a second correction.",
    "reassessment": "Place all nine ancestral rows on the same capacity-and-slack comparison.",
    "checks": {
      "exact_reduction": true,
      "same_primary_count": true,
      "ordinal_identity": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:01:15.642998+00:00",
    "sha256": "e9b892f41e1032aae886ae8f4f531d760f84364db14ed4785ea813d2e7d627fc"
  },
  {
    "step": 1143,
    "title": "Express the SP changes as capacity reductions against baseline slack",
    "question": "Does one positive-part formula explain all three clipped rows and the six unchanged lives?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "File18 §§2.1.3,3.1.3",
      "C1142",
      "C953–C970"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:01:17.628424+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "e9b892f41e1032aae886ae8f4f531d760f84364db14ed4785ea813d2e7d627fc",
    "results": {
      "slack_transfer": {
        "path": "model/SP_capacity_slack_transfer.json",
        "sha256": "7f737584f8e0dd53f2a57af2a4fa39e337666e91bbc66594a19bc6f82f4d2e25",
        "bytes": 696
      },
      "capacity_reductions": [
        350,
        350,
        350,
        350,
        350,
        350,
        250,
        250,
        130
      ],
      "slack": [
        727,
        615,
        517,
        422,
        367,
        235,
        670,
        1,
        6
      ],
      "life_reductions": [
        0,
        0,
        0,
        0,
        0,
        115,
        0,
        249,
        124
      ]
    },
    "finding": "A single threshold law generates the whole SP reduction field: only capacity loss exceeding pre-existing baseline slack reduces a life. Jared crosses by115, Methuselah by249, Lamech by124; the other six retain slack.",
    "reassessment": "Separate the role of age-change location from its total350 capacity reduction.",
    "checks": {
      "three_reductions": true,
      "sum488": true,
      "identity_all_rows": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:01:17.628747+00:00",
    "sha256": "1c1f33cefd0a72109baa242258edbdd5270e953b81cf795d342e13f5ff66af3c"
  },
  {
    "step": 1144,
    "title": "Locate each capacity-loss step in the genealogy",
    "question": "Why does a shared350 loss affect some rows differently and shrink downstream?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1143",
      "File18 §§2.1.3,3.1"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:01:19.587532+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "1c1f33cefd0a72109baa242258edbdd5270e953b81cf795d342e13f5ff66af3c",
    "results": {
      "step_locations": {
        "path": "model/SP_capacity_step_locations.json",
        "sha256": "d66ca2af1e2770ef2b872ecf735a4a81562fedba81a4977961c395fd244f7c70",
        "bytes": 544
      },
      "local_losses": [
        0,
        0,
        0,
        0,
        0,
        100,
        0,
        120,
        130
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The350 loss is the cumulative effect of three located changes100,120,130. Its downstream levels350,250,130 follow their positions, so the complete cap response depends on an ordered source change vector, not just its total.",
    "reassessment": "Test whether moving a fixed loss to a different source row preserves the cap output.",
    "checks": {
      "exact_locations": true,
      "sum350": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:01:19.587855+00:00",
    "sha256": "d7b2958392e95807f694515f8f7cb54498944e3a67e9e7b8703b62576c957078"
  },
  {
    "step": 1145,
    "title": "Test the information carried by loss placement",
    "question": "Can an unchanged total350 produce a different complete lifespan field?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1144",
      "Strategy §6"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:01:21.560110+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "d7b2958392e95807f694515f8f7cb54498944e3a67e9e7b8703b62576c957078",
    "results": {
      "placement_counterexample": {
        "path": "model/SP_loss_placement_counterexample.json",
        "sha256": "761b4d186e53aa9ba06e42fd3cd7c00d5e751ac739537c9ce31c982bbaa7ac73",
        "bytes": 940
      },
      "lifespan_difference": [
        0,
        0,
        0,
        0,
        0,
        0,
        0,
        20,
        0
      ]
    },
    "finding": "A diagnostic exchange of100 and120 preserves the outer350 loss but changes Methuselah’s capped life by20. The source locations carry explanatory information that an endpoint total discards.",
    "reassessment": "Determine which baseline lifespan relations the new threshold explanation still leaves unresolved.",
    "checks": {
      "same_total": true,
      "positive_ages": true,
      "field_changes": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:01:21.560504+00:00",
    "sha256": "20e5bbe87d8b2ec5c9b0f6dd1eab3f2a9d077d7ae1836e35f804a6c1db0d19de"
  },
  {
    "step": 1146,
    "title": "Classify the remaining baseline-life explanations",
    "question": "Which existing source relations identify a discarded excess, and which merely re-express supplied biography?",
    "inputs": {
      "source_inventory_sha256": "35f1150e6b9cd4e43fb4f8c2dbfae942535014f2f0dbde5c2f6ee81f46e3db25"
    },
    "sources": [
      "prep/sp_source_relations.md",
      "File51a §3.4",
      "File18 §4A",
      "File17 §§8.1,12.1"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:02:51.096352+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "20e5bbe87d8b2ec5c9b0f6dd1eab3f2a9d077d7ae1836e35f804a6c1db0d19de",
    "results": {
      "baseline_status": {
        "path": "model/baseline_explanation_status.json",
        "sha256": "54e0af53e6738024ef0b04038ba931ad897a5ea2ae2d8886c6c457ee6ac9e2da",
        "bytes": 703
      }
    },
    "finding": "Methuselah has an explicit local alignment equation. Jared and MT Lamech can be recovered from their retained biography components. Calculated LXX571 cannot independently explain753, and the prophetic complement requires a separate inferred identification.",
    "reassessment": "Test the relational content of the complete777/753/653 Lamech triple without assigning historical priority.",
    "checks": {
      "Jared": true,
      "Methuselah": true,
      "Lamech": true,
      "source753": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:02:51.096619+00:00",
    "sha256": "e8d4d65c7178e7e3c157480d940486332bde218ebb7c028e84582267395231f3"
  },
  {
    "step": 1147,
    "title": "Measure the information in the Lamech triple",
    "question": "What do the two stated differences24 and100 determine about the three source lives?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "File18 §4A.4",
      "C1146"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:02:53.034995+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "e8d4d65c7178e7e3c157480d940486332bde218ebb7c028e84582267395231f3",
    "results": {
      "triple_constraints": {
        "path": "model/Lamech_triple_constraints.json",
        "sha256": "61fae319a4c2351f7e4ee251e9cc765554e0854c54013fb75e77ca26e72cd598",
        "bytes": 504
      },
      "rank": 2,
      "common_translation_freedom": true
    },
    "finding": "The24 and100 relations fix two differences but leave a common lifespan translation free. Holding653 reconstructs753 and777 conditionally; the124 comparison follows and adds no third independent relation.",
    "reassessment": "Translate the cap result into remaining-year measurements to connect it to conserved-lifespan repartition.",
    "checks": {
      "equations": true,
      "rank2": true,
      "dependent124": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:02:53.035593+00:00",
    "sha256": "6e905d94afa3118dc8308177d7329dba5d45db7abc05ff5066a08f147d6d4bd3"
  },
  {
    "step": 1148,
    "title": "Express the clipped rows in begetting and remainder coordinates",
    "question": "How do the three SP lifespan changes split between birth intervals and remaining years?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "File18 §§2.1.3,3.1",
      "C1143"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:02:55.001486+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "6e905d94afa3118dc8308177d7329dba5d45db7abc05ff5066a08f147d6d4bd3",
    "results": {
      "clipped_row_decomposition": {
        "path": "model/SP_clipped_row_decomposition.json",
        "sha256": "ec2429915a537f5878593c1d589d17cbcc927e5285357521d3a43bfad7a7e0db",
        "bytes": 684
      },
      "MT_remainders": [
        800,
        782,
        595
      ],
      "SP_algebraic_remainders": [
        785,
        653,
        601
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The changes split as Jared−100/−15, Methuselah−120/−129 and Lamech−130/−124 in begetting/remainder coordinates. Both components can change when life is clipped, unlike a conserved-lifespan repartition.",
    "reassessment": "Ask which shared Flood-boundary relations survive this change of row coordinates.",
    "checks": {
      "row_identity": true,
      "remaining_counts": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:02:55.001984+00:00",
    "sha256": "f9d63eae7e0a11f77170e6ca8df64adfd119bb5792702e8dc1fb87592bd12053"
  },
  {
    "step": 1149,
    "title": "Derive adjacent-cap remainder relations",
    "question": "When does a clipped ancestor’s remaining count equal the next capacity or next lifespan?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1148",
      "File18 §3.1.3"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:02:56.980369+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "f9d63eae7e0a11f77170e6ca8df64adfd119bb5792702e8dc1fb87592bd12053",
    "results": {
      "adjacent_cap_relations": {
        "path": "model/SP_cap_remainder_relations.json",
        "sha256": "6c303c3e35f6e67041ad8bb85aff9b5d33d0bc089a1ef7c4e918d56cbce80f9d",
        "bytes": 598
      }
    },
    "finding": "A clipped row’s algebraic remainder equals the next capacity. Adjacent clipped rows therefore share a remainder/life equality; across uncapped Enoch the equality is with capacity785, leaving the actual365 distinct.",
    "reassessment": "Use this source-local distinction to formulate a compact connection from the SP mechanism to the wider row grammar.",
    "checks": {
      "all_capacity_equalities": true,
      "Methuselah_Lamech": true,
      "Enoch_capacity_not_life": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:02:56.980779+00:00",
    "sha256": "14e8b41dd604a1f53ec2eb334e71df92666b483ddcc7f1422a1f687083c580f9"
  },
  {
    "step": 1150,
    "title": "State what the SP source analysis has explained",
    "question": "What positive connection can now replace the open-ended search for every individual age?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1132–C1149",
      "Strategy §§1,5B,6",
      "selection_audit review message"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:03:28.159114+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "14e8b41dd604a1f53ec2eb334e71df92666b483ddcc7f1422a1f687083c580f9",
    "results": {
      "SP_explanatory_note": {
        "path": "deliverables/SP_Source_Choices_Interim.md",
        "sha256": "f8d6c70379638fc4ee9356e646f96993e7c07f1f834340eeef4018446b5f6c65",
        "bytes": 2431
      },
      "C1139_clarification": "No retained-coordinate-count advantage established for the actual grid tuple; both models use scale plus two interior ages."
    },
    "finding": "The SP investigation has a bounded explanatory result: source age relations plus a located capacity-loss/slack law. Unresolved individual ages remain explicit, and the next constructive extension is the post-Flood component structure.",
    "reassessment": "Adopt the complete post-Flood source packet and identify a common row-operation basis.",
    "checks": {
      "grid_clarification": true,
      "count_guard": true,
      "constructive_next": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:03:28.159395+00:00",
    "sha256": "e7db3cf2531fe79a4aed41d745280b7f1db92fd36fb7d12eeed86060c02e035b"
  },
  {
    "step": 1151,
    "title": "Adopt the complete post-Flood relational packet",
    "question": "Which full ordered source field will test the extension beyond Flood clipping?",
    "inputs": {
      "packet_sha256": "514d9bb85d0b0da636197a33c50f6bf8c6da5474cf425eb9500f8f95b8f5e23c"
    },
    "sources": [
      "File18 §§2.2,3.2.1,4.2",
      "prep/postflood_source_packets.md"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:05:26.981874+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "e7db3cf2531fe79a4aed41d745280b7f1db92fd36fb7d12eeed86060c02e035b",
    "results": {
      "postflood_rows": {
        "path": "model/postflood_rows.json",
        "sha256": "a0ff44bb5f3bc7719a261916b06d853f671442e15a331d688ac3ad20fc60d426",
        "bytes": 6240
      },
      "rows": 28
    },
    "finding": "The complete28-row source packet preserves native Cainan, SP officialTerah145, corrected LXX339/339/330 and calculated-remainder provenance. It provides a fixed family for testing shared component constraints.",
    "reassessment": "Define a unique two-component row-change basis and distinguish its conserved quantities.",
    "checks": {
      "all28_literal_rows": true,
      "exact_literals": true,
      "compatible_rows": true,
      "native_Cainan": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:05:26.983636+00:00",
    "sha256": "731e1fafe20b5587b7c54c21c4162c828a3197779174ad97481cf2c0cd0c4166"
  },
  {
    "step": 1152,
    "title": "Define the row-operation basis",
    "question": "Can every compatible change in begetting, remainder and lifespan be written with two explicit operations?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "Strategy §§3.2,5B",
      "C1151"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:05:28.953365+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "731e1fafe20b5587b7c54c21c4162c828a3197779174ad97481cf2c0cd0c4166",
    "results": {
      "row_basis": {
        "path": "model/row_operation_basis.json",
        "sha256": "d5890c1fc31751f0260af97c1b982841593fe6ecf28fd42cf503922eb04be8e2",
        "bytes": 385
      },
      "basis_matrix": [
        [
          1,
          0
        ],
        [
          -1,
          1
        ],
        [
          0,
          1
        ]
      ],
      "rank": 2
    },
    "finding": "Two row operations describe every compatible source change uniquely: transfer between begetting and remainder while preserving life, then change remainder and life together while preserving begetting. Their equal-amplitude combination preserves remainder.",
    "reassessment": "Place the complete post-Flood inter-tradition changes in this basis.",
    "checks": {
      "rank2": true,
      "compatibility": true,
      "integer_recovery": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:05:28.954071+00:00",
    "sha256": "b2bace0b362b12ce38bac81c85f32a17a9465b57fd5a114378f13746ff789d9d"
  },
  {
    "step": 1153,
    "title": "Encode every post-Flood row change in the common basis",
    "question": "Does the same pair of operations cover the entire source packet including its exceptions?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1151–C1152"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:05:30.957301+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "b2bace0b362b12ce38bac81c85f32a17a9465b57fd5a114378f13746ff789d9d",
    "results": {
      "complete_operations": {
        "path": "model/postflood_row_operations.json",
        "sha256": "ce50515189f1475e712c55d19ed24a1ae8404803ccad6213e8e4cd37e227799b",
        "bytes": 1809
      },
      "rows": 18,
      "operation_pairs": [
        [
          0,
          -60
        ],
        [
          0,
          0
        ],
        [
          50,
          0
        ],
        [
          50,
          60
        ],
        [
          100,
          -60
        ],
        [
          100,
          0
        ],
        [
          100,
          27
        ],
        [
          100,
          40
        ],
        [
          100,
          100
        ]
      ]
    },
    "finding": "All18 shared-row transformations fit the same R/A basis. The exceptional Eber,Nahor andTerah rows receive explicit source coefficients; they are not hidden inside a uniform-century claim.",
    "reassessment": "Test whether three shared amplitudes generate those located coefficients across the whole packet.",
    "checks": {
      "all18_rows": true,
      "remainder_identity": true,
      "matched_order": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:05:30.957848+00:00",
    "sha256": "37cace2dd1c94d4e1a07dcee983e9824695317f18990906f0bb36188f313fa4d"
  },
  {
    "step": 1154,
    "title": "Construct the shared-amplitude post-Flood dictionary",
    "question": "Can the located operations be generated by one century, one sixty and one early-life increment?",
    "inputs": {
      "amplitudes": [
        "u=100",
        "t=60",
        "a=27"
      ]
    },
    "sources": [
      "C1153",
      "prep/postflood_source_packets.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:05:32.938107+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "37cace2dd1c94d4e1a07dcee983e9824695317f18990906f0bb36188f313fa4d",
    "results": {
      "amplitude_dictionary": {
        "path": "model/postflood_amplitude_dictionary.json",
        "sha256": "3bba40cef2d38a6ebc31e2206c567e328bd0cf20b85aeff0f4f44daaf4a57d98",
        "bytes": 3645
      },
      "rank": 3,
      "outputs": 36
    },
    "finding": "The whole36-coordinate change packet lies in a rank3 source-labelled model with amplitudes100,60,27. Repeated changes share parameters, but their named supports remain part of the description.",
    "reassessment": "Determine which observations actually recover the three amplitudes.",
    "checks": {
      "all36_match": true,
      "rank3": true,
      "fixed_labels": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:05:32.940128+00:00",
    "sha256": "0666e23e6864cca5bc4b8468aff3939593d7bbf1c6892cdb856077aa121ce062"
  },
  {
    "step": 1155,
    "title": "Recover amplitudes from a minimal local observation set",
    "question": "Which three source differences identify the shared dictionary parameters?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1154"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:05:34.895543+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "0666e23e6864cca5bc4b8468aff3939593d7bbf1c6892cdb856077aa121ce062",
    "results": {
      "local_parameter_recovery": {
        "path": "model/postflood_local_parameter_recovery.json",
        "sha256": "a9277fb71ba857920e95d12af2670e7b6193a9dea00ee394681db9ee7fc7761c",
        "bytes": 419
      },
      "parameters": [
        100,
        60,
        27
      ]
    },
    "finding": "One century begetting difference, the officialTerah lifespan difference and one early LXX life difference recover all three amplitudes. Other rows test the already fitted support pattern rather than introducing new parameter values.",
    "reassessment": "Compare the information visible through regular and cumulative measurements.",
    "checks": {
      "nonsingular": true,
      "source_parameters": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:05:34.897343+00:00",
    "sha256": "c8402be74a1f7ac70bf6a92f2cb858a11aa60ca518663193b66dfae2f1a63dc0"
  },
  {
    "step": 1156,
    "title": "Compare regular and cumulative parameter visibility",
    "question": "Which parts of the shared source change are invisible in each chronological measurement?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1154",
      "Strategy §§3.1–3.2"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:06:33.814096+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "c8402be74a1f7ac70bf6a92f2cb858a11aa60ca518663193b66dfae2f1a63dc0",
    "results": {
      "projection_visibility": {
        "path": "model/postflood_projection_visibility.json",
        "sha256": "817997b009590c22ea121ef6263e5a8436ee996461cd9bcca741b2ace15aa4c8",
        "bytes": 325
      },
      "ranks": [
        1,
        1,
        3
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The same source dictionary has different visible information in each mode: regular ages see only100, SP life differences only60, and the full LXX life field sees all three amplitudes. This explains aligned births alongside different cumulative structures.",
    "reassessment": "Determine what is lost when the complete lifespan fields are reduced to their outer totals.",
    "checks": {
      "regular_rank1": true,
      "SP_rank1": true,
      "LXX_rank3": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:06:33.815633+00:00",
    "sha256": "4e9e9de42a5705d07cf11386ff8e4107dc9d1f0be22400d62d6c8f982abb0702"
  },
  {
    "step": 1157,
    "title": "Measure amplitude information retained by whole totals",
    "question": "Which source parameters disappear when the ordered fields are summed?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1156",
      "C1154"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:06:35.768282+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "4e9e9de42a5705d07cf11386ff8e4107dc9d1f0be22400d62d6c8f982abb0702",
    "results": {
      "total_measurements": {
        "path": "model/postflood_total_measurements.json",
        "sha256": "005cfbe0c33d8d6f5d03d6b178ed8e0afbed34a7a74e61b900ddbf64faf729c6",
        "bytes": 303
      },
      "measurement_rows": [
        [
          "13/2",
          0,
          0
        ],
        [
          0,
          -2,
          0
        ],
        [
          4,
          0,
          2
        ]
      ],
      "life_total_rank": 2
    },
    "finding": "The totals are6.5u,−2t and4u+2a. The two lifespan totals have rank2 and cannot separateu froma; LXX’s total also cancels its two opposite t contributions. Ordered rows preserve information absent from their sum.",
    "reassessment": "Ask whether combining regular and cumulative outer totals recovers the amplitudes under fixed source supports.",
    "checks": {
      "source_totals": true,
      "rank2": true,
      "LXX_t_cancels": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:06:35.769395+00:00",
    "sha256": "6a10c0ed74a9fae805423668d389edb8f841662314c1a5634befa12a0db0d494"
  },
  {
    "step": 1158,
    "title": "Recover the shared amplitudes from complementary totals",
    "question": "Do the regular and two cumulative totals jointly determine the fixed-support model?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1157"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:06:37.725513+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "6a10c0ed74a9fae805423668d389edb8f841662314c1a5634befa12a0db0d494",
    "results": {
      "total_parameter_recovery": {
        "path": "model/postflood_total_parameter_recovery.json",
        "sha256": "b7cbee8e9ee57c6f28bdf47561a51e5ccc5813084a78f29fef11b3d65d7a2bc1",
        "bytes": 377
      },
      "determinant": -26,
      "parameters": [
        100,
        60,
        27
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The three complementary totals recover100,60,27 exactly within the fixed-support model. Their success depends on the located source patterns; totals alone cannot justify that pattern.",
    "reassessment": "Demonstrate the source-location information that this recovery still requires.",
    "checks": {
      "rank3": true,
      "exact_parameters": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:06:37.726117+00:00",
    "sha256": "7b52f76db894d11394f9f52d3119c028bce24c704f7cd639ba1e3d93e1003c68"
  },
  {
    "step": 1159,
    "title": "Separate amplitude recovery from row-support recovery",
    "question": "Can the same total data conceal a different internal life field?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1158",
      "Strategy §6"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:06:39.714292+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "7b52f76db894d11394f9f52d3119c028bce24c704f7cd639ba1e3d93e1003c68",
    "results": {
      "support_counterexample": {
        "path": "model/postflood_support_counterexample.json",
        "sha256": "653291f11ca05bc926527501af839c04f4434d5a277eb033ea4c686ca8d3acd6",
        "bytes": 582
      },
      "same_total": 454
    },
    "finding": "Exchanging the27 and40 increments at Arphaxad andEber preserves454 and every regular age while changing two lives and an internal cumulative boundary. The complete source support therefore remains essential.",
    "reassessment": "Examine the repeated early remainder block as a source relation within that support.",
    "checks": {
      "total_preserved": true,
      "field_not_preserved": true,
      "valid_numeric_rows": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:06:39.714807+00:00",
    "sha256": "b0c402f508bcf70e02cd771527ab5abb72a160bce182f960c7c07a2bb8090bba"
  },
  {
    "step": 1160,
    "title": "Identify the complete early remainder block",
    "question": "What common row relation joins Arphaxad andShelah across the three traditions?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1151",
      "File18 §§2.2,3.2.1,4.2"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:06:41.676267+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "b0c402f508bcf70e02cd771527ab5abb72a160bce182f960c7c07a2bb8090bba",
    "results": {
      "early_remainder_block": {
        "path": "model/postflood_early_remainder_block.json",
        "sha256": "23053bb32fd37dee359f22da33f10026d82015860d95b4f10fc261847999bd8e",
        "bytes": 721
      },
      "remainder_values": {
        "MT_native_OFF": 403,
        "SP_native_OFF_official145": 303,
        "LXX_native_ON": 330
      }
    },
    "finding": "Each tradition preserves an equal-remainder Arphaxad/Shelah pair:403,303 or330. Their five-year begetting difference is matched by a five-year lifespan difference. This is a relational block carried through both measurements.",
    "reassessment": "Determine how many independent coordinates describe the complete cross-tradition early block.",
    "checks": {
      "equal_remainders": true,
      "paired_five": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:06:41.676830+00:00",
    "sha256": "cbc38bfdd4e7cba2500964e564f96ab93ba9f2f691d4656d78e4613642ebf186"
  },
  {
    "step": 1161,
    "title": "Parametrize the early six-row source block",
    "question": "How much of the Arphaxad/Shelah field follows from equal remainders and shared changes?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1160",
      "C1154"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:08:24.360073+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "cbc38bfdd4e7cba2500964e564f96ab93ba9f2f691d4656d78e4613642ebf186",
    "results": {
      "early_block_model": {
        "path": "model/postflood_early_block_rank.json",
        "sha256": "9beab9334ccc6dfe598b19d29df22d6e27f16d09864886912b193b39a474fec6",
        "bytes": 1173
      },
      "rank": 5,
      "outputs": [
        35,
        438,
        30,
        433,
        135,
        438,
        130,
        433,
        135,
        465,
        130,
        460
      ]
    },
    "finding": "Five coordinates describe the twelve early b/L values once the equal-remainder and shared-change relations are held. The source35/30 difference and common403 remainder have distinct roles from the100 and27 transformation amplitudes.",
    "reassessment": "Compare the late Peleg/Reu/Serug block, where the conserved quantity changes.",
    "checks": {
      "rank5": true,
      "source_block": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:08:24.361786+00:00",
    "sha256": "cfcac401033a4768efd885e5ededf63b4d991a65dbbce7a8c2b9b798216efb72"
  },
  {
    "step": 1162,
    "title": "Parametrize the late remainder-preserving block",
    "question": "What shared rule generates the Peleg/Reu/Serug rows across MT,SP andLXX?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1151",
      "C1152"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:08:26.307665+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "cfcac401033a4768efd885e5ededf63b4d991a65dbbce7a8c2b9b798216efb72",
    "results": {
      "late_block_model": {
        "path": "model/postflood_late_block_rank.json",
        "sha256": "10c554b5f058f61a1fab50938cb7c20c949b0777afa8963a5e1428ab70238a1a",
        "bytes": 1889
      },
      "rank": 7,
      "outputs": [
        30,
        239,
        32,
        239,
        30,
        230,
        130,
        239,
        132,
        239,
        130,
        230,
        130,
        339,
        132,
        339,
        130,
        330
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The late block has seven free coordinates in this model: six baseline components and one shared century. MT→SP preserves each life; SP→LXX preserves the raised begetting age; the combined MT→LXX move preserves the original remainder.",
    "reassessment": "Check that the intermediate rows in this factorization are actual suppliedSP rows.",
    "checks": {
      "rank7": true,
      "LXX_lives": true,
      "SP_lives": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:08:26.311062+00:00",
    "sha256": "612302048fa5ae40cf0038412359ed1b3ffbe8e01bdb330047570106a124920c"
  },
  {
    "step": 1163,
    "title": "Identify a source-realized two-stage row factorization",
    "question": "Does the late conserved-remainder operation pass through the suppliedSP biography?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1162",
      "File18 §§2.2,3.2.1,4.2"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:08:28.272856+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "612302048fa5ae40cf0038412359ed1b3ffbe8e01bdb330047570106a124920c",
    "results": {
      "source_triangles": {
        "path": "model/postflood_late_source_triangles.json",
        "sha256": "504ebfd746ae2abdfad8dfce687da3726454b0699c71b81682eaf63d7c32e95e",
        "bytes": 1230
      }
    },
    "finding": "For all three late rows, the intermediate R100 result is the suppliedSP row, and the following A100 result is the suppliedLXX row. This gives a concrete connection between three source families while leaving historical direction open.",
    "reassessment": "Extend the source-realized factorization to all nine common post-Flood rows.",
    "checks": {
      "SP_intermediates": true,
      "LXX_completions": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:08:28.273393+00:00",
    "sha256": "a53946ac8fb956cb659c1f2bdc3c11d78afcfb6ccf9ba4d57fb644c885e384b6"
  },
  {
    "step": 1164,
    "title": "Factor the complete post-Flood triangle throughSP",
    "question": "Can the same source-realized composition explain early blocks and exceptional rows too?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1153",
      "C1163"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:08:30.234532+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "a53946ac8fb956cb659c1f2bdc3c11d78afcfb6ccf9ba4d57fb644c885e384b6",
    "results": {
      "complete_source_triangle": {
        "path": "model/postflood_complete_source_triangle.json",
        "sha256": "a644d72f2230a2074ea533eee0f3cf78937af3db7b77691b405c5c074bd9f0de",
        "bytes": 1967
      },
      "SP_to_LXX_life_changes": [
        0,
        27,
        27,
        100,
        100,
        100,
        100,
        60,
        60
      ]
    },
    "finding": "Every common post-Flood row admits the source-realized triangle. SP andLXX share the begetting measurement, so their final edge changes only remainder and lifespan:27/27, four100s, two60s, and the unchangedShem row.",
    "reassessment": "Express that final edge as a disjoint three-amplitude source pattern.",
    "checks": {
      "all_birth_edges_zero": true,
      "composition": true,
      "nine_rows": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:08:30.235524+00:00",
    "sha256": "1204a092c045544c3f8b23764ea93152f614397e12b7afbb316cd9619ce62c45"
  },
  {
    "step": 1165,
    "title": "Compress the SP-to-LXX lifespan edge by its disjoint supports",
    "question": "Which part of the three-tradition pattern is common to every final-edge row?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1164",
      "C1154"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:08:32.228741+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "1204a092c045544c3f8b23764ea93152f614397e12b7afbb316cd9619ce62c45",
    "results": {
      "disjoint_life_pattern": {
        "path": "model/SP_LXX_disjoint_life_pattern.json",
        "sha256": "01a75dc646299050788ad3967c1ae427f21c540b567488b8b056b0edaedc0d64",
        "bytes": 865
      },
      "rank": 3,
      "source_total": 574
    },
    "finding": "The final lifespan edge is a disjoint4/2/2 pattern with amplitudes100,60,27. It explains a common regular birth path alongside a cumulative surplus574, with no need to assign a different birth transformation to each row.",
    "reassessment": "Determine how the pattern propagates through the complete cumulative path rather than just its total.",
    "checks": {
      "rank3": true,
      "total574": true,
      "nonnegative_values": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:08:32.229945+00:00",
    "sha256": "77ef001a127d61cd306b0d7ff4aa0f34633290ff8f377b6ea073a66722e4846a"
  },
  {
    "step": 1166,
    "title": "Propagate the disjoint source pattern through the whole cumulative field",
    "question": "Does the three-amplitude model retain its meaning at every ordered boundary?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1165",
      "inherited U reconstruction"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:09:59.599751+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "77ef001a127d61cd306b0d7ff4aa0f34633290ff8f377b6ea073a66722e4846a",
    "results": {
      "cumulative_pattern": {
        "path": "model/SP_LXX_cumulative_amplitude_pattern.json",
        "sha256": "e636ce7c4b437dc61d4ef11a76b1bad546c0c272bd29adbd0a9549f778710d4d",
        "bytes": 805
      },
      "rank": 3,
      "complete_field": [
        574,
        574,
        547,
        520,
        420,
        320,
        220,
        120,
        60
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The same three amplitudes generate all nine cumulative differences574,574,547,520,420,320,220,120,60. Repeated and changing plateaus follow the exact source support; the cumulative representation retains all three parameters.",
    "reassessment": "Separate the triangle’s operator consistency from genuinely additional source constraints.",
    "checks": {
      "rank_preserved": true,
      "fullfield": true,
      "local_recovered": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:09:59.603522+00:00",
    "sha256": "da4419e472011aace1c1cff3084ef8c6e6c64eb330f53b588ab53d7826661ff0"
  },
  {
    "step": 1167,
    "title": "Audit the source triangle’s dependent agreements",
    "question": "Which parts of the three-route agreement explain source structure rather than restate subtraction?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1164–C1166",
      "Strategy §5D"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:10:01.557320+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "da4419e472011aace1c1cff3084ef8c6e6c64eb330f53b588ab53d7826661ff0",
    "results": {
      "triangle_dependency_audit": {
        "path": "model/postflood_triangle_dependency_audit.json",
        "sha256": "317aab7f9adab28520c4e945715e4382cab042135c1e1e0987ba8f4c71b20c44",
        "bytes": 876
      }
    },
    "finding": "The triangle closure itself is forced subtraction. Its useful content is the repeated source-supported coefficient pattern and the actualSP intermediate rows; these organize the family without multiplying its evidence.",
    "reassessment": "Restore nativeCainan through its complete source biography and determine which information the repeated330 block shares.",
    "checks": {
      "forced_vs_constraints": true,
      "cost_retained": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:10:01.557662+00:00",
    "sha256": "44fc91edfc4435b52781950d3eadd0012142a9004b22b030f262c6b67d375392"
  },
  {
    "step": 1168,
    "title": "Restore nativeCainan as a labelled member of the early block",
    "question": "What is numerically shared by Cainan andShelah, and what remains a distinct source premise?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "File18 §§1.6.1,4.2",
      "C1160–C1161"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:10:03.506423+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "44fc91edfc4435b52781950d3eadd0012142a9004b22b030f262c6b67d375392",
    "results": {
      "native_Cainan_block": {
        "path": "model/native_Cainan_early_block.json",
        "sha256": "8f34af9bc7db2a7446cb5d8e8caf4bbf4e402117c0ad3ce0c4af0abe271f8835",
        "bytes": 487
      },
      "shared_vector": [
        130,
        330,
        460
      ]
    },
    "finding": "NativeCainan extends the early330-remainder block and numerically repeatsShelah’s130/330/460 biography. That equality can share numeric parameters while Cainan’s existence, name and position remain independent source structure.",
    "reassessment": "Compute the parameter count of the whole native post-Flood family under the declared relations.",
    "checks": {
      "identical_numeric_rows": true,
      "three330remainders": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:10:03.506782+00:00",
    "sha256": "bcdf2c51daf063c63e78e8369b2e969bc1994c2c2ffe42219724455b0ef04434"
  },
  {
    "step": 1169,
    "title": "Measure the complete native post-Flood model dimension",
    "question": "How many free numeric coordinates generate all28 source rows under the stated dictionary and Cainan relation?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1154",
      "C1168"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:10:05.491426+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "bcdf2c51daf063c63e78e8369b2e969bc1994c2c2ffe42219724455b0ef04434",
    "results": {
      "native_joint_model": {
        "path": "model/postflood_native_joint_model.json",
        "sha256": "17da9d5fcad0baf115b8fa23a2e47b303607a8d6cedbbfae7efb96cfcf4b1d54",
        "bytes": 12227
      },
      "outputs": 56,
      "rank": 21
    },
    "finding": "The complete28-row native family has56 b/L outputs generated by21 numeric coordinates in the declared model. This includes the18 baseline values; the three-amplitude claim does not erase their input cost.",
    "reassessment": "Assess what the MT equal-remainder relation contributes if it is included in the baseline itself.",
    "checks": {
      "rank21": true,
      "56_outputs": true,
      "complete_source_match": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:10:05.568411+00:00",
    "sha256": "2075b113f8096bc2bd9e9d8502a0491d49817c4eb9501df5eaef8bc440e864ea"
  },
  {
    "step": 1170,
    "title": "Include the baseline early-remainder relation",
    "question": "Does the MT Arphaxad/Shelah constraint reduce the complete family model rather than only a projection?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1160",
      "C1169"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:10:07.555891+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "2075b113f8096bc2bd9e9d8502a0491d49817c4eb9501df5eaef8bc440e864ea",
    "results": {
      "restricted_native_model": {
        "path": "model/postflood_native_with_early_relation.json",
        "sha256": "e2d25c8794d995a9ca16bbcad5b65a9c753686c1ab310eeb5a36c6418897a732",
        "bytes": 427
      },
      "rank": 20
    },
    "finding": "Including the shared MT403 remainder as a relation reduces the declared whole-family dimension from21 to20. The reduction applies to all native outputs coherently; it does not make403 or the remaining baseline ages self-explanatory.",
    "reassessment": "Test another explicit repeated baseline value and keep its numerical role separate from shared operators.",
    "checks": {
      "constraint_holds": true,
      "rank20": true,
      "one_relation": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:10:07.641129+00:00",
    "sha256": "a845fa514ac062c4fe58c3c4b0518596e3a0afb40b512f4941aeb80ed4562cba"
  },
  {
    "step": 1171,
    "title": "Keep baseline equalities distinct from transformation equalities",
    "question": "How do the repeated MT ages and lives constrain the complete native family?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "File18 §2.2",
      "C1169–C1170"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:11:43.172600+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "a845fa514ac062c4fe58c3c4b0518596e3a0afb40b512f4941aeb80ed4562cba",
    "results": {
      "baseline_equalities": {
        "path": "model/postflood_baseline_equalities.json",
        "sha256": "6382fce0b770c956c180be8131004b9c5048295a016096aaf672bd619fb29f86",
        "bytes": 1085
      },
      "constraint_rank": 4,
      "family_rank": 17
    },
    "finding": "Four independent named baseline equalities reduce this declared native-family model to17 numeric freedoms. Baseline repetitions and shared transformation amplitudes have different explanatory roles and should remain separately costed.",
    "reassessment": "Check whether minimizing rank alone would actually satisfy the Strategy’s compression goal.",
    "checks": {
      "four_independent": true,
      "source_satisfies": true,
      "rank17": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:11:43.280119+00:00",
    "sha256": "04761c4c4a7d35b3fc6a68702818bbf6047a0e09f2429faa8b523cf0a54d736b"
  },
  {
    "step": 1172,
    "title": "Reject rank alone as an explanation score",
    "question": "Could a formally smaller numeric dimension conceal a larger description of the source family?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1171",
      "Strategy §6"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:11:45.208647+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "04761c4c4a7d35b3fc6a68702818bbf6047a0e09f2429faa8b523cf0a54d736b",
    "results": {
      "rank_counterexample": {
        "path": "model/rank_only_compression_counterexample.json",
        "sha256": "b54c1d3fc222a1ffb0f88d10a1ba8d4eb9df7b7f3e9d7c9e5c5c2ca7b4857d1a",
        "bytes": 469
      }
    },
    "finding": "A one-dimensional fitted ray can encode every observed value only by placing all56 values in its coefficients. This shows why lower rank is not itself the Strategy’s desired compression; source rules, masks and exceptional choices must be counted.",
    "reassessment": "Establish the algebraic domain of the row moves before using them as a shared operation grammar.",
    "checks": {
      "ray_rank1": true,
      "all56_stored": true,
      "no_score_weights": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:11:45.209858+00:00",
    "sha256": "d35e57433c43dcf73a70acf751376cb503fbacbef9062064d5e6ecc7a08ba5f8"
  },
  {
    "step": 1173,
    "title": "State the domain of compatible row moves",
    "question": "When is a two-operation row transformation a valid nonnegative biography calculation?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1152",
      "Strategy §§5B,5C,5G"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:11:47.163056+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "d35e57433c43dcf73a70acf751376cb503fbacbef9062064d5e6ecc7a08ba5f8",
    "results": {
      "row_domains": {
        "path": "model/row_operation_domains.json",
        "sha256": "eaa724a2a5031a17aa72a8193ddeac33905c82448cef49c67467df70d7e698c6",
        "bytes": 436
      }
    },
    "finding": "The normal form is an integer-coordinate identity, but nonnegative intermediate biographies impose order-sensitive domains. Source admission is an additional requirement beyond those inequalities.",
    "reassessment": "Exhibit a complete positive endpoint for which one formal order leaves the nonnegative domain.",
    "checks": {
      "compatibility_symbolic": true,
      "domain_separation": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:11:47.163371+00:00",
    "sha256": "bc7f7d8d293507df43bea6645ac593a973ecfa3849d12d764a069fd94cdc2886"
  },
  {
    "step": 1174,
    "title": "Test order against the biography domain",
    "question": "Can commuting formulas fail to define both source-compatible intermediate paths?",
    "inputs": {
      "row": [
        1,
        1,
        2
      ],
      "d": 2,
      "e": 1
    },
    "sources": [
      "C1173"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:11:49.125757+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "bc7f7d8d293507df43bea6645ac593a973ecfa3849d12d764a069fd94cdc2886",
    "results": {
      "order_counterexample": {
        "path": "model/row_order_domain_counterexample.json",
        "sha256": "b7317aad0bab6daf107563c28761bb167acc40b4845d3452487bdd43095d171f",
        "bytes": 363
      }
    },
    "finding": "The formulas commute on unrestricted coordinates, yet R-first produces a negative remainder in this diagnostic while A-first remains valid. A common endpoint therefore does not authorize every intermediate route.",
    "reassessment": "Check how the complete source packet uses the domain-qualified operations.",
    "checks": {
      "same_endpoint": true,
      "R_invalid": true,
      "A_path_valid": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:11:49.126064+00:00",
    "sha256": "a46f365e6e41597ffe79e56d7428e6324239db52b7bc6c9cf5cd7f7031046875"
  },
  {
    "step": 1175,
    "title": "Check source-row normal forms against their domains",
    "question": "Are the normal forms for all18 observed post-Flood changes numerically admissible, and which intermediate rows are actually supplied?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1151–C1153",
      "C1173–C1174"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:11:51.122846+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "a46f365e6e41597ffe79e56d7428e6324239db52b7bc6c9cf5cd7f7031046875",
    "results": {
      "normal_form_domain_check": {
        "path": "model/postflood_normal_form_domain_check.json",
        "sha256": "4d32cccf4e0881fbccf346590dae80e1d6861768549e59f3ad905f2ce5f46f61",
        "bytes": 4396
      },
      "rows": 18
    },
    "finding": "All18 selected R-first normal forms stay nonnegative. The intermediate matches a suppliedSP row only where its lifespan is unchanged; Eber andTerah retain an additional source life change. Mathematical admissibility and source realization are now distinguished row by row.",
    "reassessment": "Summarize the whole post-Flood connection in a compact source-labelled reconstruction.",
    "checks": {
      "all_nonnegative": true,
      "all_endpoints": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:11:51.124066+00:00",
    "sha256": "b356db2cc9ff678f3124b341b42978f81bff25a21c587bdfb90375b4e4af4ebd"
  },
  {
    "step": 1176,
    "title": "Write the post-Flood family explanation",
    "question": "How can the complete three-tradition relation be presented without a catalogue of isolated totals?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1151–C1175",
      "Strategy §1"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:12:32.262795+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "b356db2cc9ff678f3124b341b42978f81bff25a21c587bdfb90375b4e4af4ebd",
    "results": {
      "postflood_explanation": {
        "path": "deliverables/PostFlood_Row_Grammar_Interim.md",
        "sha256": "254b621a11ea8c7c249b554a9e629f8d567f958585ab449489aa50931c1de69f",
        "bytes": 2866
      }
    },
    "finding": "The new explanation connects complete source blocks through conserved row components and their chronological projections. It gives the positive mechanism before the parameter and provenance qualifications.",
    "reassessment": "Prepare the full pre/post-Flood row packet to test whether the same operators extend across the entire shared genealogy.",
    "checks": {
      "whole_family_present": true,
      "numeric_topology_distinct": true,
      "input_cost_visible": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:12:32.263229+00:00",
    "sha256": "bd52d95489eef671fe47958a2e4f3d3dcaf4b594f59517b1eb80fb61a21929ef"
  },
  {
    "step": 1177,
    "title": "Freeze the complete labelled genealogy for the next extension",
    "question": "Can the pre- and post-Flood rows be tested together without losing count and source tags?",
    "inputs": {
      "proposal_packet_sha256": "1421aa3dbef2f870ef256672b2abd931a3562dc997a22a606507ce3e6c58ec5e"
    },
    "sources": [
      "File18 §§2–4",
      "prep/operator_extension_proposals.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:13:32.542619+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "bd52d95489eef671fe47958a2e4f3d3dcaf4b594f59517b1eb80fb61a21929ef",
    "results": {
      "complete_source_rows": {
        "path": "model/complete_source_row_packet.json",
        "sha256": "1bd5961126532673e6fda1535befc5e64cf21d67d01a3c5e78d1a613bbb8ab59",
        "bytes": 17795
      },
      "counts": {
        "MT": 19,
        "SP": 19,
        "LXX": 20
      },
      "next_domain": "ordinary rows plus separately tagged SP inclusive counts; no inferred physical remainder for those counts"
    },
    "finding": "The58-row native packet preserves ordinary biographies, SP inclusive exceptions, nominal versus completed Lamech intervals and nativeCainan. It enables a full pre/post-Flood operator comparison under explicit types.",
    "reassessment": "Check how the source-supported century operation changes its conserved quantity across the Flood.",
    "checks": {
      "58rows": true,
      "sourceLXX753": true,
      "calculated571": true,
      "SPtagged": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:13:32.544777+00:00",
    "sha256": "0b57c23ba1dd1d456953010acb1e7dd8476e2921c2b6a68676acc8054a9479f9"
  },
  {
    "step": 1178,
    "title": "Connect the pre-Flood and post-Flood century changes",
    "question": "Does the same100 amplitude act through different conserved components on declared source blocks?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1152",
      "C1163",
      "C1177"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:13:34.522020+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "0b57c23ba1dd1d456953010acb1e7dd8476e2921c2b6a68676acc8054a9479f9",
    "results": {
      "cross_Flood_century": {
        "path": "model/century_operation_across_Flood.json",
        "sha256": "0db5b3b9f3418e6025a6203479f93c9308b44961bbef0c627715807711b64182",
        "bytes": 1305
      }
    },
    "finding": "The six pre-Flood LXX century changes preserve lifespan; the three later changes preserve remainder. The shared100 amplitude connects the blocks through the same row grammar while their different conserved quantities explain different cumulative effects.",
    "reassessment": "Identify the additional source coefficient needed for a complete whole-genealogy model.",
    "checks": {
      "six_R100": true,
      "three_diagonal100": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:13:34.522542+00:00",
    "sha256": "256213978200d2308ea10082dbd65e29782007c8716606ec3b0028801c6e8166"
  },
  {
    "step": 1179,
    "title": "Specify the whole-genealogy extension before execution",
    "question": "Which extra local source change must join the post-Flood dictionary to cover MT andLXX completely?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1178",
      "File18 §4A",
      "C1154"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:13:36.497740+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "256213978200d2308ea10082dbd65e29782007c8716606ec3b0028801c6e8166",
    "results": {
      "whole_genealogy_next_model": {
        "path": "model/whole_genealogy_extension_question.json",
        "sha256": "826ee1186994592063674adc6bdb4c228acf9a60b905f281e5bdecfbba031b8e",
        "bytes": 546
      },
      "extra_life_coefficient": [
        {
          "name": "Lamech",
          "delta_b": 0,
          "delta_L": -24
        }
      ]
    },
    "finding": "Lamech’s−24 is the only additional pre-Flood lifespan change needed. The proposed complete model will compare four shared coefficients against the less constrained five-parameter alternative, keeping its fitted Eber relation visible.",
    "reassessment": "Assess the first block’s gains against its unresolved source burdens before the required full Strategy reread.",
    "checks": {
      "onlyLamech": true,
      "ordinaryNoahunchanged": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:13:36.498307+00:00",
    "sha256": "f33fb4e9283a51bb09c37cd19fd5a55a0654bc24db441c336d8b968c874d3984"
  },
  {
    "step": 1180,
    "title": "Cost the first block’s explanatory gains",
    "question": "Which results reduce a declared source model and which are consistency or new encodings?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1132–C1179",
      "Strategy §§1,6"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:14:14.796722+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "f33fb4e9283a51bb09c37cd19fd5a55a0654bc24db441c336d8b968c874d3984",
    "results": {
      "first_block_cost_ledger": {
        "path": "model/block1_explanation_cost_ledger.json",
        "sha256": "b8f39e95f57c25b33b0f24a4fc1a0964f14851020f0058316f5ca5dd00fc2a21",
        "bytes": 1408
      },
      "explanatory_families": 8
    },
    "finding": "The block advances the source-generation question through located threshold behavior and a complete row-operation grammar. It leaves inherited magnitudes and source roles visible, rejects rank-only scoring, and sets up a full-genealogy test.",
    "reassessment": "Close the50-action checkpoint, then reread every section of the Strategy before selecting C1182.",
    "checks": {
      "eight_families": true,
      "no_new_endpoint_search": true,
      "cost_present": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:14:14.797398+00:00",
    "sha256": "ddf1b2ce0bb6a0cb0939fcf8581f55a6a9ae1f50b0b3231290fba9fbb054d798"
  },
  {
    "step": 1181,
    "title": "Close the first50-action research block",
    "question": "Is the current result coherent enough for the required fresh Strategy assessment?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1132–C1180",
      "model/block1_explanation_cost_ledger.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:14:16.758506+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "ddf1b2ce0bb6a0cb0939fcf8581f55a6a9ae1f50b0b3231290fba9fbb054d798",
    "results": {
      "block_checkpoint": {
        "path": "deliverables/Block_01_C1132_C1181_Checkpoint.json",
        "sha256": "0f2e2674251526b7c75c73576ed59a87cb346b1b3b56b7377bbe6510791efd02",
        "bytes": 1142
      },
      "completed_in_block": 50,
      "cycle_completed": 50,
      "remaining_authorized": 250
    },
    "finding": "The first50 actions provide a coherent SP source-choice analysis and post-Flood family reconstruction. A full fresh Strategy review is required now before any further numbered action.",
    "reassessment": "Reread Strategy completely, reassess the whole first block, then choose C1182 as the best continuation toward the common chronological grammar.",
    "checks": {
      "49_preceding_records": true,
      "all_reassessed": true,
      "all_bound_present": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:14:16.760350+00:00",
    "sha256": "c1d6a9cec0e724882ac9122721d62638a54dc1d59e9a9a678d1bc576ad14df18"
  },
  {
    "step": 1182,
    "title": "Extend the row grammar across the whole shared genealogy",
    "question": "Does the five-amplitude model reconstruct every MT to LXX common-row change?",
    "inputs": {
      "parameters": [
        "u",
        "lambda",
        "a",
        "e",
        "n"
      ],
      "values": [
        100,
        -24,
        27,
        40,
        60
      ]
    },
    "sources": [
      "C1179",
      "model/complete_source_row_packet.json",
      "File18"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:21:00.851092+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "c1d6a9cec0e724882ac9122721d62638a54dc1d59e9a9a678d1bc576ad14df18",
    "results": {
      "model": {
        "path": "model/whole_genealogy_five_model.json",
        "sha256": "00974b700a432f664a92f80cdbfdb8cef83e334d8f4ac3437aec4e3bb2921ac9",
        "bytes": 3399
      },
      "rank": 5,
      "matched_rows": 19
    },
    "finding": "Five source-labelled amplitudes reconstruct all38 common-row begetting/lifespan changes. The same century coefficient acts before and after the Flood through different row operations.",
    "reassessment": "Test the explicit e+n=u restriction rather than silently reducing the parameter count.",
    "checks": {
      "complete_match": true,
      "rank5": true,
      "38outputs": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:21:00.855779+00:00",
    "sha256": "816c091df698966f5ff7967dcaea32e4dfd45d46e391aa7884545bb1341a4811"
  },
  {
    "step": 1183,
    "title": "Expose the extra premise in the four-amplitude model",
    "question": "What is lost when Eber40 and Nahor60 are tied to the century100?",
    "inputs": {
      "relation": "e+n=u"
    },
    "sources": [
      "C1182",
      "C1154"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:21:02.832105+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "816c091df698966f5ff7967dcaea32e4dfd45d46e391aa7884545bb1341a4811",
    "results": {
      "model": {
        "path": "model/whole_genealogy_four_model.json",
        "sha256": "db6857df003663117809841c614779640cb386f165c4c8281cc8c8f03d5f8595",
        "bytes": 2952
      },
      "rank5_to_rank4": [
        5,
        4
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The four-amplitude form is exact only after adding the fitted relation40+60=100. It is a useful compression, but not an independent derivation of these source numerals.",
    "reassessment": "Find a small transparent observation set that recovers the five coefficients without totals.",
    "checks": {
      "rank4": true,
      "same_outputs": true,
      "substitution_injective": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:21:02.839998+00:00",
    "sha256": "18b41b6eba02e1ee89dfcffeff38abcad5434e74bbf1d49b0954edeffc1c1c76"
  },
  {
    "step": 1184,
    "title": "Recover amplitudes from local named observations",
    "question": "Which five source differences identify the unrestricted model?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1182"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:21:04.806540+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "18b41b6eba02e1ee89dfcffeff38abcad5434e74bbf1d49b0954edeffc1c1c76",
    "results": {
      "recovery": {
        "path": "model/whole_genealogy_local_recovery.json",
        "sha256": "02ec326eb620855f03d145bedfec53dc2653efb6ee52b3679550b22c9c3d893b",
        "bytes": 608
      },
      "observations": {
        "Adam:b": 100,
        "Lamech:L": -24,
        "Arphaxad:L": 27,
        "Eber:L": 40,
        "Nahor:L": 60
      }
    },
    "finding": "Adam’s begetting difference and four named lifespan differences recover the five amplitudes directly. The four-parameter version predicts a relation among these five already-known observations.",
    "reassessment": "Determine exactly what the two chronology head differences conceal.",
    "checks": {
      "unit_basis": true,
      "recovery_exact": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:21:04.807764+00:00",
    "sha256": "6add3063715e4b3ed2f1be1a6001847c9f9a32a1d04cdbcb246d55af49384280"
  },
  {
    "step": 1185,
    "title": "Compare complete row recovery with two head differences",
    "question": "Can regular and cumulative totals distinguish the same five coefficients?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1182"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:21:06.762307+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "6add3063715e4b3ed2f1be1a6001847c9f9a32a1d04cdbcb246d55af49384280",
    "results": {
      "head_information": {
        "path": "model/whole_genealogy_head_information.json",
        "sha256": "855645f2d27bb371e76a02f8b5dcc6b46e64ebdaa303b4c33eb8bf74b49071c6",
        "bytes": 487
      },
      "head_differences": [
        1250,
        430
      ],
      "rank": 2,
      "lost_dimensions": 3
    },
    "finding": "The two heads see12.5u and3u+lambda+2a+e+n. Their values1250 and430 leave three coefficient directions invisible, even though all local row changes are recoverable from five named observations.",
    "reassessment": "Check whether the four-amplitude restriction restores that missing information.",
    "checks": {
      "expected_heads": true,
      "rank2": true,
      "kernel3": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:21:06.763813+00:00",
    "sha256": "6a67cf88a2e9cc4663e984eccabf03a1a65a3b9aa0c8ac3871d288c473e99c5a"
  },
  {
    "step": 1186,
    "title": "Test head identification after shared-amplitude compression",
    "question": "Do two chronology heads identify the four-amplitude form?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1183",
      "C1185"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:21:08.723615+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "6a67cf88a2e9cc4663e984eccabf03a1a65a3b9aa0c8ac3871d288c473e99c5a",
    "results": {
      "head_information": {
        "path": "model/whole_genealogy_four_head_information.json",
        "sha256": "2d00c6ef8bd02475535fe9a95771d4a08f65d68553083e88eac824606c664423",
        "bytes": 378
      },
      "kernel": [
        [
          0,
          -2,
          1,
          0
        ],
        [
          0,
          0,
          0,
          1
        ]
      ]
    },
    "finding": "Even the four-amplitude form leaves two directions hidden from the heads: the sixty-year allocation and the trade between Lamech’s correction and the paired early increments. Complete fields are needed to locate them.",
    "reassessment": "Restore native Cainan and distinguish insertion information from coefficient compression.",
    "checks": {
      "heads": true,
      "rank2": true,
      "kernel2": true,
      "t_unseen": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:21:08.724654+00:00",
    "sha256": "851e4dc660048693f0286a2180936e0e5f75482ca4b2eeaa0db0414cd2d76043"
  },
  {
    "step": 1187,
    "title": "Restore native LXX insertion after matched-row comparison",
    "question": "What does Cainan add that no common-row coefficient can supply?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1182",
      "C1168",
      "model/complete_source_row_packet.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:22:25.961337+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "851e4dc660048693f0286a2180936e0e5f75482ca4b2eeaa0db0414cd2d76043",
    "results": {
      "native_insertion": {
        "path": "model/whole_genealogy_native_insertion.json",
        "sha256": "47ae760f92ed9eb575696dfb014115d80ff1215ca9b548fe188be5faaec1b50c",
        "bytes": 658
      },
      "native_heads": [
        1380,
        890
      ]
    },
    "finding": "Native Cainan adds130 to the Regular and460 to the Cumulative head difference, producing1380 and890. Its numbers match Shelah, but its existence and ordered position are separate source information.",
    "reassessment": "Find a whole-field observation that distinguishes an insertion from a redistributed total.",
    "checks": {
      "native_heads": true,
      "same_numbers": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:22:25.961782+00:00",
    "sha256": "8e4b8d6f3d87022f072f4ec768562899ae371e1d0e5c0fdc272d834243632023"
  },
  {
    "step": 1188,
    "title": "Distinguish insertion from redistribution at the named boundary",
    "question": "Can the same head change conceal different internal birth paths?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1187",
      "C1167"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:22:27.920734+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "8e4b8d6f3d87022f072f4ec768562899ae371e1d0e5c0fdc272d834243632023",
    "results": {
      "witness": {
        "path": "model/insertion_redistribution_witness.json",
        "sha256": "d11e0e5d562cd187b3e4c49bff508fa3f70b2630d3d9df40c68ece1782c086b0",
        "bytes": 495
      },
      "equal_terminal_total": 395
    },
    "finding": "An added130 can be hidden in a neighbouring interval if only the total is observed. The new Cainan-labelled boundary and its incidence recover the structural distinction.",
    "reassessment": "Summarize the whole-genealogy row grammar before moving to Rounded information loss.",
    "checks": {
      "same_terminal": true,
      "different_internal_fields": true,
      "extra_vertex": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:22:27.921808+00:00",
    "sha256": "f3a0c2f6b7651020eedabebc00d6a94fd9b4d4b9ff7907f8591ac48e53bbe8c2"
  },
  {
    "step": 1189,
    "title": "Write the complete-genealogy explanatory bridge",
    "question": "How should a reader understand the common operations without mistaking compression for origin?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1152",
      "C1182–C1188",
      "C1143"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:22:29.879895+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "f3a0c2f6b7651020eedabebc00d6a94fd9b4d4b9ff7907f8591ac48e53bbe8c2",
    "results": {
      "explanation": {
        "path": "deliverables/Whole_Genealogy_Row_Grammar_Interim.md",
        "sha256": "7614f3f07386d2d738fa9bdf7834f3147bb2c128722949f2263bed4841130c35",
        "bytes": 2203
      }
    },
    "finding": "The complete genealogy is now described by a small vocabulary of located row operations, alongside explicit cap and insertion mechanisms. This turns the numerical comparisons into a readable family connection.",
    "reassessment": "Establish the exact finite fibre of a Rounded row with its lifespan retained.",
    "checks": {
      "five_support_blocks": true,
      "native_retained": true,
      "origin_scope": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:22:29.880338+00:00",
    "sha256": "e7c959274b018b5447fda32603698c8dc9df923f34450af2daea11f947b6cf40"
  },
  {
    "step": 1190,
    "title": "Specify the joint Rounded-row observation",
    "question": "What exact data remain after begetting and remaining years are rounded separately?",
    "inputs": {
      "Q": "nearest multiple of5 on integer nonnegative durations"
    },
    "sources": [
      "C1189",
      "File51a",
      "File52c_latest.md",
      "C1131 inherited rounding analysis"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:22:31.861791+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "e7c959274b018b5447fda32603698c8dc9df923f34450af2daea11f947b6cf40",
    "results": {
      "observation": {
        "path": "model/joint_rounding_observation.json",
        "sha256": "dda331935947e8bcd63cba12aa5afc9ec31aa3a07ca64995199c8529d7452d77",
        "bytes": 540
      },
      "cells": {
        "0": [
          0,
          1,
          2
        ],
        "5": [
          3,
          4,
          5,
          6,
          7
        ],
        "10": [
          8,
          9,
          10,
          11,
          12
        ]
      }
    },
    "finding": "Joint Rounded observations restrict two hidden residuals to a bounded line u+v=L−B−R. Nonnegative durations truncate the cell at zero; current derived remainders do not supply independent evidence.",
    "reassessment": "Derive and verify the exact size of that bounded line for interior cells.",
    "checks": {
      "zero_cell": true,
      "interior_cell": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:22:31.862131+00:00",
    "sha256": "dfba833c7385eb1f5d5150fc3aebf4a3f3f7510f562aa74723fe41d442e5805a"
  },
  {
    "step": 1191,
    "title": "Count the exact residual fibre",
    "question": "How many original decompositions share B,R,L away from zero?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1190"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:22:33.812921+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "dfba833c7385eb1f5d5150fc3aebf4a3f3f7510f562aa74723fe41d442e5805a",
    "results": {
      "fibre_count": {
        "path": "model/joint_rounding_fibre_count.json",
        "sha256": "675aded4ec0b4aa373b5fb41a62a59b066ba872990fb481b07f80f5fd2ee610f",
        "bytes": 388
      },
      "counts": {
        "-5": 0,
        "-4": 1,
        "-3": 2,
        "-2": 3,
        "-1": 4,
        "0": 5,
        "1": 4,
        "2": 3,
        "3": 2,
        "4": 1,
        "5": 0
      }
    },
    "finding": "Interior joint fibres have5−|z| members for |z|<=4. A singleton occurs only at z=±4, where both residuals must be the same extreme ±2.",
    "reassessment": "Apply this criterion to the complete55-row ordinary source domain.",
    "checks": {
      "all_counts": true,
      "singletons": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:22:33.813364+00:00",
    "sha256": "a7bac3e57a118615956bdade02d54316c9c306183c353f7e4b805504c61bb97f"
  },
  {
    "step": 1192,
    "title": "Compute joint Rounded fibres on all ordinary source rows",
    "question": "Which rows remain exactly identifiable when exact life and both rounded parts are retained?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1191",
      "model/complete_source_row_packet.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:23:38.403467+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "a7bac3e57a118615956bdade02d54316c9c306183c353f7e4b805504c61bb97f",
    "results": {
      "fibres": {
        "path": "model/ordinary_joint_rounding_fibres.json",
        "sha256": "1cb4a13c33bfabf1020e463c99bd040a92121ec0f3ae9f96e5447592ad059df7",
        "bytes": 14320
      },
      "ordinary_rows": 55,
      "singletons": [
        "MT:Methuselah",
        "MT:Reu",
        "SP:Reu",
        "LXX:Methuselah",
        "LXX:Reu"
      ]
    },
    "finding": "Five of55 ordinary rows have singleton joint fibres: MT/LXX Methuselah, MT/LXX Reu, and SP Reu. This conditional uniqueness comes from two same-sign extreme residuals, not from new source testimony.",
    "reassessment": "Compare each singleton with the ambiguity when only one rounded component is retained.",
    "checks": {
      "55rows": true,
      "excluded3": true,
      "formula_all": true,
      "singletons5": true,
      "source_retained": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:23:38.404610+00:00",
    "sha256": "13b1c5e72ddcd7c70c0a03130ddeccb78d1415aa399749954211836e2f555361"
  },
  {
    "step": 1193,
    "title": "Measure the gain from the second rounded component",
    "question": "How does a singleton arise from combining two individually ambiguous observations?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1192"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:23:40.362205+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "13b1c5e72ddcd7c70c0a03130ddeccb78d1415aa399749954211836e2f555361",
    "results": {
      "intersections": {
        "path": "model/joint_rounding_singleton_intersections.json",
        "sha256": "64be39ff48facb6d403eb3b77ed1258eb586e644ea46e6f4acc71aa1d8ad18ce",
        "bytes": 1372
      },
      "rows": 5
    },
    "finding": "Each singleton combines two five-choice observations whose candidate sets touch at one endpoint. The gain is genuine conditional information, although these current observations share the same source derivation.",
    "reassessment": "Use LXX Lamech to show a nearby non-singleton and preserve the main753 state.",
    "checks": {
      "five_each": true,
      "one_joint": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:23:40.365407+00:00",
    "sha256": "b6a4ef059df0fc388dc265a913a2d54c0b63327031aa6e88fb128237c9977802"
  },
  {
    "step": 1194,
    "title": "Inspect the main LXX Lamech joint ambiguity",
    "question": "Do the rounded components identify182 and571 when life753 is known?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1192",
      "File18 main LXX753"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:23:42.357585+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "b6a4ef059df0fc388dc265a913a2d54c0b63327031aa6e88fb128237c9977802",
    "results": {
      "ambiguity": {
        "path": "model/LXX_Lamech_joint_rounding_ambiguity.json",
        "sha256": "fadf71b03bb34e6c537cd1466cce62070877a8d0061e127067d395ea05a8ae01",
        "bytes": 446
      },
      "pairs": [
        [
          181,
          572
        ],
        [
          182,
          571
        ]
      ]
    },
    "finding": "With life753 and rounded parts180/570, both181+572 and182+571 remain possible. The current182/571 pair still needs its source assignment; the753 state remains primary.",
    "reassessment": "Determine the total amount of conditional ambiguity across all55 rows.",
    "checks": {
      "two_pairs": true,
      "main753": true,
      "z3": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:23:42.358027+00:00",
    "sha256": "cc2a5548194c6dfb669d35cb34c1d18a0d40061bf791009d1dcaa876188a0451"
  },
  {
    "step": 1195,
    "title": "Summarize the full joint observation ambiguity",
    "question": "How much rowwise ambiguity remains before any cross-row constraints are introduced?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1192"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:23:44.291779+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "cc2a5548194c6dfb669d35cb34c1d18a0d40061bf791009d1dcaa876188a0451",
    "results": {
      "summary": {
        "path": "model/ordinary_joint_rounding_ambiguity_summary.json",
        "sha256": "43d77706b99348a303441412447f3e223d6ddb7189c1f94240874ff6c964f417",
        "bytes": 403
      },
      "histogram": {
        "1": 5,
        "2": 1,
        "3": 13,
        "4": 6,
        "5": 30
      },
      "products": {
        "MT": 22781250000,
        "SP": 2531250000,
        "LXX": 210937500000
      }
    },
    "finding": "The joint observations narrow every row to at most five possibilities but leave50 of55 rows ambiguous. Their product counts formal decompositions only, before source-labelled cross-row relations are imposed.",
    "reassessment": "Test whether source-equal remaining years create additional recovery in the early post-Flood block.",
    "checks": {
      "hist55": true,
      "ambiguous50": true,
      "all_positive": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:23:44.292454+00:00",
    "sha256": "1a00412e5151981593aaa3ab8cff4219b45a435854c3a9ff4290ff75d33c1e5a"
  },
  {
    "step": 1196,
    "title": "Intersect Rounded fibres with the early equal-remainder relation",
    "question": "Does Arphaxad/Shelah equal remaining life select their exact source decomposition?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1192",
      "C1160"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:23:46.247007+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "1a00412e5151981593aaa3ab8cff4219b45a435854c3a9ff4290ff75d33c1e5a",
    "results": {
      "intersections": {
        "path": "model/early_pair_rounding_relation.json",
        "sha256": "5c76d1a7978ba62189b3f22166a016fb9443399c0063a6ba53cdce442783599a",
        "bytes": 987
      },
      "counts": [
        [
          "MT",
          9,
          3
        ],
        [
          "SP",
          9,
          3
        ],
        [
          "LXX",
          25,
          5
        ]
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The equal-remainder premise sharply reduces paired ambiguity but does not identify the exact early values. Its five-year begetting difference follows from the exact lifespan difference once the shared remainder is imposed.",
    "reassessment": "Test the late block where Reu supplies a conditional singleton.",
    "checks": {
      "source_present": true,
      "not_unique": true,
      "reduced": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:23:46.248261+00:00",
    "sha256": "b1b772e10daf556304b2690a3fdd587b20d3a2cc3a81ec8cefd79be347a97de6"
  },
  {
    "step": 1197,
    "title": "Test late-block recovery under shared century operations",
    "question": "Do the exact Reu recovery and shared source operations determine Peleg and Serug?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1192",
      "C1162",
      "C1171"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:24:57.404565+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "b1b772e10daf556304b2690a3fdd587b20d3a2cc3a81ec8cefd79be347a97de6",
    "results": {
      "late_block": {
        "path": "model/late_block_joint_rounding_recovery.json",
        "sha256": "7b23de1d3ad4c27eb643636c854a02745d7b03a84e9a3920e9f00a86d6309ed4",
        "bytes": 333
      },
      "remaining_common_choices": [
        28,
        29,
        30,
        31
      ]
    },
    "finding": "Reu is conditionally fixed at32, while Peleg and Serug can jointly take28,29,30 or31 in MT, with the century counterparts in SP/LXX. The shared row grammar narrows the block but does not generate the source30.",
    "reassessment": "Identify the exact missing kind of input rather than search for a new numerical target.",
    "checks": {
      "four_choices": true,
      "source30_present": true,
      "Reu32": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:24:57.405086+00:00",
    "sha256": "0d7cab31277e244b1c444b5e3f2dcc96d551f69a500934b87bd6b43018e14cbe"
  },
  {
    "step": 1198,
    "title": "State the residual information needed to recover an ordinary row",
    "question": "Which one additional coordinate resolves any remaining joint fibre?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1190–C1197"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:24:59.378862+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "0d7cab31277e244b1c444b5e3f2dcc96d551f69a500934b87bd6b43018e14cbe",
    "results": {
      "recovery": {
        "path": "model/joint_rounding_residual_recovery.json",
        "sha256": "0783a2d7611a7e7908a1a1d4fd35ccb0353d9e71b1a0cffd1690be45463a06f5",
        "bytes": 4132
      },
      "rows": 55
    },
    "finding": "One exact residual per ambiguous row supplies what joint rounding removed. Singleton rows need no extra residual, but reading a stored source residual back is reconstruction, not a new discovery.",
    "reassessment": "Connect the joint fibre to the failure of separate rounding to preserve b+r=L.",
    "checks": {
      "all_recovered": true,
      "bounded": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:24:59.379523+00:00",
    "sha256": "0dc6366f881466627b757cdf66d884c27ad0f190b17a616cfa0b1a3fa757db30"
  },
  {
    "step": 1199,
    "title": "Derive the row rounding carry from the hidden residual sum",
    "question": "How does the joint observation control the difference between rounded life and rounded parts?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1191",
      "C1192"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:25:01.340720+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "0dc6366f881466627b757cdf66d884c27ad0f190b17a616cfa0b1a3fa757db30",
    "results": {
      "carry_bridge": {
        "path": "model/joint_rounding_carry_bridge.json",
        "sha256": "09df548a9ff72ded568e716ef1fca3f0cb17d025f60f6662d99181bdcbd7b46e",
        "bytes": 4134
      },
      "branches": {
        "-4": -5,
        "-3": -5,
        "-2": 0,
        "-1": 0,
        "0": 0,
        "1": 0,
        "2": 0,
        "3": 5,
        "4": 5
      }
    },
    "finding": "The same residual sum that measures joint ambiguity determines the carry between rounded lifespan and rounded parts. Carry is−5 for z≤−3, zero for |z|≤2, and+5 for z≥3.",
    "reassessment": "Check whether the carry by itself retains the exact joint recovery information.",
    "checks": {
      "all_rows": true,
      "three_branches": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:25:01.341533+00:00",
    "sha256": "6b92f05310cbabfa085134c859ff27941d3690ae2debfe145287ead85194d7fc"
  },
  {
    "step": 1200,
    "title": "Separate carry information from exact residual information",
    "question": "Can knowing the carry replace knowing the exact lifespan in joint recovery?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1199"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:25:03.301412+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "6b92f05310cbabfa085134c859ff27941d3690ae2debfe145287ead85194d7fc",
    "results": {
      "carry_information": {
        "path": "model/rounding_carry_information.json",
        "sha256": "92e6d16905b18c5ee3305c094f7ef6fc0af0339cb3dc69ba596d574bf7f12d12",
        "bytes": 365
      },
      "pair_counts": {
        "-5": 3,
        "0": 19,
        "5": 3
      }
    },
    "finding": "A carry stores only a branch: its three classes contain3,19 and3 residual pairs. Even an extreme carry leaves three possible exact decompositions when exact life is absent.",
    "reassessment": "Combine this result with the cap, which removes excess lifespan rather than a small rounding residual.",
    "checks": {
      "partition25": true,
      "counts": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:25:03.301807+00:00",
    "sha256": "813eaaeffb6b87bd3fd12d69ccad203afa18ebae55aa133985fdb18b4f4b1464"
  },
  {
    "step": 1201,
    "title": "Write the joint Rounded-row explanatory bridge",
    "question": "What does joint recovery add to the family picture?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1190–C1200",
      "C1189"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:25:05.245793+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "813eaaeffb6b87bd3fd12d69ccad203afa18ebae55aa133985fdb18b4f4b1464",
    "results": {
      "explanation": {
        "path": "deliverables/Joint_Rounded_Row_Information.md",
        "sha256": "f582659b5226cb2d9115eaaa9d572eff7f17c63c37f2e3cd4d8d088500a669fa",
        "bytes": 1863
      }
    },
    "finding": "Joint Rounded observations now have a concrete information account: bounded residual fibres explain both conditional recovery and the local carry between different rounded constructions.",
    "reassessment": "Derive the composite cap-plus-round fibre with source capacities held.",
    "checks": {
      "source_dependency": true,
      "SP_scope": true,
      "main753": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:25:05.246201+00:00",
    "sha256": "10515ce8af816561f078cc29a980782be0b598824fbba16e670f9204ffb4b126"
  },
  {
    "step": 1202,
    "title": "Derive the composite cap-plus-round inverse set",
    "question": "What original lifespans can produce a fixed rounded capped value when capacity is known?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1201",
      "C1143",
      "C1131 cap analysis"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:26:09.238998+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "10515ce8af816561f078cc29a980782be0b598824fbba16e670f9204ffb4b126",
    "results": {
      "fibre_law": {
        "path": "model/cap_round_fibre_law.json",
        "sha256": "4ff7af76d04d05a1559f9918457b5a1ea19a6369cf01f0740073105104291fbf",
        "bytes": 2166
      }
    },
    "finding": "At the rounded capacity, a finite rounding cell joins an unbounded cap tail. The rounded capped output can therefore forget even whether clipping occurred.",
    "reassessment": "Apply the threshold formula to the three SP clipped capacities.",
    "checks": {
      "thresholds": true,
      "tails": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:26:09.239508+00:00",
    "sha256": "df5e09d75d05022c7bc20ea540505645c79ac555ed0492221773a5d49d1198f6"
  },
  {
    "step": 1203,
    "title": "Calculate the SP composite fibre thresholds",
    "question": "How far below each exact cap can an uncapped life imitate its rounded clipped output?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1202",
      "C1143"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:26:11.193966+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "df5e09d75d05022c7bc20ea540505645c79ac555ed0492221773a5d49d1198f6",
    "results": {
      "thresholds": {
        "path": "model/SP_cap_round_fibre_thresholds.json",
        "sha256": "0e5375ce43907dc1ce63d0b6d0786a30ed3ddaa91d3fbf3682294d53aea30dbb",
        "bytes": 752
      },
      "minimum_inputs": [
        843,
        718,
        653
      ]
    },
    "finding": "Jared’s845 output permits any life at least843; Methuselah’s720 permits at least718; Lamech’s655 permits at least653. Rounded output alone does not recover the original962/969/777 ledger or generally the clipping status.",
    "reassessment": "Determine how a known clipping branch changes the information needed for reconstruction.",
    "checks": {
      "thresholds": true,
      "uncapped_counts": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:26:11.194944+00:00",
    "sha256": "500a3558e64974f26704f34efb61febcd10b8a9786ab1145092b4e4378483af1"
  },
  {
    "step": 1204,
    "title": "Separate the two loss types by the known cap branch",
    "question": "Are rounding residual and cap excess independent missing quantities on every row?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1202",
      "C1203"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:26:13.150833+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "500a3558e64974f26704f34efb61febcd10b8a9786ab1145092b4e4378483af1",
    "results": {
      "branch_information": {
        "path": "model/cap_round_branch_information.json",
        "sha256": "496cab05f8d37f8f3f5ac004911fb79736ca2e4435da321932625405a2f45d59",
        "bytes": 2128
      }
    },
    "finding": "The two loss registers are not two independent unknowns per row. A known clipped row has y=c, fixing its rounding residual; a known unclipped row has zero excess and needs only its rounding residual.",
    "reassessment": "Verify reconstruction of all nine baseline lives using the branch-appropriate register.",
    "checks": {
      "identity_all": true,
      "three_clipped": true,
      "branch_constraints": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:26:13.151348+00:00",
    "sha256": "582d9b8d493849e89b92c6868c8b2072903e0d9da9fc0d9ed995d316d2ccdcc8"
  },
  {
    "step": 1205,
    "title": "Recover the baseline from branch-appropriate loss data",
    "question": "Do the three excesses and six ordinary residuals reconstruct the complete ledger?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1204"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:26:15.110130+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "582d9b8d493849e89b92c6868c8b2072903e0d9da9fc0d9ed995d316d2ccdcc8",
    "results": {
      "recovery": {
        "path": "model/SP_composite_loss_recovery.json",
        "sha256": "0a7fb945140282fae094852f57bddd8f2ce60ab0bfaa766ad35a5618e246fa81",
        "bytes": 1119
      },
      "recovered": [
        930,
        912,
        905,
        910,
        895,
        962,
        365,
        969,
        777
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The declared register exactly recovers all nine baseline lives. This is an information-preserving enlargement of the cap-and-round construction, not an inverse of its output alone.",
    "reassessment": "Test whether the single total488 can replace the three located excesses.",
    "checks": {
      "exact_recovery": true,
      "nine_records": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:26:15.110563+00:00",
    "sha256": "729f5b4f06ff8e9b30b903352cb9541ca555aba076308042d507b53bf0fc086f"
  },
  {
    "step": 1206,
    "title": "Test total-loss recovery of the clipped baseline",
    "question": "Can total reduction488 identify the three lost source lifespans?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1205",
      "C1143"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:26:17.058450+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "729f5b4f06ff8e9b30b903352cb9541ca555aba076308042d507b53bf0fc086f",
    "results": {
      "ambiguity": {
        "path": "model/SP_total_excess_ambiguity.json",
        "sha256": "38552129de7b83e606e002bd913c6a5b105c31a1b2f1a1aa3161f1477465bceb",
        "bytes": 476
      },
      "same_total": 488
    },
    "finding": "Total488 gives one equation for three removed amounts. Moving one year between Jared and Methuselah preserves every capped output and the total while changing the baseline ledger.",
    "reassessment": "Determine what extra located measurements would resolve the loss distribution.",
    "checks": {
      "same_total": true,
      "same_caps": true,
      "kernel2": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:26:17.059098+00:00",
    "sha256": "3beb9a4a6b56a24aa33c80cbe02f32e4293395766ee78cfaa86e2bb145bf00ef"
  },
  {
    "step": 1207,
    "title": "Identify the missing located measurements for cap recovery",
    "question": "How many extra independent excess measurements supplement the total?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1206"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:27:07.215551+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "3beb9a4a6b56a24aa33c80cbe02f32e4293395766ee78cfaa86e2bb145bf00ef",
    "results": {
      "measurement_completion": {
        "path": "model/SP_excess_measurement_completion.json",
        "sha256": "4fc6202631b89ebf6649113e942494dbf1adf1a0b8e97840042b384ef675a920",
        "bytes": 515
      },
      "recovered": [
        115,
        249,
        124
      ]
    },
    "finding": "After the total is retained, two independent located excesses recover the third. The source must still provide those measurements or equivalent baseline facts.",
    "reassessment": "Relate rounded reduction to exact cap excess using the residual identity.",
    "checks": {
      "rank3": true,
      "exact": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:27:07.217447+00:00",
    "sha256": "316a83011e391ec9d62a4335b59aca207ab135b9c5d6742c003e28be1047f6b2"
  },
  {
    "step": 1208,
    "title": "Explain the change from exact to rounded cap reduction",
    "question": "Why does total488 become485 under row rounding?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1204",
      "C1143",
      "C1131 inherited cap-round result"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:27:09.166462+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "316a83011e391ec9d62a4335b59aca207ab135b9c5d6742c003e28be1047f6b2",
    "results": {
      "loss_identity": {
        "path": "model/cap_round_loss_identity.json",
        "sha256": "238adb4d7804f3f7873b3ee15c3ac61e23e8c1f7b8bf0615c2b7b462b5c3cb14",
        "bytes": 1794
      },
      "exact_total": 488,
      "rounded_total": 485
    },
    "finding": "Rounded reduction equals exact removed life plus the difference of the two rounding errors. The three SP cap losses115/249/124 become115/250/120, explaining488→485 without a second cap rule.",
    "reassessment": "Check what commutes when both the cap and its input are rounded consistently.",
    "checks": {
      "identity_all": true,
      "totals": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:27:09.167822+00:00",
    "sha256": "1244961a0b50d087dce02dadbe3282140ad91c9f13efd6c1ebc5df68703fb63c"
  },
  {
    "step": 1209,
    "title": "State the exact cap-round commutation condition",
    "question": "When does rounding commute with the cap?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1208",
      "C1131 inherited cap-round theorem"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:27:11.159718+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "1244961a0b50d087dce02dadbe3282140ad91c9f13efd6c1ebc5df68703fb63c",
    "results": {
      "commutation_scope": {
        "path": "model/cap_round_commutation_scope.json",
        "sha256": "3a28ca3976b2b3e0c3db3acc855fbab20e1484a32e4cf271b3787b19eb686a3f",
        "bytes": 450
      }
    },
    "finding": "Cap and rounding commute when both quantities are rounded by the same monotone rule. Keeping the capacity exact on only one route changes the operation; it is not a counterexample to that theorem.",
    "reassessment": "Test whether rounding preserves the strict fact that a life exceeded capacity.",
    "checks": {
      "monotone_checks": true,
      "witness_values": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:27:11.160246+00:00",
    "sha256": "74a19343aab6121ea572fd8ed73239378aaa8634bdb5fe33ead4fdee495f8336"
  },
  {
    "step": 1210,
    "title": "Distinguish cap commutation from strict clipping visibility",
    "question": "Can exact clipping disappear after rounding, and can an unrounded cap change the result?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1209",
      "C1203"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:27:53.412297+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "74a19343aab6121ea572fd8ed73239378aaa8634bdb5fe33ead4fdee495f8336",
    "results": {
      "witnesses": {
        "path": "model/cap_round_visibility_witnesses.json",
        "sha256": "9444cd743e2f3d518f91e21500c8d2c52c5d0ac6005ce952b1b6969fb8a4d77c",
        "bytes": 414
      }
    },
    "finding": "A one-year excess can disappear inside a rounded cell. Separately, L14 and c11 yield10 when the cap is rounded consistently but11 when only the input is rounded. C1209’s12/11 example did not distinguish the routes; this one does.",
    "reassessment": "State the strict clipping criterion in terms of rounded-cell thresholds.",
    "checks": {
      "hidden_strictness": true,
      "distinguished": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:27:53.412628+00:00",
    "sha256": "ffc58c8f773b31df16332527aec1f213641cd732cb8e3ac0e5f470cbef9ea419"
  },
  {
    "step": 1211,
    "title": "Determine the threshold for visible rounded clipping",
    "question": "How large must a life be for its cap reduction to remain visible after rounding?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1210",
      "C1203"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:27:55.384447+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "ffc58c8f773b31df16332527aec1f213641cd732cb8e3ac0e5f470cbef9ea419",
    "results": {
      "visibility": {
        "path": "model/cap_round_strict_visibility.json",
        "sha256": "2a81074b2f3001decdb18bf7167d22e03ff71e1a0520a12704f08f3800f0b0b3",
        "bytes": 736
      },
      "thresholds": [
        848,
        723,
        658
      ]
    },
    "finding": "Visible rounded clipping begins at Q(c)+3. For the SP capacities the thresholds are848,723 and658; the actual baseline lives exceed them comfortably, so all three reductions remain visible.",
    "reassessment": "Summarize cap and rounding as distinct kinds of information loss before returning to cross-family transformations.",
    "checks": {
      "thresholds": true,
      "actual_visible": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:27:55.384973+00:00",
    "sha256": "cf2997c629bac5adbe616fe68c1619795c68af5091b121e357c6fc1cbe5ed7ad"
  },
  {
    "step": 1212,
    "title": "Write the cap-and-round information bridge",
    "question": "How can the two operations agree forward while remaining non-invertible?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1202–C1211",
      "C1143"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:27:57.347957+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "cf2997c629bac5adbe616fe68c1619795c68af5091b121e357c6fc1cbe5ed7ad",
    "results": {
      "explanation": {
        "path": "deliverables/Cap_and_Round_Information.md",
        "sha256": "228c06a4b52ef3e54734d8e061292c124824d661fc306bc2a2d662d7cbd03a80",
        "bytes": 1893
      }
    },
    "finding": "The cap-to-Rounded interface now has both a forward rule and an exact account of its lost information. This completes the bounded information analysis and returns attention to source mechanisms feeding larger chronology relations.",
    "reassessment": "Check which whole-genealogy row operations are preserved by nearest-five rounding.",
    "checks": {
      "capacity_table": true,
      "source_counts": true,
      "stages": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:27:57.348286+00:00",
    "sha256": "23f31a596d3140b7457f466f5e0945cde16b8f82ed365ace16d05d9026eb4241"
  },
  {
    "step": 1213,
    "title": "Test row operations that translate by the five-year lattice",
    "question": "Which changes pass through nearest-five rounding without changing their amplitude?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1182",
      "C1199",
      "prep/review1182_1201 pending independent review"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:29:06.281790+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "23f31a596d3140b7457f466f5e0945cde16b8f82ed365ace16d05d9026eb4241",
    "results": {
      "equivariance": {
        "path": "model/round_lattice_equivariance.json",
        "sha256": "cd4cba7a1d4f52780ea7a1406c86691f7f48b8dbaefa232792e71ca96049ced1",
        "bytes": 504
      }
    },
    "finding": "All translations by multiples of five pass through rounding exactly, including the century, half-century, forty and sixty changes. The signed carry notation uses an algebraic extension, not negative source durations.",
    "reassessment": "Locate the only whole-genealogy amplitudes outside that lattice.",
    "checks": {
      "all_translation_cases": true,
      "two_off_lattice": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:29:06.282246+00:00",
    "sha256": "d8888961095773dcd375ca4baa91c39f66218acc52b18322cd77ca1eb20e7ddb"
  },
  {
    "step": 1214,
    "title": "Compute the Rounded common-row change field",
    "question": "Where do the five source amplitudes change after rounding?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1182",
      "C1213"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:29:08.314535+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "d8888961095773dcd375ca4baa91c39f66218acc52b18322cd77ca1eb20e7ddb",
    "results": {
      "rounded_field": {
        "path": "model/whole_genealogy_rounded_changes.json",
        "sha256": "59c733198e1c6b2dca7c08d425e2a4764198b31dcf334d79cc93652e6fc96cd3",
        "bytes": 3065
      },
      "changed_rows": [
        "Lamech",
        "Arphaxad",
        "Shelah"
      ]
    },
    "finding": "Only Lamech and the Arphaxad/Shelah pair change their lifespan-difference amplitudes:−24 becomes−20, while each27 becomes25. Every common-row begetting difference survives exactly.",
    "reassessment": "Determine why the whole Cumulative head difference nevertheless stays unchanged.",
    "checks": {
      "three_changes": true,
      "all_birth_deltas": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:29:08.315419+00:00",
    "sha256": "ee4e3ed3d9b2e34ce4da147b4003e4f17ab25b5e1de1a1007370eb18eedb87ca"
  },
  {
    "step": 1215,
    "title": "Explain the exact cancellation in the Rounded head difference",
    "question": "Why do local rounding changes preserve the total430?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1214"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:29:10.374185+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "ee4e3ed3d9b2e34ce4da147b4003e4f17ab25b5e1de1a1007370eb18eedb87ca",
    "results": {
      "cancellation": {
        "path": "model/whole_genealogy_rounded_head_cancellation.json",
        "sha256": "3d45a7d600eda8d3b759b2b612bd9ca5267b4804fb9b58fa83e23698e46fce33",
        "bytes": 436
      },
      "located_errors": [
        {
          "name": "Lamech",
          "difference_error": 4
        },
        {
          "name": "Arphaxad",
          "difference_error": -2
        },
        {
          "name": "Shelah",
          "difference_error": -2
        }
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The Rounded Cumulative total remains430 because Lamech contributes+4 and Arphaxad/Shelah contribute−2 each. The cancellation explains the shared head while predicting an internal displacement field.",
    "reassessment": "Reconstruct the internal rounding-displacement field rather than stop at its zero total.",
    "checks": {
      "cancels": true,
      "heads430": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:29:10.374656+00:00",
    "sha256": "268065dc94c7df85f65656030e021aa590c9aa49622bcf48c4a9fb9d73239916"
  },
  {
    "step": 1216,
    "title": "Reconstruct the hidden interior effect of head cancellation",
    "question": "Which cumulative boundaries move even though the head error is zero?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1215"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:29:12.387992+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "268065dc94c7df85f65656030e021aa590c9aa49622bcf48c4a9fb9d73239916",
    "results": {
      "interior_field": {
        "path": "model/whole_genealogy_rounding_interior_field.json",
        "sha256": "6d567b190a9b6394b05ca6e81b64f7eefde7f8e2021b4b92f407e75e25fa0c2d",
        "bytes": 916
      },
      "nonzero_boundaries": [
        {
          "boundary": "Noah",
          "difference_error": -4
        },
        {
          "boundary": "Shem",
          "difference_error": -4
        },
        {
          "boundary": "Arphaxad",
          "difference_error": -4
        },
        {
          "boundary": "Shelah",
          "difference_error": -2
        }
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The head cancellation hides a−4 comparison shift at Noah, Shem and Arphaxad, followed by−2 at Shelah. Adjacent differences recover the three local rounding changes exactly.",
    "reassessment": "Check compatibility with separately rounded remaining years and identify the carry change.",
    "checks": {
      "head_terminal_zero": true,
      "recurrence": true,
      "nonzero4": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:29:12.390524+00:00",
    "sha256": "05c9eb4596a23c5d92a7bf787703c21929e0f1b60b2a915d78004a7236b807d1"
  },
  {
    "step": 1217,
    "title": "Locate the row where the rounding carry itself changes",
    "question": "Does rounded lifespan change always equal rounded begetting plus remaining-year changes?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1214",
      "C1199"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:29:14.399115+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "05c9eb4596a23c5d92a7bf787703c21929e0f1b60b2a915d78004a7236b807d1",
    "results": {
      "carry_change": {
        "path": "model/whole_genealogy_rounded_carry_change.json",
        "sha256": "9e64605b3c1b687ca5656ad9eb06a5cfe846fd29f54ea82de3a48bd97031fdc8",
        "bytes": 1422
      },
      "nonzero": [
        {
          "name": "Lamech",
          "carry_change": 5
        }
      ]
    },
    "finding": "Lamech alone changes the carry, by+5. Its Rounded lifespan adjustment is−20, while its rounded remaining-year adjustment is−25; keeping the carry reconciles both constructions.",
    "reassessment": "Summarize the whole-row route into Rounded chronology and select the next larger family connection.",
    "checks": {
      "onlyLamech": true,
      "sum5": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:29:14.399680+00:00",
    "sha256": "e172278e3603cd66a7bf10fdcbb9d2a8f3fc422b899c92b917e2732e3190c525"
  },
  {
    "step": 1218,
    "title": "Lift source translations to Rounded values plus residuals",
    "question": "How can a non-grid row change act coherently on the Rounded representation?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1213–C1217",
      "prep/round_joint_fibres.md"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:30:55.328517+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "e172278e3603cd66a7bf10fdcbb9d2a8f3fc422b899c92b917e2732e3190c525",
    "results": {
      "translation": {
        "path": "model/rounded_residual_translation.json",
        "sha256": "f9e2b0fdc53f2c54c40d63f1de6d2aaa0aa0eef6eb8f7fe79eb7cde3bd98fdee",
        "bytes": 936
      },
      "examples": [
        {
          "x": 777,
          "d": -24,
          "Q_x": 775,
          "rho": 2,
          "rounded_shift": -20,
          "new_rounded": 755,
          "new_residual": -2
        },
        {
          "x": 595,
          "d": -24,
          "Q_x": 595,
          "rho": 0,
          "rounded_shift": -25,
          "new_rounded": 570,
          "new_residual": 1
        },
        {
          "x": 438,
          "d": 27,
          "Q_x": 440,
          "rho": -2,
          "rounded_shift": 25,
          "new_rounded": 465,
          "new_residual": 0
        },
        {
          "x": 433,
          "d": 27,
          "Q_x": 435,
          "rho": -2,
          "rounded_shift": 25,
          "new_rounded": 460,
          "new_residual": 0
        }
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The retained residual determines how an off-grid change crosses rounded cells. This single rule explains why the same−24 change produces−20 in Lamech’s rounded lifespan and−25 in his rounded remainder.",
    "reassessment": "Verify the lifted rule across every ordinary existing tradition comparison.",
    "checks": {
      "all_examples": true,
      "different_shifts": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:30:55.328995+00:00",
    "sha256": "ab653031c1d0b310364ae75a98de6bfb2be19a9338c613c6a4e47707f1f75ba4"
  },
  {
    "step": 1219,
    "title": "Verify the lifted rule on all ordinary tradition changes",
    "question": "Does one residual law cover all35 common-row comparisons and all three measurements?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1218",
      "model/complete_source_row_packet.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:30:57.310860+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "ab653031c1d0b310364ae75a98de6bfb2be19a9338c613c6a4e47707f1f75ba4",
    "results": {
      "all_translations": {
        "path": "model/all_ordinary_lifted_translations.json",
        "sha256": "2758dc3c28556dbcad313c1eb49e12d357695a36b441e826377b20681d96a5ce",
        "bytes": 20768
      },
      "measurement_checks": 105
    },
    "finding": "The lifted rule reconstructs all105 rounded measurements across35 ordinary existing row comparisons. It unifies source shifts with Rounded representation while preserving the native insertion and inclusive-row distinctions.",
    "reassessment": "Test composition so that the rule applies to a sequence of source changes.",
    "checks": {
      "105checks": true,
      "all_match": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:30:57.311863+00:00",
    "sha256": "12db7d2b624388c3f3753b990726ee3bb97939d244c5f898654e7ab5577ef5b3"
  },
  {
    "step": 1220,
    "title": "Prove coherence of consecutive rounded-residual translations",
    "question": "Does the lifted action depend on how an admitted total shift is decomposed?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1218",
      "C1219"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:30:59.326469+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "12db7d2b624388c3f3753b990726ee3bb97939d244c5f898654e7ab5577ef5b3",
    "results": {
      "composition": {
        "path": "model/rounded_translation_composition.json",
        "sha256": "75a28f7bb3d4a6f20397c95c1ee5d51b30d61bd6dc6d190fbb0db940da93dba8",
        "bytes": 384
      },
      "diagnostic_cases": 25
    },
    "finding": "The lifted translations compose exactly because they retain the full original value. Their coherence is mathematical; source authorization of each intermediate state remains separate.",
    "reassessment": "Determine precisely when the residual may be dropped without breaking a universal shift rule.",
    "checks": {
      "all_cases": true,
      "25cases": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:30:59.326980+00:00",
    "sha256": "c74d03e7bb0f6fd6dc2f9508f6ca8d8f644702e763748aefb46f89434f09b18d"
  },
  {
    "step": 1221,
    "title": "Characterize source shifts that descend to rounded cells",
    "question": "When can the Rounded value alone determine the Rounded shifted value for every input?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1213",
      "C1220"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:31:01.330411+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "c74d03e7bb0f6fd6dc2f9508f6ca8d8f644702e763748aefb46f89434f09b18d",
    "results": {
      "criterion": {
        "path": "model/rounded_cell_shift_criterion.json",
        "sha256": "4c2cbdaadd6fd462334918a11e56c5bcae951522a91a8675add093e2ff9ebb15",
        "bytes": 1385
      }
    },
    "finding": "Only multiples of five act on all Rounded cells without residual information. The off-grid27 and−24 changes therefore need source residues; their successful finite examples do not define a universal rounded-only rule.",
    "reassessment": "Conclude the second block’s local-to-Rounded bridge and begin the Strategy’s equal-gain source provenance.",
    "checks": {
      "each_splits": true,
      "same_initial_cell": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:31:01.330840+00:00",
    "sha256": "84ad885f597b1b2aa40c7bf22a2d231f08c7756a1b7fb3b0eadd72b314f71e89"
  },
  {
    "step": 1222,
    "title": "Write the source-change to Rounded-path synthesis",
    "question": "What has the full-row test established beyond endpoint agreement?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1213–C1221",
      "C1189"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:31:03.286021+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "84ad885f597b1b2aa40c7bf22a2d231f08c7756a1b7fb3b0eadd72b314f71e89",
    "results": {
      "synthesis": {
        "path": "deliverables/Source_Changes_to_Rounded_Paths.md",
        "sha256": "9629485664a6702d46147cf21859dfd7a987ccbba15aee8da413d1846b06a230",
        "bytes": 1632
      }
    },
    "finding": "The full-row test explains both stable totals and shifted internal boundaries through located residuals. It supplies the mechanism needed to carry source families into Rounded representations.",
    "reassessment": "Bind the source-appointed nodes and wrappers of the SP rectangle before substituting cap reductions.",
    "checks": {
      "whole_field": true,
      "scope": true,
      "next_strategy": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:31:03.286462+00:00",
    "sha256": "0064433763922485e81deebfa8516f834f4aff9cbfb920184e4061f22886fe51"
  },
  {
    "step": 1223,
    "title": "Bind the source nodes of the SP equal-gain rectangle",
    "question": "Which node classes and placements must remain distinct before the row mechanisms are substituted?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "Strategy §4.3",
      "File18 §§3.1,6C.1",
      "File22",
      "prep/family_synthesis_candidates.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:32:29.012764+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "0064433763922485e81deebfa8516f834f4aff9cbfb920184e4061f22886fe51",
    "results": {
      "source_nodes": {
        "path": "model/SP_rectangle_source_nodes.json",
        "sha256": "73d96eaab3a4be396ee556bf510367945b9a26048dc881a7653e8d321fd91c23",
        "bytes": 1113
      }
    },
    "finding": "The rectangle uses the Regular week opening4206 and Cumulative decade opening13406. Their underlying4199 and13396 endpoints have different wrappers; these supplied source roles must remain visible.",
    "reassessment": "Generate the Regular head from the located source begetting changes and declared frame shift.",
    "checks": {
      "five_bindings": true,
      "wrappers": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:33:40.687282+00:00",
    "sha256": "4ec3f8cfe1272f897337b2abe6c3f0965d00d945de509426dfc0daa2db1ecc68"
  },
  {
    "step": 1224,
    "title": "Derive the Regular rectangle radius from source row changes",
    "question": "Can the reconstructed source changes account for the Regular2760 input?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1223",
      "C1143",
      "C1157",
      "File22 Actual4114"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:33:42.643569+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "4ec3f8cfe1272f897337b2abe6c3f0965d00d945de509426dfc0daa2db1ecc68",
    "results": {
      "regular_provenance": {
        "path": "model/SP_rectangle_regular_provenance.json",
        "sha256": "2f8b03fe5ba73a792a2d88f7055f234c51f0dab12223a1293ccf05731dcd1893",
        "bytes": 343
      },
      "radius": 2760
    },
    "finding": "The Regular input2760 decomposes into the MT baseline radius, post-Flood+650, pre-Flood−350, the declared−215 frame change and the seven-year wrapper. The row grammar explains the two genealogical changes; frame and wrapper remain source premises.",
    "reassessment": "Generate the Cumulative radius using the cap loss and post-Flood life changes.",
    "checks": {
      "native4199": true,
      "opening4206": true,
      "radius2760": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:33:42.644030+00:00",
    "sha256": "3abc7c0960048edb4471a5b3c9cbc5a486f27fee458dae2aa6faa6cfb8b34701"
  },
  {
    "step": 1225,
    "title": "Derive the Cumulative rectangle radius from the cap",
    "question": "Can the new cap mechanism explain the Cumulative11960 input?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1223",
      "C1143",
      "C1157",
      "File22 Actual14004"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:33:44.607605+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "3abc7c0960048edb4471a5b3c9cbc5a486f27fee458dae2aa6faa6cfb8b34701",
    "results": {
      "cumulative_provenance": {
        "path": "model/SP_rectangle_cumulative_provenance.json",
        "sha256": "b4e710d1dcc79ad4e3027ef0ccb10ff8072422c99e855b58b9a6643bcd2ee467",
        "bytes": 361
      },
      "radius": 11960
    },
    "finding": "The Cumulative input11960 is now traced through the cap-generated488 and the separate Eber/Terah120 reduction, followed by its supplied decade opening. This explains the source mechanism behind the existing endpoint.",
    "reassessment": "Apply the established Keys to the two fully sourced radii and classify what is new.",
    "checks": {
      "loss608": true,
      "completion13396": true,
      "opening13406": true,
      "radius11960": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:33:44.607968+00:00",
    "sha256": "86a251d0431823777a829fa6e51dd259b35589a20e2d3e88baf66c315d538dab"
  },
  {
    "step": 1226,
    "title": "Close the source-to-Key rectangle",
    "question": "Do the two source-generated radii produce the same40-year gain?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1224",
      "C1225",
      "Strategy §4.3"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:33:46.553257+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "86a251d0431823777a829fa6e51dd259b35589a20e2d3e88baf66c315d538dab",
    "results": {
      "rectangle": {
        "path": "model/SP_rectangle_source_to_keys.json",
        "sha256": "2915b2ba9d1a46ccd7d9d007050f8822558866bd9ac4f478d7e5a612fd262477",
        "bytes": 444
      },
      "gains": [
        40,
        40
      ],
      "gap": 9200
    },
    "finding": "The reconstructed inputs give the established40/40 gains to Conquest1406, preserving9200, whose25/23 expansion is10000. The advance is the genealogy-to-cap-to-Key explanation, not another independent occurrence of those numbers.",
    "reassessment": "Determine which supplied placements are essential to the equal-gain equality.",
    "checks": {
      "gains40": true,
      "same_target": true,
      "gap9200": true,
      "expanded10000": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:33:46.553745+00:00",
    "sha256": "3dd7ca3b747f0a73d39da7ea3dca814fa4160e517c5c9a0b915f7bc6a5fbc49a"
  },
  {
    "step": 1227,
    "title": "Audit the wrapper contribution to equal gains",
    "question": "Does the equality follow from the two genealogical endpoints before their wrappers are applied?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1223–C1226"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:33:48.529777+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "3dd7ca3b747f0a73d39da7ea3dca814fa4160e517c5c9a0b915f7bc6a5fbc49a",
    "results": {
      "wrapper_audit": {
        "path": "model/SP_rectangle_wrapper_residual.json",
        "sha256": "9e3470448d64f0c911e014dd204e25ae4d7bc479ae9e914445477ab1967f3468",
        "bytes": 353
      },
      "unwrapped_balance": 61,
      "wrapper_balance": -61
    },
    "finding": "Before the wrappers, the equal-gain balance is61 rather than zero. The distinct+7 and+10 source openings contribute−61 and complete the equality. The cap mechanism explains the life reduction but does not independently generate the chosen node roles.",
    "reassessment": "Test whether the equal-gain claim is stable under a common relocation of its target anchor.",
    "checks": {
      "raw61": true,
      "wrapper_minus61": true,
      "gain_difference": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:33:48.530212+00:00",
    "sha256": "703f24cd45c0f40a3488717df979e79f4441be88ced251ed999dcbffbb0c9eb9"
  },
  {
    "step": 1228,
    "title": "Distinguish common translation from a changed held anchor",
    "question": "Is equal gain automatic for another comparison anchor?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1227",
      "Strategy §4.3"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:34:52.061874+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "703f24cd45c0f40a3488717df979e79f4441be88ced251ed999dcbffbb0c9eb9",
    "results": {
      "anchor_dependence": {
        "path": "model/SP_rectangle_anchor_dependence.json",
        "sha256": "79f6de07f587cb73249f1bc7555e484298cff70ca7200a7c88fb9f3c98ceba84",
        "bytes": 612
      },
      "conditional_anchor": 1446
    },
    "finding": "For these fixed source heads, equal gain selects1446 algebraically. Moving only the comparison anchor breaks the equality; translating the complete frame preserves it. The source’s Exodus identification is separate from the equation.",
    "reassessment": "Present the entire source-to-rectangle dependency chain with its explanatory limits.",
    "checks": {
      "anchor1446": true,
      "law_all": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:34:52.062289+00:00",
    "sha256": "bdde5a6b66cad440abd7e33cc0cc5e4d793a3323fc867e4a79edb458894fb51f"
  },
  {
    "step": 1229,
    "title": "Write the Strategy rectangle from the row mechanisms",
    "question": "Can the larger relation now be explained as one connected construction?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1223–C1228",
      "C1143",
      "C1154"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:34:54.027007+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "bdde5a6b66cad440abd7e33cc0cc5e4d793a3323fc867e4a79edb458894fb51f",
    "results": {
      "explanation": {
        "path": "deliverables/Source_Rows_to_SP_Equal_Gain_Rectangle.md",
        "sha256": "26de2697e7a6c74c6b60fff95888ed90aa329d5e386cc19f8a425cf909036285",
        "bytes": 2058
      }
    },
    "finding": "The Strategy rectangle is now a connected source-row, cap, placement and Key construction. Its inherited numerical closure is explained alongside the remaining absolute and node-role premises.",
    "reassessment": "Review the second block’s net explanatory gain and choose the next complete source family.",
    "checks": {
      "all_stages": true,
      "source_limits": true,
      "no_new_count": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:34:54.027440+00:00",
    "sha256": "9d421189b237e536e5818f40055c8e57e86b1db7f072120169aa2c1abb335e27"
  },
  {
    "step": 1230,
    "title": "Assess the second block before the required Strategy reread",
    "question": "Which gains advance explanation, and which proposed work should now stop?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1182–C1229",
      "prep/family_synthesis_candidates.json",
      "prep/review1182_1201.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:34:55.998972+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "9d421189b237e536e5818f40055c8e57e86b1db7f072120169aa2c1abb335e27",
    "results": {
      "ledger": {
        "path": "model/block2_explanation_cost_ledger.json",
        "sha256": "0520b903d46fd6e56955a0a4a36b6c6b2b9c2d0eb3433e2d55efcb1354493b60",
        "bytes": 1564
      },
      "next_candidate": "File51a §7A Moses-centred complete family"
    },
    "finding": "The second block has connected complete genealogies to Rounded information and the Strategy rectangle. The next useful move is a full source-appointed Moses-centred family, rather than more generic rank or fibre enumeration.",
    "reassessment": "Close the100-action checkpoint, then reread the entire Strategy before selecting C1232.",
    "checks": {
      "six_topics": true,
      "native_scope": true,
      "source_costs": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:34:55.999700+00:00",
    "sha256": "58a9b49ec981354236525aa595d9ad3b73afdf1cec5902f50a8eb2bd6d1616f1"
  },
  {
    "step": 1231,
    "title": "Close the second fifty-action checkpoint",
    "question": "What completed results and unresolved premises should the next full Strategy review assess?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1182–C1230",
      "Strategy.md"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:34:57.941040+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "58a9b49ec981354236525aa595d9ad3b73afdf1cec5902f50a8eb2bd6d1616f1",
    "results": {
      "checkpoint": {
        "path": "deliverables/Block_02_C1182_C1231_Checkpoint.json",
        "sha256": "5bbee6cd906bd6183bf6db9f8156f0b3d5771af1f0b716c98b0437c72656b8b7",
        "bytes": 1422
      },
      "completed_actions": 100,
      "remaining_actions": 200
    },
    "finding": "The second50 actions are closed, with exact artifacts and appended clarifications retained. A fresh full Strategy review must now decide the next action.",
    "reassessment": "Read the complete Strategy and reassess the larger family explanation before beginning C1232.",
    "checks": {
      "fifty": true,
      "six_artifacts": true,
      "all_exist": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:34:57.941770+00:00",
    "sha256": "79533b03647c08d1385247d11e94fef4038e957b7bcc1cd43bf02d887b5e6230"
  },
  {
    "step": 1232,
    "title": "Freeze the Moses-family source roles before reconstruction",
    "question": "What precisely is the object called cumulative position in File51a§7A?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "File51a §§3.1,7A",
      "prep/moses_centred_construction.json",
      "Strategy review afterC1231"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:38:11.483119+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "79533b03647c08d1385247d11e94fef4038e957b7bcc1cd43bf02d887b5e6230",
    "results": {
      "source_scope": {
        "path": "model/Moses_family_source_scope.json",
        "sha256": "06a5bba4785e5618166ca37a2d8af33481b69bffbe2ec5d55896822d63defe0f",
        "bytes": 33769
      },
      "literal_excerpts_checked": 12
    },
    "finding": "The Moses family is an accumulated Regular path, not a sum of patriarchal lifespans. Its source roles, strict state and fixed terminus are now explicit before reconstruction.",
    "reassessment": "Derive the late Jacob–Joseph–Entry–Moses path from the stated source constants.",
    "checks": {
      "excerpts12": true,
      "MTstate": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:39:30.462322+00:00",
    "sha256": "7f76461a2706311af841c1c5af4fe570dc63a0dcf90823e622304e427b484b3d"
  },
  {
    "step": 1233,
    "title": "Derive the late path without invented genealogical intervals",
    "question": "What source-supplied quantities connect Jacob to Moses?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1232",
      "File51a §§2.3.1,7A.4"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:39:32.490069+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "7f76461a2706311af841c1c5af4fe570dc63a0dcf90823e622304e427b484b3d",
    "results": {
      "late_path": {
        "path": "model/Moses_late_path.json",
        "sha256": "5388360af0150b9b39529cc6c4be9c594b16117ae94a2405c94581d7d1f62f64",
        "bytes": 606
      },
      "actual": [
        91,
        39,
        350
      ],
      "rounded": [
        90,
        40,
        350
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The source constants give Jacob→Joseph91, Joseph→Entry39 and Entry→Moses350. Rounding gives90+40+350 while preserving480 from Jacob to Moses; no missing Levitical begetting ages are needed.",
    "reassessment": "Accumulate the complete MT row path to the fixedMoses terminus.",
    "checks": {
      "actual": true,
      "rounded": true,
      "sum480": true,
      "430split": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:39:32.490888+00:00",
    "sha256": "76f9556e3f9223dfdff315b6ff66077baddc3bfc089ba80cc86f930c394e4b19"
  },
  {
    "step": 1234,
    "title": "Reconstruct the full MT path to Moses",
    "question": "Does ordered row rounding generate the entire selected birth field?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1233",
      "model/complete_source_row_packet.json",
      "File51a §3.1"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:39:34.510698+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "76f9556e3f9223dfdff315b6ff66077baddc3bfc089ba80cc86f930c394e4b19",
    "results": {
      "complete_path": {
        "path": "model/Moses_MT_complete_path.json",
        "sha256": "2fe1381ccaccd97ad19616296b7c616507d4de1e0d87a7ee6de89b110edc3ec1",
        "bytes": 3929
      },
      "nodes": 25,
      "head_actual": 4112,
      "head_rounded": 4106
    },
    "finding": "The complete25-node path generates strictActual4112 and Rounded4106 at Adam, withMoses1526 held. Its2580 span is obtained from the source intervals rather than inserted as a target.",
    "reassessment": "Compare every one of the23 named source births with the literal table.",
    "checks": {
      "25nodes": true,
      "heads": true,
      "total2580": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:39:34.511419+00:00",
    "sha256": "c825c6911a045d7ec949265c7b56d61e5cfac60bf9dded570798bdbfce32c43c"
  },
  {
    "step": 1235,
    "title": "Compare the complete generated field with the literal MT table",
    "question": "Do all source births agree, including the rounding displacement changes?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1234",
      "File51a §3.1",
      "prep/moses_centred_construction.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:39:36.466914+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "c825c6911a045d7ec949265c7b56d61e5cfac60bf9dded570798bdbfce32c43c",
    "results": {
      "literal_comparison": {
        "path": "model/Moses_MT_literal_comparison.json",
        "sha256": "8b1248523155d5fb20d383d2697c41527128d04648320d88b9071cc3dbff10eb",
        "bytes": 4164
      },
      "source_births": 23
    },
    "finding": "All23 source births agree in both the strictActual and Rounded columns. The complete displacement pattern is reproduced without fitting individual BC labels.",
    "reassessment": "Partition the generated whole path at the source-appointed Adam, Seth, Enoch, Arphaxad andReu nodes.",
    "checks": {
      "all23": true,
      "all_fields": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:39:36.469695+00:00",
    "sha256": "362bba7b5268b78ee6d944a06e120858dead982a4693cba9ed42ebe1e613e8f8"
  },
  {
    "step": 1236,
    "title": "Build the complete five-block Moses path",
    "question": "Which ordered source segments generate all the selected cycle displays?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1234",
      "File51a §§7A.1–7A.4"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:39:38.417213+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "362bba7b5268b78ee6d944a06e120858dead982a4693cba9ed42ebe1e613e8f8",
    "results": {
      "five_blocks": {
        "path": "model/Moses_five_source_blocks.json",
        "sha256": "a91b4f03fd5a396f77ecfb589276deb60f91456b851a48563addce0a32e7de1f",
        "bytes": 1522
      },
      "spans": [
        130,
        490,
        1030,
        130,
        800
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The source path decomposes as130|490|1030|130|800. Its selected430/490 relationships can now be derived from the whole ordered family, with every internal age retained.",
    "reassessment": "Derive the three cycle comparisons from this one complete block field.",
    "checks": {
      "five_spans": true,
      "whole2580": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:39:38.418056+00:00",
    "sha256": "1cdacc034d0e9cca51dc49f28996205bde5df1066ecdc8681185f02c19b436d1"
  },
  {
    "step": 1237,
    "title": "Derive the three Moses cycle spans from the full path",
    "question": "How do the430 and490 families share this source chronology?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1236",
      "File51a §7A.1"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:40:43.642062+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "1cdacc034d0e9cca51dc49f28996205bde5df1066ecdc8681185f02c19b436d1",
    "results": {
      "cycle_family": {
        "path": "model/Moses_cycle_family.json",
        "sha256": "383622af80e02a860a556b78cab0e461136ba9ff53e4266e2f32899288d61ab4",
        "bytes": 479
      },
      "spans": [
        2580,
        2450,
        1960
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The complete path yields2580=6×430,2450=5×490 and1960=4×490. Their shared chronology and initial130/490 blocks explain the correspondence as one family.",
    "reassessment": "Test exactly what the130 bridge does and does not determine.",
    "checks": {
      "cycles": true,
      "ordered_subtractions": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:40:43.642740+00:00",
    "sha256": "1fd6b282ac7dd6df3e1b48b42b04e4d1d9e505c9e4a5d87046bb01a7a0dfb7aa"
  },
  {
    "step": 1238,
    "title": "Separate cycle compatibility from selection of the downstream node",
    "question": "Does Adam130 alone force the sourceMoses2580 position?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1237",
      "File51a §7A.2"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:40:45.663579+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "1fd6b282ac7dd6df3e1b48b42b04e4d1d9e505c9e4a5d87046bb01a7a0dfb7aa",
    "results": {
      "bridge_dependency": {
        "path": "model/Moses_bridge_dependency.json",
        "sha256": "38c25a7954001979fe0b8819837abdf7f7f785548833206462452b50c89e59cc",
        "bytes": 691
      }
    },
    "finding": "Adam130 links the two specified target lengths but does not independently choose their downstream node. The full source path supplies2580; the bridge then explains its simultaneous430/490 description.",
    "reassessment": "Trace the post-Flood130|800 partition back through the unrounded source intervals.",
    "checks": {
      "bridge130": true,
      "not_sufficient": true,
      "same_p": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:40:45.663977+00:00",
    "sha256": "61ae1281aebab090beb8114a89e57ae97942eddbf340ac017a531489bdb73bab"
  },
  {
    "step": 1239,
    "title": "Recover the unrounded source partition behind130 plus800",
    "question": "Which interval changes produce the two-part recapitulation?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1234",
      "C1236",
      "File51a §7A.4"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:40:47.712589+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "61ae1281aebab090beb8114a89e57ae97942eddbf340ac017a531489bdb73bab",
    "results": {
      "partition": {
        "path": "model/Moses_postflood_partition_residuals.json",
        "sha256": "ea4867aadb57486cb8c9f9d0698491cbf2304a0e6b644b303da9a4567b7af00b",
        "bytes": 1346
      },
      "actual": [
        129,
        801
      ],
      "rounded": [
        130,
        800
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The source partition129|801 becomes130|800. Eber contributes+1 beforeReu; Reu−2 andNahor+1 contribute−1 afterward, while Jacob−1 andJoseph+1 cancel in the tail.",
    "reassessment": "Show why the whole930 is conserved while its internal cut changes.",
    "checks": {
      "actual129801": true,
      "rounded130800": true,
      "conserved930": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:40:47.714087+00:00",
    "sha256": "f0c72be49d98083798a6eb1fec6c9f5a9e9c03f046c76b44d2226bebf86f607b"
  },
  {
    "step": 1240,
    "title": "Locate the conserved endpoints and shifted Reu boundary",
    "question": "How does the130|800 repartition act on the actual named coordinates?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1239",
      "C1234"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:40:49.858686+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "f0c72be49d98083798a6eb1fec6c9f5a9e9c03f046c76b44d2226bebf86f607b",
    "results": {
      "boundary_effect": {
        "path": "model/Moses_postflood_fixed_endpoints.json",
        "sha256": "d1c9d0ef76ad9721054add0426b26bf4fe4500b7d9bffd2692f6a55a97e47b5d",
        "bytes": 528
      },
      "nodes": [
        {
          "name": "Arphaxad",
          "actual_BC": 2456,
          "rounded_BC": 2456,
          "shift": 0
        },
        {
          "name": "Reu",
          "actual_BC": 2327,
          "rounded_BC": 2326,
          "shift": -1
        },
        {
          "name": "Moses",
          "actual_BC": 1526,
          "rounded_BC": 1526,
          "shift": 0
        }
      ]
    },
    "finding": "Arphaxad2456 andMoses1526 remain fixed, whileReu moves from2327 to2326. The130|800 pattern is a controlled change of the internal division, not a change to the930-year whole.",
    "reassessment": "Compare the two generated block measures withAdam biography without merging their source roles.",
    "checks": {
      "endpoints_fixed": true,
      "Reu_minus1": true,
      "names": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:40:49.863473+00:00",
    "sha256": "59cf6c59ba21b6a932756d544f38cc1af119ab618af6320ccaf63be42d7b1d89"
  },
  {
    "step": 1241,
    "title": "State the biographical and composite-path correspondence",
    "question": "How many new conditions are asserted by130 plus800 equals930?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1239",
      "File51a §7A.4",
      "model/complete_source_row_packet.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:40:51.870497+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "59cf6c59ba21b6a932756d544f38cc1af119ab618af6320ccaf63be42d7b1d89",
    "results": {
      "component_correspondence": {
        "path": "model/Moses_Adam_component_correspondence.json",
        "sha256": "c79ab436f165036017e2c7f77d5017c2a82d50a0982296779e4044d40aed81a6",
        "bytes": 607
      }
    },
    "finding": "The correspondence consists of two component equalities: the composite path has the same130 and800 measures asAdam’s biography. Their930 total follows from those equalities and is not a third independent constraint.",
    "reassessment": "Derive theShem-death430 display from the samepostFlood path andShem biography.",
    "checks": {
      "two_components": true,
      "total_follows": true,
      "composite_not_row": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:40:51.871224+00:00",
    "sha256": "6fc12af70df07cde20bb9b5f9991896dbeb41bf34a8005194ac52c8d82eafcd2"
  },
  {
    "step": 1242,
    "title": "Derive Shem’s death-to-Moses interval from the same family",
    "question": "Is the430 interval a separate chronological placement or a consequence of the retained path?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1241",
      "File51a §7A.3"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:42:09.747688+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "6fc12af70df07cde20bb9b5f9991896dbeb41bf34a8005194ac52c8d82eafcd2",
    "results": {
      "Shem_consequence": {
        "path": "model/Moses_Shem_death_consequence.json",
        "sha256": "9c68522f696c11245f897bffd9a7b2503f518c5873fed9b2660cf7fa13664d83",
        "bytes": 269
      },
      "death": 1956,
      "gap": 430
    },
    "finding": "Shem’s source100/600 biography and the930 post-Flood path give100+930−600=430. His1956 death and its430 interval toMoses follow from the same retained data.",
    "reassessment": "Transfer the two post-Flood blocks using the shared begetting-amplitude masks.",
    "checks": {
      "death1956": true,
      "gap430": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:42:09.748213+00:00",
    "sha256": "720fe5a281df20d78ca69a57d191f3655795ef9a817d7824f9535a3aece62daf"
  },
  {
    "step": 1243,
    "title": "Project the common begetting changes onto the Moses partition",
    "question": "Which part of the source amplitude dictionary does the two-part path observe?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1154",
      "C1239",
      "model/complete_source_row_packet.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:42:11.701929+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "720fe5a281df20d78ca69a57d191f3655795ef9a817d7824f9535a3aece62daf",
    "results": {
      "partition_transfer": {
        "path": "model/Moses_partition_amplitude_transfer.json",
        "sha256": "f950758b3fe2b42cd1af704145c84729b4233647d44bfe4fc1ba8a7c1fc99eb1",
        "bytes": 603
      },
      "SP": [
        530,
        1050
      ],
      "nativeLXX": [
        660,
        1050
      ]
    },
    "finding": "Four century changes enter the first block and two-and-a-half enter the second. They produceSP530|1050; nativeLXX addsCainan130 to the first, giving660|1050. Lifespan amplitudes are invisible to this Regular measurement.",
    "reassessment": "Reconstruct the full nativeLXX path independently and compare the projected blocks.",
    "checks": {
      "SP": true,
      "LXX": true,
      "shared_gain": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:42:11.702528+00:00",
    "sha256": "47f7e3b59dd6cde9fa1c0b31e0b437eaacd1250fac83329e3836ea15e0ed26c9"
  },
  {
    "step": 1244,
    "title": "Reconstruct the complete native LXX Moses path",
    "question": "Does the full native row chain agree with the projected two-block transfer?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1243",
      "model/complete_source_row_packet.json",
      "File51a §7A.5"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:42:13.702742+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "47f7e3b59dd6cde9fa1c0b31e0b437eaacd1250fac83329e3836ea15e0ed26c9",
    "results": {
      "native_path": {
        "path": "model/Moses_LXX_native_complete_path.json",
        "sha256": "349e15040eb75bcb325bb2c83865a847266e0b60a265da53410dc040515fd403",
        "bytes": 3839
      },
      "nodes": 26,
      "head": 5486,
      "postFlood_partition": [
        660,
        1050
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The complete26-node nativeLXX path givesCreation5486 and3960 toMoses, with exactly oneCainan. Its660|1050 post-Flood partition matches the row-mask transfer.",
    "reassessment": "Compare the completeMT/LXX head difference with its pre/postFlood and insertion components.",
    "checks": {
      "head5486": true,
      "native_one": true,
      "blocks": true,
      "nodes26": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:42:13.706127+00:00",
    "sha256": "e8b4474dc6801fe86e85af21aeb387d4d985f8679c2a0d75ce1460b80e09c67e"
  },
  {
    "step": 1245,
    "title": "Explain the Moses-centred MT to LXX whole-path difference",
    "question": "Which source components account for the1380 gap?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1244",
      "C1234",
      "C1187"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:42:15.874803+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "e8b4474dc6801fe86e85af21aeb387d4d985f8679c2a0d75ce1460b80e09c67e",
    "results": {
      "gap_provenance": {
        "path": "model/Moses_MT_LXX_gap_provenance.json",
        "sha256": "9477a963ed28fe8d44beedfde45d79929feaf8d97455b7f56fc044270a7121e8",
        "bytes": 431
      },
      "gap": 1380
    },
    "finding": "The1380 Moses-centred head gap is600 before theFlood,650 across sharedpostFlood rows and130 from nativeCainan. The source’s3960 factorisations describe that generatedLXX path; they do not add new chronological inputs.",
    "reassessment": "Keep the transmittedSP head separate while testing its permitted post-Flood comparison.",
    "checks": {
      "components": true,
      "LXXcycles": true,
      "MTcycle": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:42:15.875335+00:00",
    "sha256": "0e080899f4cc4a0bf0c2e39ba9f8b31d991efa901ba260655f9b5f1f01d22277"
  },
  {
    "step": 1246,
    "title": "Resolve the SP scope of the Moses comparison",
    "question": "What can be reconstructed without turning a conditional SP rounding diagnostic into its transmitted head?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1243",
      "File51a §7A.5",
      "C762 inherited",
      "prep/moses_centred_construction.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:42:17.860680+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "0e080899f4cc4a0bf0c2e39ba9f8b31d991efa901ba260655f9b5f1f01d22277",
    "results": {
      "SP_scope": {
        "path": "model/Moses_SP_source_scope.json",
        "sha256": "bb0226d26198bf20f123ba0f7b3376d4119b88230b85a8ad3803b14288a8d261",
        "bytes": 540
      },
      "block_comparison": [
        530,
        1050
      ],
      "transmitted_span": 2885
    },
    "finding": "The shared post-Flood row comparison gives530|1050, while4411 remains the source-transmittedSP block. Its2885 interval and1075 LXXgap are source comparisons, not a newly authorized completeSP Rounded chronology.",
    "reassessment": "Test the admittedMT Terah andCainan states against the wholeMoses family.",
    "checks": {
      "blocks": true,
      "transmitted2885": true,
      "gap1075": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:42:17.861259+00:00",
    "sha256": "6059f65b69562549b75606fda1673f4bd612f39f0b80bbb0a6f58cc02d30aa5d"
  },
  {
    "step": 1247,
    "title": "Generate the finite admitted MT Moses-state field",
    "question": "How do Terah+60 and one restoredCainan+130 affect every named comparison?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1246",
      "File51a §§4.4,7A",
      "File18 §1.6"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:43:40.403929+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "6059f65b69562549b75606fda1673f4bd612f39f0b80bbb0a6f58cc02d30aa5d",
    "results": {
      "finite_states": {
        "path": "model/Moses_finite_MT_states.json",
        "sha256": "2a986f97684f64c2d215b4ec84753f988bda2ed6fb26c762e66cadf2c8149608",
        "bytes": 1333
      },
      "states": 4
    },
    "finding": "The four admitted states shift the earlier cycle spans by0,130,60 or190, while separating the two post-Flood parts: Cainan changes the first, andTerah the second.",
    "reassessment": "Determine which specificMoses equalities survive this finite source-state field.",
    "checks": {
      "four_states": true,
      "source_branch": true,
      "double_branch": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:43:40.406174+00:00",
    "sha256": "1bb01778a9d42290152bbcf2bc521b80eb3952d11162e326b9e0ba9abfe0cdb9"
  },
  {
    "step": 1248,
    "title": "Classify surviving Moses relations across admitted states",
    "question": "Which relations are structural under the switches and which select the base state?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1247"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:43:42.393364+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "1bb01778a9d42290152bbcf2bc521b80eb3952d11162e326b9e0ba9abfe0cdb9",
    "results": {
      "relation_survival": {
        "path": "model/Moses_finite_relation_survival.json",
        "sha256": "e59d1304eb3a8f17875607d3c1e40f42b2218ef6f2aef034f3c68e5c17d97488",
        "bytes": 1181
      }
    },
    "finding": "The initial130 and490 differences survive every admitted switch because the affected downstream changes are shared. The exact6×430,5×490 and4×490 lengths select the base state, while each130/800 component tests its own switch separately.",
    "reassessment": "Show why matching only the930 total is weaker than matching bothcomponents in a general model.",
    "checks": {
      "gaps_all": true,
      "base_cycles_only": true,
      "first_matches2": true,
      "second_matches2": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:43:42.393777+00:00",
    "sha256": "979f4e434f1c211f30126c14fe0df71267ab61de92ad5d034c0351923d58ad8d"
  },
  {
    "step": 1249,
    "title": "Separate general component constraints from finite-state selection",
    "question": "Does930 alone characterize the130|800 recapitulation?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1241",
      "C1248"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:43:44.340334+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "979f4e434f1c211f30126c14fe0df71267ab61de92ad5d034c0351923d58ad8d",
    "results": {
      "constraint_scope": {
        "path": "model/Moses_total_vs_components.json",
        "sha256": "3954330c4e0ce81c119acb258672c86b4fca5c41c1c9b04e7bcdd495b71c8a73",
        "bytes": 624
      }
    },
    "finding": "The930 total alone does not determine its internal division: Actual129|801 andRounded130|800 demonstrate that directly. The total can still select the base within the separately declared four-state field because its other allowed changes are all positive.",
    "reassessment": "Inspect the sourcecyclebridge as an integerrelation without searching additionalchronologicaltargets.",
    "checks": {
      "formal_same_total": true,
      "distinct_partitions": true,
      "finite_base_only": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:43:44.340787+00:00",
    "sha256": "e1cb6415ea15fd391ab1252f93896d91d671344b5e92e61b4f55c8c853538925"
  },
  {
    "step": 1250,
    "title": "Determine the arithmetic freedom in the430/490 bridge",
    "question": "Does the integer bridge430m−490n=130 have only the source solution?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1238",
      "File51a §7A.2"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:43:46.390359+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "e1cb6415ea15fd391ab1252f93896d91d671344b5e92e61b4f55c8c853538925",
    "results": {
      "bridge_family": {
        "path": "model/Moses_cycle_bridge_integer_family.json",
        "sha256": "5511afbe3ed58ac79ffe1d94b93293f8fab73e811d91fa86e0454fffd7af8275",
        "bytes": 587
      }
    },
    "finding": "The bridge has infinitely many positive integer solutions, with6/5 the smallest in this fixed430/490 equation. That arithmetic property is separate from the source path’s identification ofMoses.",
    "reassessment": "Assess the minimal source packet that regenerates the completeMosesfamily rather than just itscyclelabels.",
    "checks": {
      "source_equation": true,
      "step_homogeneous": true,
      "examples": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:43:46.390729+00:00",
    "sha256": "0677fb515a567213d1cedea44caa1354604c9c1a595221eb22190378fe30c3e2"
  },
  {
    "step": 1251,
    "title": "Record the Moses family’s source-generation cost",
    "question": "What inputs generate the complete family and what is only a consequence?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1232–C1250"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:43:48.375330+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "0677fb515a567213d1cedea44caa1354604c9c1a595221eb22190378fe30c3e2",
    "results": {
      "source_cost": {
        "path": "model/Moses_family_source_cost.json",
        "sha256": "5d7d618b4168335decc38bfa0add90f517de426e547ebe36bd6eb840c05be98f",
        "bytes": 965
      }
    },
    "finding": "The completefamily is generated by ordered sourceintervals, a short narrative-derived tail, one rounding rule and declaredcuts. Its severalcycleandbiography displays share that packet; sourcevalues, placement andinterpretationremain explicit.",
    "reassessment": "Write thecompleteMoses construction as areader-facingexplanation before opening anotherkernel.",
    "checks": {
      "whole_paths": true,
      "cost_visible": true,
      "no_overclaim": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:43:48.375828+00:00",
    "sha256": "7c0058c4e02b3e478122547a2c0b1b97a879fe69f4aecc5fb22c9edba5e1d094"
  },
  {
    "step": 1252,
    "title": "Write the complete Moses-centred family explanation",
    "question": "How does the reconstructed source path connect the430,490 and130-plus800 families?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1232–C1251",
      "File51a §7A"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:45:24.171450+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "7c0058c4e02b3e478122547a2c0b1b97a879fe69f4aecc5fb22c9edba5e1d094",
    "results": {
      "explanation": {
        "path": "deliverables/Moses_Centred_Chronological_Family.md",
        "sha256": "a6cb32355311f08c1084a7069e47dd4e79670b50e4c48107f08837a260f37ff6",
        "bytes": 2717
      }
    },
    "finding": "TheMoses family now shows how local row measures, rounding residuals and finite source variants produce a connected430/490/biography construction. Its dependent displays and interpretive roles are explicit.",
    "reassessment": "Return to Strategy§4.1 and distinguish the row-generatedgaps from the finitevariant scales in its coefficientfive formula.",
    "checks": {
      "whole_family": true,
      "source_limits": true,
      "noSPpromotion": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:45:24.171801+00:00",
    "sha256": "172c30a9ad055465f732eb24cb2d55c10d1196a606af2641ba362816cce863dc"
  },
  {
    "step": 1253,
    "title": "Separate the two source mechanisms behind the fivefold kernel",
    "question": "What objects do the repeatedcentury and Terah/Cainan/Sojourn parameters measure?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "Strategy §4.1",
      "prep/regular_kernel_source_cost.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:45:26.138985+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "172c30a9ad055465f732eb24cb2d55c10d1196a606af2641ba362816cce863dc",
    "results": {
      "two_mechanisms": {
        "path": "model/regular_kernel_two_mechanisms.json",
        "sha256": "d8a2ee103b3ab70d54fd26f14b74d158f1f079f34ec331d06e82575119daa926",
        "bytes": 2655
      }
    },
    "finding": "The repeatedcentury changes measure differences between source rows; Terah,Cainan andSojourn measure admitted placementchoices. The Strategy’s compactformula relates these distinct mechanisms and must retain both source burdens.",
    "reassessment": "Reconstruct the entire matchedrow displacementstaircase as the first mechanism’s output.",
    "checks": {
      "four_primitives": true,
      "two_objects": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:45:26.139969+00:00",
    "sha256": "60273029fa4b5b1de7fbbe54cccb7040aeed0e8e72996771ffeed43c33627fb2"
  },
  {
    "step": 1254,
    "title": "Reconstruct the whole regular displacement staircase",
    "question": "Do thecentury support masks explain every boundary behind1250 and650?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1182",
      "C1253"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:45:28.122335+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "60273029fa4b5b1de7fbbe54cccb7040aeed0e8e72996771ffeed43c33627fb2",
    "results": {
      "staircase": {
        "path": "model/regular_kernel_complete_staircase.json",
        "sha256": "dbf847b6bd763d2c10d8dbc1144a44d7e89fc83c8597def0302bc4bacf8f66d1",
        "bytes": 863
      },
      "field": [
        1250,
        1150,
        1050,
        950,
        850,
        750,
        750,
        650,
        650,
        650,
        650,
        650,
        550,
        450,
        350,
        250,
        150,
        50,
        0,
        0
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The named row masks generate the whole20-boundary1250-to650-to0 staircase. The600 drop beforeNoah is the sum of six located century changes; the650 plateau is the shared post-Flood contribution.",
    "reassessment": "Restore nativeCainan and check that its support is a partialfieldchange.",
    "checks": {
      "field_expected": true,
      "recurrence": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:45:28.122809+00:00",
    "sha256": "51f2670a249422df989754b6c32ec0df916ab7d23a61ef2136789912d27daf54"
  },
  {
    "step": 1255,
    "title": "Retain native Cainan in the kernel displacement field",
    "question": "Which existing comparison boundaries receive the native130 insertion?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1254",
      "File18 §1.6",
      "C1187"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:45:30.080253+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "51f2670a249422df989754b6c32ec0df916ab7d23a61ef2136789912d27daf54",
    "results": {
      "native_staircase": {
        "path": "model/regular_kernel_native_staircase.json",
        "sha256": "0f041687dd46807b2d89a5416e25b71ec744dbce28153a8d101b5e0c2cc13147",
        "bytes": 935
      },
      "native_head": 1380,
      "native_Arphaxad": 780
    },
    "finding": "Restoring nativeCainan raises the upstreamcomparison field by130, giving1380 atCreation and780 on theNoah/Shem/Arphaxad plateau. The downstreamsharedfield is unchanged, andCainan retains its ownnewvertex.",
    "reassessment": "Reconstruct the separateeight-state placementfield fromT,C,S.",
    "checks": {
      "native_heads": true,
      "downstream_unchanged": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:45:30.080690+00:00",
    "sha256": "4e8c03ea8dadd2945648d9f51ae4fde3c4da93332ceedc9e54c2a78f8e38ae8d"
  },
  {
    "step": 1256,
    "title": "Generate the full finite placement field",
    "question": "How do thethree source switches produce the405 envelope?",
    "inputs": {
      "T": 60,
      "C": 130,
      "S": 215
    },
    "sources": [
      "C1253",
      "Strategy §4.1",
      "File07 §2.11.1a"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:45:32.030891+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "4e8c03ea8dadd2945648d9f51ae4fde3c4da93332ceedc9e54c2a78f8e38ae8d",
    "results": {
      "placement_field": {
        "path": "model/regular_kernel_eight_state_field.json",
        "sha256": "b72b31629e31996bd0e090a0f1833f4f5a3361ea610ca8d600d0a91ba1ebef43",
        "bytes": 1037
      },
      "offsets": [
        0,
        60,
        130,
        190,
        215,
        275,
        345,
        405
      ],
      "gaps": [
        60,
        70,
        60,
        25,
        60,
        70,
        60
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The completefield is0,60,130,190,215,275,345,405, with60|70|60|25|60|70|60 spacings. Its405 width comes fromT+C+S, independently of thecoefficientfive formula.",
    "reassessment": "Distinguish thetwo different four-state restrictions that source summaries use.",
    "checks": {
      "eight_distinct": true,
      "width405": true,
      "spacing": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:45:32.031407+00:00",
    "sha256": "8c7738cd9781e1ad93c18a0353a16161b968b64bfedfa7dd888503fa7f2b7ff8"
  },
  {
    "step": 1257,
    "title": "Distinguish the two four-state source fields",
    "question": "Why do valid source summaries give widths190 and275?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1256",
      "File18 §1.1",
      "Strategy §4.1"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:46:39.714230+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "8c7738cd9781e1ad93c18a0353a16161b968b64bfedfa7dd888503fa7f2b7ff8",
    "results": {
      "restrictions": {
        "path": "model/regular_kernel_four_state_restrictions.json",
        "sha256": "746905c28121909a96402a212fbe1f45d719f8df0828a4e87cf1aa1b0680d4e5",
        "bytes": 298
      },
      "fields": [
        [
          0,
          60,
          130,
          190
        ],
        [
          0,
          60,
          215,
          275
        ]
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The190 field variesTerah andCainan; the275 field variesTerah andSojourn withCainanOFF. Their differentwidths arise from differentsourcechoices, andboth sit within the405 field.",
    "reassessment": "Compare the generatedeight offsets with theliteral source’sYear6 andendpoint columns.",
    "checks": {
      "TC": true,
      "TS": true,
      "widths": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:46:39.714674+00:00",
    "sha256": "8d35865d82c52c5d58e6d563c2c0dbd8318591d1f4ffada4d127c9f944a14411"
  },
  {
    "step": 1258,
    "title": "Verify the full placement field against its literal source",
    "question": "Do all eight source rows support the generated offsets with nodeclasses retained?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1256",
      "File07 §2.11.1a",
      "prep/regular_kernel_source_cost.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:46:41.681559+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "8d35865d82c52c5d58e6d563c2c0dbd8318591d1f4ffada4d127c9f944a14411",
    "results": {
      "literal_states": {
        "path": "model/regular_kernel_literal_eight_states.json",
        "sha256": "656a663efb970ffb4164c7877345e18c2a2afc2b2165334b615c4db8906560eb",
        "bytes": 2918
      },
      "states": 8
    },
    "finding": "All eight states are explicitly present in the source with distinctYear6 andcompletion labels. The405 geometry is a reconstruction of thatcompletefinitefield, not an extrapolation from twoendpoints.",
    "reassessment": "Solve the exact conditions connecting thisplacementfield to the row-generatedheadgaps.",
    "checks": {
      "eightbindings": true,
      "offsets": true,
      "phase2": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:46:41.685083+00:00",
    "sha256": "1ec561163270dd28520393c528af658364b0f17805c122359487ffd1756c76d6"
  },
  {
    "step": 1259,
    "title": "Derive the necessary and sufficient coefficient-five calibration",
    "question": "When do the row gaps equal5(C+2T) and5C?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1254",
      "C1256",
      "Strategy §4.1"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:46:43.651080+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "1ec561163270dd28520393c528af658364b0f17805c122359487ffd1756c76d6",
    "results": {
      "calibration": {
        "path": "model/regular_kernel_five_calibration.json",
        "sha256": "df161a85a5d0da068398d3c6e22e3232084ff1ded55eb7929261cbd762d6b63a",
        "bytes": 474
      },
      "ratios": [
        "3/5",
        "13/10"
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The fivefoldexpression holds exactly whenT=3u/5 andC=13u/10. These match60 and130 at u100, but the ratios are additional source relations; the row supports alone do not generate them.",
    "reassessment": "Separate compatibility ofa commoncoefficient fromthe choice thatcoefficient equalsfive.",
    "checks": {
      "ratios": true,
      "sourcevalues": true,
      "reconstruction": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:46:43.652027+00:00",
    "sha256": "eca1b4576c3639111eecd6e4283671e4b0a3343ec75c6a6a9d7b0ba981e2d7fa"
  },
  {
    "step": 1260,
    "title": "Separate a shared scaling coefficient from the value five",
    "question": "What condition permits any common nonzero coefficientκ?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1259"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:46:45.656980+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "eca1b4576c3639111eecd6e4283671e4b0a3343ec75c6a6a9d7b0ba981e2d7fa",
    "results": {
      "common_coefficient": {
        "path": "model/regular_kernel_common_coefficient.json",
        "sha256": "15e4ece10cca099ee802d18df1a9385606604314efc2998858552a45c5008aca",
        "bytes": 450
      },
      "source_kappa": 5
    },
    "finding": "A common coefficient requires the ratio6C=13T. The specific valuefive additionally calibratesC to the centuryu. This distinguishes a shared structural ratio from its observed numerical scale.",
    "reassessment": "Relate thepair’s midpoint andhalfwidth to itsNoah950 comparison without adding independentconstraints.",
    "checks": {
      "compatibility": true,
      "kappa5": true,
      "both_heads": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:46:45.657482+00:00",
    "sha256": "da6a9f4711f4dc3d8300fe6296ee8a3cef63f4fdf704c5f88dd36fed80fe03e5"
  },
  {
    "step": 1261,
    "title": "Explain the950 plus-or-minus300 presentation",
    "question": "What additional source content does the sum-and-difference display contribute?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1254",
      "C1260",
      "Strategy §4.2"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:46:47.657744+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "da6a9f4711f4dc3d8300fe6296ee8a3cef63f4fdf704c5f88dd36fed80fe03e5",
    "results": {
      "sum_difference": {
        "path": "model/regular_kernel_sum_difference_scope.json",
        "sha256": "54fafdd8b71ac0f1f88ddad4d8c43dd2683e1a7f29634dd9fef272077fe4f235",
        "bytes": 394
      },
      "midpoint": 950,
      "halfwidth": 300
    },
    "finding": "The sameheadpair is950±300, with midpoint19u/2 andhalfwidth3u. Its equality toNoah’s950-year life is a source-role comparison; rewriting thepair thisway does not explain or replace thelocatedcenturychanges.",
    "reassessment": "Integrate thecurrentSP countingmechanism into thekernel comparisonwithoutforcing itintotheLXX formula.",
    "checks": {
      "mid950": true,
      "half300": true,
      "reconstruct": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:46:47.658839+00:00",
    "sha256": "3da77f0a9678c956cf650c363eac249f929005fe3e628e4235e6ccb9712da828"
  },
  {
    "step": 1262,
    "title": "Integrate the SP local age mechanism with the regular kernel",
    "question": "How does the sourceSP300 gap arise while retaining its distinctcount convention?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1142–C1144",
      "C1254",
      "Strategy §4.1"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:47:47.526801+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "3da77f0a9678c956cf650c363eac249f929005fe3e628e4235e6ccb9712da828",
    "results": {
      "SP_mechanism": {
        "path": "model/regular_kernel_SP_local_mechanism.json",
        "sha256": "530d7955a762a6f1e7c1f80d69750855d16b25251c3e41d0b2b9ef14eec97fcb",
        "bytes": 453
      },
      "creation_difference": 300
    },
    "finding": "SPCreation’s300 difference comes from post-Flood650 minus the located350 age reduction. Lamech’s nominal129 difference becomes130 completedunits through the53rd-year convention, using the one-year correction exactly once.",
    "reassessment": "Show howmatchingvariantchoices preserve the source-generatedcomparison while differentchoiceschange it.",
    "checks": {
      "losses": true,
      "sum350": true,
      "creation300": true,
      "countonce": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:47:47.527476+00:00",
    "sha256": "6f8b1c28a202707339472a403c196ba4b9cf4cbd26e06075b7644d724797a790"
  },
  {
    "step": 1263,
    "title": "Connect baseline row differences to finite variant placement",
    "question": "When does the samevariant choice preserve a comparison between traditions?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1256",
      "C1262",
      "File18 nestedvariant supports"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:47:49.489753+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "6f8b1c28a202707339472a403c196ba4b9cf4cbd26e06075b7644d724797a790",
    "results": {
      "variant_connection": {
        "path": "model/regular_kernel_variant_covariance.json",
        "sha256": "d6fd98fa2cfaf15d4c700f7b320f6dd86b244b9edfd8666eef4ec807c6cec4f5",
        "bytes": 918
      }
    },
    "finding": "Matching variantchoices cancel from a matched comparison; different choices change it by their declared offsetdifference. This connects thetwo mechanisms without treatingall switches as whole-genealogytranslations.",
    "reassessment": "Write thefivefoldkernel’s positiveexplanation and remainingcalibration burden.",
    "checks": {
      "eightcases": true,
      "baseline_preserved": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:47:49.490259+00:00",
    "sha256": "ae5d989ee653ec32b5b473aaafa2b9a6aae42b05fba98a624e9e97922dde493f"
  },
  {
    "step": 1264,
    "title": "Write the source-grounded explanation of the regular kernel",
    "question": "What does coefficientfive now explain in theStrategy?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1253–C1263",
      "Strategy §§4.1–4.2"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:47:51.451559+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "ae5d989ee653ec32b5b473aaafa2b9a6aae42b05fba98a624e9e97922dde493f",
    "results": {
      "explanation": {
        "path": "deliverables/Regular_Kernel_Two_Source_Mechanisms.md",
        "sha256": "ef89a70263acf53cf639f122160a561771a46054d5821ca824bab796dc44b2db",
        "bytes": 1968
      }
    },
    "finding": "TheStrategy kernel now has a whole-field interpretation and an exactcalibrationcondition. The source-supportedrow andvariant mechanisms explain more than thecompactformula alone, while itsremaining sourceburden isvisible.",
    "reassessment": "Integrate thealreadyavailableNT comparison as a completefamily illustration rather thanopening a newgenerativecampaign.",
    "checks": {
      "two_layers": true,
      "calibration": true,
      "historical_limit": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:47:51.451897+00:00",
    "sha256": "a84f26b23c330d29a2fb03857e85c07617fcd895568fa378300527178985915d"
  },
  {
    "step": 1265,
    "title": "Adopt the bounded NT source-transfer scope",
    "question": "What can the completeNT comparison add to the familyexplanation?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "prep/nt_source_transfer.json",
      "File43",
      "File18",
      "C1131 inheritedNT family"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:47:53.444200+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "a84f26b23c330d29a2fb03857e85c07617fcd895568fa378300527178985915d",
    "results": {
      "NT_scope": {
        "path": "model/NT_transfer_scope.json",
        "sha256": "78966182028a5894ad74991af664661da69fbb9385f5fcdb6ba68895bd86db68",
        "bytes": 4032
      },
      "shared_rows": 22,
      "native_LXX_rows": 23
    },
    "finding": "TheNT comparison is a completeintegration example, not a new source-generatingrule. It can show whichsource differences a birth-basedNT comparison detects and whichlifespan differences itmisses.",
    "reassessment": "Inspect thewhole22-row sharedcomparison with nativeCainan retainedseparately.",
    "checks": {
      "shared22": true,
      "native23": true,
      "stop_named": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:47:53.446264+00:00",
    "sha256": "8a887e66b77e85c4361509920b233407cf972096a5ef579b8842e58e95329520"
  },
  {
    "step": 1266,
    "title": "Verify the full NT-to-native birth comparison",
    "question": "Do the22 shared rows retain their literals and the samecomparisonrule across allthree sources?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1265",
      "prep/nt_source_transfer.json",
      "File43 §3.4",
      "File18"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:48:58.098333+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "8a887e66b77e85c4361509920b233407cf972096a5ef579b8842e58e95329520",
    "results": {
      "complete_comparison": {
        "path": "model/NT_complete_shared_birth_comparison.json",
        "sha256": "40e5df3c8edcd780b60d3560e6f31875cc0ddd066fd7afe9773715b80ab0f17b",
        "bytes": 36143
      },
      "rows": 22,
      "checks": 154
    },
    "finding": "All22 sharedAdam-to-Jacob rows retain theirNT andnative-source literals andcomparison values. The sameNT opening can be compared with eachbirthfield while their chronologytags remain distinct.",
    "reassessment": "Verify theadjacent recurrence andtheCainan-induced two-cell edge.",
    "checks": {
      "22rows": true,
      "all_literals_and_differences": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:48:58.153438+00:00",
    "sha256": "6da8120fe20db593d6ca6b69c9d8f59d9166db0d79a8137d6e25b289e73117c0"
  },
  {
    "step": 1267,
    "title": "Verify the complete NT comparison recurrence",
    "question": "How do sourceintervals andNT intervalcounts generate thewholecomparisonfield?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1266",
      "prep/nt_source_transfer.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:49:00.175724+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "6da8120fe20db593d6ca6b69c9d8f59d9166db0d79a8137d6e25b289e73117c0",
    "results": {
      "recurrence": {
        "path": "model/NT_complete_comparison_recurrence.json",
        "sha256": "6ac195aca0970895bd9dfb769be62c8fdb673c2315cb5a606d87bfac05cedc61",
        "bytes": 5613
      },
      "edges": 21
    },
    "finding": "Thecomplete21-edge comparison follows theexistinglocal recurrence. Arphaxad-to-Shelah covers twoNT cells because thecomparison’sshared-name list omitsCainan; retaining140 prevents a falseone-cell identification.",
    "reassessment": "Examine theentireSP/LXX suffixwherebirthcomparisons coincide.",
    "checks": {
      "all_edges": true,
      "Cainan_edge": true,
      "edges21": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:49:00.177916+00:00",
    "sha256": "38bc3cf5e66d39e4af301485b390ce48230537a17a104cf488095eaac5644e6b"
  },
  {
    "step": 1268,
    "title": "Locate the complete birth-identical SP and LXX suffix",
    "question": "Which chronologydifferences are invisible to thisNT birthcomparison?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1266",
      "prep/nt_source_transfer.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:49:02.160075+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "38bc3cf5e66d39e4af301485b390ce48230537a17a104cf488095eaac5644e6b",
    "results": {
      "identical_suffix": {
        "path": "model/NT_SP_LXX_identical_birth_suffix.json",
        "sha256": "c0aa72b66de88e7545dcc92ffef6fd9c3bde11eaec3df2b8ad43e0b579e6f796",
        "bytes": 2313
      },
      "names": [
        "Shelah",
        "Eber",
        "Peleg",
        "Reu",
        "Serug",
        "Nahor",
        "Terah",
        "Abraham",
        "Isaac",
        "Jacob"
      ]
    },
    "finding": "Shelah throughJacob form a ten-nodeSP/LXX suffix withidenticalnativebirths andNT comparisonvalues. This is a completeexample ofdifferent sourcefamilies agreeing inone measurement.",
    "reassessment": "Recover thelifespan differences hidden by thatbirth-onlyagreement.",
    "checks": {
      "ten_names": true,
      "all_births_equal": true,
      "all_NT_equal": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:49:02.162458+00:00",
    "sha256": "6b6b53535b2cb1d142d6ae03de651602ab9a5100b1a4128a8c70edd7c5ab6d7a"
  },
  {
    "step": 1269,
    "title": "Expose the source-life differences hidden by the NT birth projection",
    "question": "What does theCumulative rowmeasure retain in thesamebirth-identicalsuffix?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1268",
      "C1165"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:49:04.206649+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "6b6b53535b2cb1d142d6ae03de651602ab9a5100b1a4128a8c70edd7c5ab6d7a",
    "results": {
      "hidden_lives": {
        "path": "model/NT_birth_projection_hidden_lives.json",
        "sha256": "7b560e40d46a5b3dd387c3b04994ccb79f2bac1ef97db39078a8332bf335a6a4",
        "bytes": 752
      },
      "differences": [
        {
          "name": "Shelah",
          "LXX_minus_SP_life": 27
        },
        {
          "name": "Eber",
          "LXX_minus_SP_life": 100
        },
        {
          "name": "Peleg",
          "LXX_minus_SP_life": 100
        },
        {
          "name": "Reu",
          "LXX_minus_SP_life": 100
        },
        {
          "name": "Serug",
          "LXX_minus_SP_life": 100
        },
        {
          "name": "Nahor",
          "LXX_minus_SP_life": 60
        },
        {
          "name": "Terah",
          "LXX_minus_SP_life": 60
        }
      ],
      "sum": 547
    },
    "finding": "Seven oftheten birth-identicalrows stillhavedifferentlifespans:27, four100s andtwo60s, totaling547. TheNT birthcomparison cannot see these; theCumulative source-row measurementcan.",
    "reassessment": "RetainCainan’s ownNT cell toillustrate thedifferencebetweenlistwidth andbiographicalmeasure.",
    "checks": {
      "seven": true,
      "sum547": true,
      "values": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:49:04.207177+00:00",
    "sha256": "1fe90c4abb12d347f06c18f050c0418851f7930083e47dac870ca6bafbd70ca3"
  },
  {
    "step": 1270,
    "title": "Restore the native Cainan row in the NT interface",
    "question": "How do a70-yearNT cell and a130-yearsourceinterval coexist atCainan?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1267",
      "prep/nt_source_transfer.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:49:06.206453+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "1fe90c4abb12d347f06c18f050c0418851f7930083e47dac870ca6bafbd70ca3",
    "results": {
      "Cainan_interface": {
        "path": "model/NT_native_Cainan_interface.json",
        "sha256": "29ec284f1630b8b563ff6e09c4117ee3d61ff92a4b69f04dc14f196a9d4bce50",
        "bytes": 866
      },
      "values": [
        1465,
        1530,
        1590
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The nativeArphaxad–Cainan–Shelah comparison runs1465→1530→1590. Its changes65 and60 equal source135/130 minusNT70, distinguishing thelist measure from thegenealogicalone.",
    "reassessment": "Connect theNT headpartition to thealreadyreconstructedMT/LXX Roundedheads withproperstateroles.",
    "checks": {
      "values": true,
      "source_gaps": true,
      "NTgaps": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:49:06.210050+00:00",
    "sha256": "1df341a37f46100ade1c47c37addd820df1407dc5ca9fdef9614b8d4e8f1245d"
  },
  {
    "step": 1271,
    "title": "Connect the NT headpartition with the complete Rounded paths",
    "question": "Do the generatedMT/LXX heads reproduce the source230|1150 interface?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1234",
      "C1244",
      "C1266",
      "File54 inheritedpartition"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:57:19.493781+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "1df341a37f46100ade1c47c37addd820df1407dc5ca9fdef9614b8d4e8f1245d",
    "results": {
      "head_interface": {
        "path": "model/NT_Rounded_head_interface.json",
        "sha256": "6ad2a1481b5dc7e249e5fd08f119157c14d3d12299474db66025a933b1c36587",
        "bytes": 376
      },
      "parts": [
        230,
        1150
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The wholeMT/LXX reconstructions reproduce theexistingNT partition230|1150 within1380. Theirsharedcoordinates remain role-qualifiedcomparisons; noNTMosesorclutchfield iscreated.",
    "reassessment": "Present theNT comparison as acompleteexample ofsharedpathgrammar withdistinctmeasurements.",
    "checks": {
      "parts": true,
      "whole1380": true,
      "Sethcoordinate": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:57:19.494328+00:00",
    "sha256": "e5de58242955d2141f813c7d18d0c544bca4167ef38cafe4e62f3f90d6c6fdd3"
  },
  {
    "step": 1272,
    "title": "Write the NT interface into the family explanation",
    "question": "What does the completecomparison teach about thecommonchronologicalgrammar?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1265–C1271"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:57:21.472912+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "e5de58242955d2141f813c7d18d0c544bca4167ef38cafe4e62f3f90d6c6fdd3",
    "results": {
      "NT_explanation": {
        "path": "deliverables/NT_Interface_to_Source_Families.md",
        "sha256": "ab766fc861d2a591d492bd33ecfe179be49217af78ef80edc011e8953048cb3e",
        "bytes": 1805
      }
    },
    "finding": "TheNT module now illustrates thecommonmeasurement approach across acompletefamily, including information itcannotsee. Itsbounded integration role isclear.",
    "reassessment": "Test the newMoses path’s exactinterface to File52c’s three alreadyadmittedregular inversewords.",
    "checks": {
      "complete_suffix": true,
      "native_role": true,
      "no_new_rule": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:57:21.473371+00:00",
    "sha256": "13bad7e85b0dcc642ddc6466f3add48718833b61e5c6dbec9fe3c03e415ba289"
  },
  {
    "step": 1273,
    "title": "Specify the Rounded genealogy to inverse-path interface",
    "question": "Which source roles may the newMoses path supply toFile52c?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1234",
      "File52c §§2.1,3.3–3.4",
      "inherited/model/completed_path_inputs.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:58:49.309809+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "13bad7e85b0dcc642ddc6466f3add48718833b61e5c6dbec9fe3c03e415ba289",
    "results": {
      "interface_nodes": {
        "path": "model/Moses_inverse_interface_nodes.json",
        "sha256": "62572fdc315d0e68894e07fe4fae931a175cc4b9a1d8ba6e1b6497f2a78eddcd",
        "bytes": 907
      }
    },
    "finding": "The newgenealogy suppliesCreation4106 andNoah3056 to theadmittedFile52c interface. Nativity,Conquest andFlood retain their independentlyspecifiedeventroles; Arphaxad’s equal2456 coordinate doesnotreplaceFlood.",
    "reassessment": "Generate allthreeadmittedoriginalcomponentwords from theseorderednodes.",
    "checks": {
      "nodes": true,
      "52c_pinned": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:58:49.311233+00:00",
    "sha256": "cae94c516e94bfc14546e666af47747ff16a278ef15c4b500a5cb4e1657743d3"
  },
  {
    "step": 1274,
    "title": "Match all three regular inverse input words",
    "question": "Do the reconstructedsourcecuts reproduce theexistingadmittedpartitiondomain?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1273",
      "inherited/model/completed_path_inputs.json"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:58:51.321287+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "cae94c516e94bfc14546e666af47747ff16a278ef15c4b500a5cb4e1657743d3",
    "results": {
      "source_words": {
        "path": "model/Moses_inverse_source_word_match.json",
        "sha256": "1cc47a6d59d77481961593d0ead7f97f018537417e7b3a3b43277a564e5b60bc",
        "bytes": 1341
      },
      "paths": 3
    },
    "finding": "Allthreeoriginalwords match exactly:1400|1050|1650,1400|1650|1050 and1400|1050|600|1050. This certifies theconnection from thecompletegenealogy to theexistinginverse domain withoutselecting newcuts.",
    "reassessment": "Reuse theinheritedone-pass outputs while keepingthisinterfacecheckdistinctfromanewinversecalculation.",
    "checks": {
      "threepaths": true,
      "allwords": true,
      "original_total": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:58:51.321850+00:00",
    "sha256": "0755562cfc939da7bfe41a1a7aee531fdbe25e4458f0eeb56660bc0f15fa3e08"
  },
  {
    "step": 1275,
    "title": "Retain the established one-pass path images at the new interface",
    "question": "What existinginverse results become available once theinputwords are matched?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1274",
      "prep/common_representation_architecture.diagnostics.json",
      "C1058–C1068 inherited"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:58:53.331358+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "0755562cfc939da7bfe41a1a7aee531fdbe25e4458f0eeb56660bc0f15fa3e08",
    "results": {
      "retained_images": {
        "path": "model/Moses_inverse_retained_images.json",
        "sha256": "e360dff13408f0f0360032588d7edca0d8ac289a7fbe986f462f8e9dc5763a2e",
        "bytes": 1242
      },
      "common_total": 14720
    },
    "finding": "The matchedwords feed thealreadyverifiedinversepaths, alltotaling14720 butretainingdifferentproperprefixes. Their16000 expansion is aninheritedcompletion nowconnectedto thefullsource-row reconstruction.",
    "reassessment": "Preserve thecoordinatecollisions thatcouldotherwiseerase sourceandgeneratedroles.",
    "checks": {
      "all14720": true,
      "prefixes": true,
      "completion": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:58:53.332354+00:00",
    "sha256": "b1e2218c23c160f700fe613cf9362c4a5e5e09f40785f3d2e54e9e2737195e1e"
  },
  {
    "step": 1276,
    "title": "Keep equal coordinates from collapsing the inverse interface",
    "question": "Which coincidences ofnumber must retain distinctobjectidentities?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1273",
      "C1275"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:58:55.284199+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "b1e2218c23c160f700fe613cf9362c4a5e5e09f40785f3d2e54e9e2737195e1e",
    "results": {
      "role_collisions": {
        "path": "model/Moses_inverse_coordinate_roles.json",
        "sha256": "7e49a3507f3bdaf8304737b2e8e8a08634920fd5948f7d2489b21b329b333bce",
        "bytes": 716
      }
    },
    "finding": "Two equal-coordinate pairs retain differentroles:Arphaxad/Flood2456 andoriginalCreation/generatedfirstleg4106. Keepingtheseroles prevents anumericmatch fromsilentlycreatinganoperation.",
    "reassessment": "Check whether thefiveMosesblocks retainrowrounding ratherthanonce-roundingtheiraggregates.",
    "checks": {
      "two_collisions": true,
      "generated4106": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:58:55.284723+00:00",
    "sha256": "b9ab34af7a6cd3d46aac8098ed9edf3954d1fb04f71bc7923055cacaca735ad8"
  },
  {
    "step": 1277,
    "title": "Compare row-rounded blocks with once-rounded block totals",
    "question": "Can theMosesblockdiagram preserve thesourceRoundedpath withoutlosingresidualinformation?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1234",
      "C1236",
      "C1218",
      "prep/common_representation_architecture.md"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:58:57.259004+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "b9ab34af7a6cd3d46aac8098ed9edf3954d1fb04f71bc7923055cacaca735ad8",
    "results": {
      "block_rounding_order": {
        "path": "model/Moses_block_rounding_order.json",
        "sha256": "819d2815e50c8f363ccc8662e4f0285dbfce8e4c58951205349674943f80e184",
        "bytes": 1037
      },
      "block_residuals": [
        0,
        2,
        4,
        -1,
        1
      ]
    },
    "finding": "The fiveblocks retain residuals0,2,4,−1,1. Enoch-to-Arphaxad is1030 afterrowrounding but1035 iftheexactblock isroundedonce; thewholepath is2580 ratherthanQ(2586)=2585. Thediagrammustretain thedeclaredoperationorder.",
    "reassessment": "Verify thecomplete25-nodeexactfield isrecoveredby accumulatedrowresiduals.",
    "checks": {
      "exact_blocks": true,
      "residuals": true,
      "distinction": true,
      "whole": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:58:57.259698+00:00",
    "sha256": "e9d141c62a82e97cb54c8c4b36d05059c97041203fbad8da3a2eebf49dbcd0e5"
  },
  {
    "step": 1278,
    "title": "Recover the whole exact Moses field from the Rounded field",
    "question": "Do accumulatedrowresiduals retain everyintermediate coordinate?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1277",
      "C1234"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T05:59:58.768804+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "e9d141c62a82e97cb54c8c4b36d05059c97041203fbad8da3a2eebf49dbcd0e5",
    "results": {
      "whole_field_recovery": {
        "path": "model/Moses_complete_residual_recovery.json",
        "sha256": "6e6ac50f823898352efd4b6313348899dfbc8f55e8fda1a51a04c975336db550",
        "bytes": 4249
      },
      "nodes": 25,
      "head_residual": 6
    },
    "finding": "All25 exactcoordinates are recovered fromtheir Roundedcoordinates andthelocated residualsums. Thehead residual6 staysun-normalized, preserving thepublished4106 Roundedhead while recoveringstrict4112.",
    "reassessment": "Write thegenealogy-to-inverse bridge withitsoperationorder andsource-roleconstraints.",
    "checks": {
      "all25": true,
      "all_recovered": true,
      "head6": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T05:59:58.770216+00:00",
    "sha256": "c3e225ca05688f0f3a1d89f692cf58d9b1809db67ae1ef28979439cc7a1dc30b"
  },
  {
    "step": 1279,
    "title": "Write the Rounded genealogy to inverse-family bridge",
    "question": "How do thetwofamilies now connect through theircompleteoriginalpaths?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1273–C1278",
      "File52c_latest.md"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T06:00:00.728641+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "c3e225ca05688f0f3a1d89f692cf58d9b1809db67ae1ef28979439cc7a1dc30b",
    "results": {
      "inverse_bridge": {
        "path": "deliverables/Rounded_Genealogy_to_Inverse_Family.md",
        "sha256": "fd52da544abb4b6f129e4501b80ebf1a83dfb6a8fcb6d118360a3b8c35c2c686",
        "bytes": 1879
      }
    },
    "finding": "TheMosesconstruction nowfeedsFile52c through anexactthree-pathinterface. Theconnection preservesoriginalcomponents, namedcuts, source/generatedroles androwroundingorder while reusingtheestablishedinversecompletion.",
    "reassessment": "Assess thethirdblock’s completefamilygains before the nextfullStrategyreview.",
    "checks": {
      "threewords": true,
      "scope": true,
      "no_second": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T06:00:00.729200+00:00",
    "sha256": "8c05a1e37df1be0291f06eaa17f366e3ac24414c78826a4c2c464479970d7074"
  },
  {
    "step": 1280,
    "title": "Assess the third block’s family-level explanatory gains",
    "question": "Has the work returned fromlocalboundaries to theStrategy’slargergoal?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1232–C1279",
      "Strategy.md"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T06:00:02.743062+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "8c05a1e37df1be0291f06eaa17f366e3ac24414c78826a4c2c464479970d7074",
    "results": {
      "family_progress": {
        "path": "model/block3_family_progress_ledger.json",
        "sha256": "3dbedcfb740458c8a14316f873bd92fbda3bdd5dfbe8ae99272aa253a8c7aeaf",
        "bytes": 1600
      }
    },
    "finding": "Thethirdblock connectedthecompleteMoses, Regularkernel, NT andRoundedinversefamilies. Furtherprogress should nowconsolidate theseverifiedinterfaces into theStrategy’s four-partpresentation, with sourcecostsandlimits attached.",
    "reassessment": "Close the150-actioncheckpoint andrereadthefullStrategybefore C1282.",
    "checks": {
      "five_topics": true,
      "all_limits": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T06:00:02.743492+00:00",
    "sha256": "3da4c96b90e8d0d69dd2768f89837ec9a53491cc34b0435cc73fbfa1cc6c47cb"
  },
  {
    "step": 1281,
    "title": "Close the third fifty-action checkpoint",
    "question": "What completedfamilyresults must thefreshStrategyreview assess?",
    "inputs": {},
    "sources": [
      "C1232–C1280",
      "Strategy.md"
    ],
    "opened_utc": "2026-09-28T06:00:04.745715+00:00",
    "predecessor_sha256": "3da4c96b90e8d0d69dd2768f89837ec9a53491cc34b0435cc73fbfa1cc6c47cb",
    "results": {
      "checkpoint": {
        "path": "deliverables/Block_03_C1232_C1281_Checkpoint.json",
        "sha256": "fc4491ecdf84cce379b6db1c61d5a569c5ed3a08fb3569279df7e32723210082",
        "bytes": 1231
      },
      "completed_actions": 150,
      "remaining_actions": 150
    },
    "finding": "Thethird50 actions areclosed withthecompletefamilyartifactsbound. A freshfullStrategyreview mustnowdecide howto use theremaining150 actions forintegrationanddelivery.",
    "reassessment": "ReadtheentireStrategy andassess allstages beforebeginningC1282.",
    "checks": {
      "fifty": true,
      "five_artifacts": true,
      "midpoint": true
    },
    "closed_utc": "2026-09-28T06:00:04.746568+00:00",
    "sha256": "590cbd67a06b37a4bddab1ccbd279c258861812a87d9e8e1e44451d6d81df161"
  }
]