[
  {
    "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"
  }
]