C628 — Complete final editorial and visual review

Question

Does the final presentation state each source domain clearly and render its equations and diagram correctly?

Inputs

{
  "review": "REVIEW_FINAL_SYNTHESIS.md",
  "final_adjustment": "primary weekly D=600; companion overlays remain separately bounded"
}

Sources

[
  "C622 revised draft; C619–C627 model and diagram; independent final review"
]

Opened utc

2026-09-28T00:44:25.226765+00:00

Results

{
  "final_draft": {
    "path": "deliverables/490d_Chronological_Families_Integrated_Draft_20260928.md",
    "sha256": "3efec12f1991ff27df1b76899d7c4e3303122462f47a49007509324f2dff9597",
    "bytes": 19118
  },
  "word_count": 2621,
  "review_sha256": "934a1f98d367a8a7cdcab596f44b97d94df9428babe3e0834a0fb9b9cdd15421",
  "presentation_checks": {
    "math_blocks_balanced": true,
    "code_fences_balanced": true,
    "diagram": "PNG inspected; exact vector and matching companion retained"
  },
  "review_resolution": "primary weekly formula explicitly600; bounded companion transport kept separate"
}

Finding

Final review required only one source-domain wording refinement, now applied. The weekly primary table is explicitly600-based. The final draft also has clearer word/number spacing, balanced math/fences and the checked exact diagram.

Reassessment

Write the continuation checkpoint with the completed model, source controls and proposed next test.

Checks

{
  "primary_domain": true,
  "balanced_math": true,
  "balanced_fences": true
}

Closed utc

2026-09-28T00:45:42.757252+00:00

Record provenance

Exact record hash: 875d433e7df1a9e78bae74a09b63506f783d4a1fcb4f97d4bd2a01a1d2f10d04

Source journal: Research_Cycles/C0532_C0631/journal.json