{
"status": "NUMERICAL_AND_DOMAIN_REVIEW_PASS_WITH_FOUR_PROSE_LAYOUT_CORRECTIONS",
"draft": {
"path": "c1132_c1431/draft/Technical_Companion_v1.md",
"sha256": "6eabfa7e483043c6cf075d5a1491f33829b1db381aacec1a3e3933281c7df97f",
"bytes": 18124
},
"method": "Read all companion text and compare to completed frozen models and inherited proofs; no new general numerical campaign; no root edits. Covenant42-value check delegated independently.",
"issues": [
{
"id": "TECH01",
"severity": "wording correction",
"line": 55,
"old": "The Moses blocks retain residuals \\(0,2,4,-1,1\\); their six-year total recovers every strict Actual coordinate without altering the Rounded field.",
"proposed_new": "The Moses blocks retain residuals \\(0,2,4,-1,1\\). Their located downstream sums recover every strict Actual coordinate without altering the Rounded field; the head residual is six.",
"reason": "One head total does not recover an entire field. C1278 uses the located suffix sums; six corrects only the head in this example."
},
{
"id": "TECH02",
"severity": "terminology correction",
"line": 205,
"old": "The separate placement \\(35u=2450\\) fixes \\(u=70\\), then \\(w=4830\\).",
"proposed_new": "The separate metric relation \\(35u=2450\\) fixes \\(u=70\\), then \\(w=4830\\).",
"reason": "A measured35-slot span fixes duration/scale, not absolute placement. The6BC hinge is the distinct placement input."
},
{
"id": "TECH03",
"severity": "scope clarification",
"line": 193,
"old": "An ordered prefix map with its full selected basis is an invertible integer encoding of the source counts.",
"proposed_new": "The proved complete Esau prefix bases are invertible integer encodings of its source counts.",
"reason": "The inherited result proves the specific selected measurement bases have determinant+1 or−1. Avoid implying that any independently selected full-rank integer measurement basis automatically has an integer inverse."
},
{
"id": "TECH04",
"severity": "math-layout cleanup",
"line": 39,
"old": "T_d(y,\\rho)=\\bigl(y+Q_{\\mathbb Z}(\\rho+d),\\\n\\rho+d-Q_{\\mathbb Z}(\\rho+d)\\bigr).",
"proposed_new": "T_d(y,\\rho)=\\bigl(y+Q_{\\mathbb Z}(\\rho+d),\n\\rho+d-Q_{\\mathbb Z}(\\rho+d)\\bigr).",
"reason": "Remove the stray single backslash at the first line end. An ordinary source newline is enough inside this display; use an aligned environment only if a visible line break is intended."
}
],
"optional": [
{
"id": "TECH05",
"severity": "optional explicit domain",
"line": 77,
"old": "For nonnegative integer \\(L\\) and fixed resolved capacity \\(c\\),",
"proposed_new": "For nonnegative integers \\(L,c\\), with capacity \\(c\\) fixed,",
"reason": "Makes the integer count domain of the composite fibre theorem explicit for both inputs."
},
{
"id": "TECH06",
"severity": "optional local introduction",
"line": 95,
"old": "An exact register argument explains part of that agreement.",
"proposed_new": "For the two-component Creation inverse paths, an exact register argument explains their outer-span agreement.",
"reason": "The previous section discusses cap fibres, so “that agreement” otherwise lacks a local referent."
}
],
"passed_areas": [
{
"area": "Row normal form and support masks",
"finding": "All named supports, amplitudes,1250/430 formulas and native130/460 insertion match C1182–1189. The fitted e+n=u restriction is identified as fitted, and baseline rows remain supplied."
},
{
"area": "Rounded residual lift",
"finding": "Q_Z and T_d formulas are exact; composition and five-divisibility criterion retain source/intermediate domains. The55-row fibre counts and LXX Lamech ambiguity agree with completed models. TECH01 corrects only the prose about aggregate recovery."
},
{
"area": "Cap/slack and composite fibres",
"finding": "Slack identity, capacity-loss supports, composite fibre cases, branch information, thresholds843/718/653 and848/723/658, and488→485 agree with completed models. The resolved-count convention is preserved."
},
{
"area": "Inverse register",
"finding": "Precisely two original spans, each with one trailing zero and a three-digit core ending nonzero, are stated. Both aggregate branches and source917/343 selection agree with inherited proofs."
},
{
"area": "Anchored Keys and grouping",
"finding": "One-stage divisibility and fixed-pivot J→P emptiness are correct:9170+300t≡2(mod3). The universal same-factor block criterion and separate civil/Rounded conventions are retained."
},
{
"area": "Covenant",
"finding": "Independent covenant_family review PASS: all42 values and four display blocks match frozen proposal. Rectangular7×6 U and variable-model rank9/33 language are explicit. Forced/conditional joins and exact/whole-year phases remain separate."
},
{
"area": "Counts/NT grouping and recurrence",
"finding": "The quotient descent criterion, Toledot counterexample, primary77-edge/eleven-block domain, two-cell Cainan gap and21-edge recurrence agree with inherited results. TECH02 andTECH03 improve scope labels without changing values."
},
{
"area": "Source states",
"finding": "LatestFile52c; mainLXX182/753 with calculated571; old777 and188 scope; strict/standardMT; SP counted/completed conventions; Covenant author-designated/proposed choices; Tishri state; NT exclusions and deferred second inversion are retained."
}
],
"bindings": [
{
"path": "c1132_c1431/model/whole_genealogy_five_model.json",
"sha256": "00974b700a432f664a92f80cdbfdb8cef83e334d8f4ac3437aec4e3bb2921ac9",
"bytes": 3399
},
{
"path": "c1132_c1431/model/whole_genealogy_four_model.json",
"sha256": "db6857df003663117809841c614779640cb386f165c4c8281cc8c8f03d5f8595",
"bytes": 2952
},
{
"path": "c1132_c1431/model/rounded_residual_translation.json",
"sha256": "f9e2b0fdc53f2c54c40d63f1de6d2aaa0aa0eef6eb8f7fe79eb7cde3bd98fdee",
"bytes": 936
},
{
"path": "c1132_c1431/model/rounded_translation_composition.json",
"sha256": "75a28f7bb3d4a6f20397c95c1ee5d51b30d61bd6dc6d190fbb0db940da93dba8",
"bytes": 384
},
{
"path": "c1132_c1431/model/cap_round_fibre_law.json",
"sha256": "4ff7af76d04d05a1559f9918457b5a1ea19a6369cf01f0740073105104291fbf",
"bytes": 2166
},
{
"path": "c1132_c1431/model/SP_cap_round_fibre_thresholds.json",
"sha256": "0e5375ce43907dc1ce63d0b6d0786a30ed3ddaa91d3fbf3682294d53aea30dbb",
"bytes": 752
},
{
"path": "c1132_c1431/model/cap_round_branch_information.json",
"sha256": "496cab05f8d37f8f3f5ac004911fb79736ca2e4435da321932625405a2f45d59",
"bytes": 2128
},
{
"path": "c1132_c1431/model/cap_round_strict_visibility.json",
"sha256": "2a81074b2f3001decdb18bf7167d22e03ff71e1a0520a12704f08f3800f0b0b3",
"bytes": 736
},
{
"path": "c1132_c1431/model/Moses_complete_residual_recovery.json",
"sha256": "6e6ac50f823898352efd4b6313348899dfbc8f55e8fda1a51a04c975336db550",
"bytes": 4249
},
{
"path": "c1132_c1431/inherited/490d_Chronological_Families_Technical_Companion_C1131_Final.md",
"sha256": "0c7bb554197b3e12751dea428d076ac7ba21f747e6c5ade643b2d4fe3e1e18e2",
"bytes": 15189
},
{
"path": "c1132_c1431/prep/final_Covenant_technical_proposal.md",
"sha256": "7df083c595f99591861ae3efca355536da91f31822a381455eaa36b991f42f81",
"bytes": 5193
}
],
"Covenant_independent_review": {
"reviewer": "/root/covenant_family",
"status": "PASS",
"draft_sha256": "6eabfa7e483043c6cf075d5a1491f33829b1db381aacec1a3e3933281c7df97f",
"proposal_sha256": "7df083c595f99591861ae3efca355536da91f31822a381455eaa36b991f42f81",
"scope": "All42 table values, four displayed blocks, rectangularU, rank-model language, source states and joins."
},
"display_delimiters": {
"opening": 12,
"closing": 12
}
}
Evidence
technical review v1.json
Edition and provenance
technical_review_v1.json
SHA-256 d2f7f91d15aa30d16985d9b229d809221da25ad4cf5f558b01207186a6da0d3d
C480–C1634/Research_Cycles/C1132_C1431_Recovered/prep/technical_review_v1.json