# C622 — Revise the synthesis after independent review

## Question

Can the draft make the causal connections clearer while preserving every stated source distinction?

## Inputs

```json
{
  "review": "REVIEW_DRAFT_C618.md",
  "changes": [
    "483 explanation",
    "475 status",
    "grid parameters",
    "weekly distance rule",
    "supplemented basis and normalized map"
  ]
}
```

## Sources

```json
[
  "C618–C621; independent draft review"
]
```

## Opened utc

2026-09-28T00:40:26.400304+00:00

## Results

```json
{
  "draft": {
    "path": "deliverables/490d_Chronological_Families_Integrated_Draft_20260928.md",
    "sha256": "ddf2e6c86ae15d149c8e04f2e7d84ce9c15ce6a9eeba2255baa6bfa680dcf01f",
    "bytes": 19018
  },
  "word_count": 2530,
  "review_changes_applied": 6
}
```

## Finding

The revised draft foregrounds the Actual/Rounded bridge and explains how483 carries the161/14 structure into both allocation identities. Parameters and diagnostic status are now explicit without expanding the scope-control discussion.

## Reassessment

Bind the principal explanatory claims to exact equations and source locators.

## Checks

```json
{
  "review_changes": true,
  "carrier_link": true
}
```

## Closed utc

2026-09-28T00:40:26.401086+00:00

## Record provenance

Exact record hash: `81003b5628aee712d30b3704f1efcfa6fc1296a574e64797a1291fb4186d6afa`

Source journal: `Research_Cycles/C0532_C0631/journal.json`