# C1122 — Audit retained scope in the completed prose

## Question

Do the final explanatory claims preserve the controlling states and exclusions?

## Inputs

```json
{}
```

## Sources

```json
[
  "C1119",
  "C1070",
  "C1102",
  "deliverables/components/Continuity_and_State_Ledger.md"
]
```

## Opened utc

2026-09-28T04:37:13.546444+00:00

## Results

```json
{
  "scope_audit": {
    "path": "model/final_scope_audit.json",
    "sha256": "3d7c66cb91baa3e1913932253c7fd0ab6ad29e396034f55e155e8ec4c594d1cd",
    "bytes": 651
  },
  "retained_scope_checks": 13
}
```

## Finding

The final prose retains the named source states, counting conventions, phase distinction, event claim status and deferred operations. Formal diagnostic transformations remain separate from admitted source changes.

## Reassessment

Check agreement of the main numerical conclusions across the reader draft, technical reference and machine registers.

## Checks

```json
{
  "latest52c": true,
  "MT_states": true,
  "cumulative_states": true,
  "LXX_state": true,
  "SP_Terah": true,
  "calendar_counts": true,
  "phase_split": true,
  "covenant_status": true,
  "NT_scope": true,
  "deferred_operation": true,
  "formal_covariance": true,
  "tail_provenance": true,
  "no_minimality_claim": true
}
```

## Closed utc

2026-09-28T04:37:13.548273+00:00

## Record provenance

Exact record hash: `dd71b947c64ad4a226db2464361558fb68713474485a86c82925e69326b25d56`

Source journal: `Research_Cycles/C0932_C1131/journal.json`