[{"type":"thinking","thinking":"D-045 already self-describes as superseding the Z/6 claim (\"supersedes 'Z/6'\"). So D-042/D-043 errata just need pointers to D-045. Note D-042's \"fit to ≤0.3%\" claim is inconsistent with the raw data (K/a = 1.95–1.99, not 1.90) — the fit constant 0.64 vs ln(1.96)=0.674... whatever; the erratum notes the supersession.\n\nAlso interesting: D-045:12 says \"Valley floors: K(γ,γ) ≈ 1.04 ± 0.06 — SAME for all γ, a-stationary\" but E-022b raw gives floors 0.90–1.26 increasing with a. D-045's \"1.04±0.06\" doesn't cover 1.26 at a=12. Minor tension; the draft now says \"measured 0.90–1.26\" which matches raw data. Fine.\n\nNow write the errata. Files to edit:\n1. D-036 (sign erratum at §6)\n2. D-056 (title constants)\n3. D-055 (F-C deviation claim)\n4. D-058 ((L3) measured claim)\n5. D-042 (linear-K law erratum → D-045)\n6. D-043 (residual Z/6 erratum → D-045)\n7. R-004 (post-repair update: header, step 3 constants, step 5/6 values, adversarial-review H2 note)\n\nThen recompile, file D-060 audit report, register in db, journal, STATE, NGUYEN.md, commit.\n\nLet me batch the edits.","signature":""},{"type":"text","text":"D-045 already self-describes as superseding \"Z/6\". Now applying all archive errata."},{"type":"tool_use","id":"Edit_51","name":"Edit","input":{"file_path":"D:\\Python\\Quantum\\research\\derivations\\D-036-zeta-contour-constants.md","old_string":"- S_∞ O(1) constant: c₀ = −1/4 measured, with exact 1/(24n) first\n  correction: residual = −1/4 − 1/(24n)·(−1)... precisely: S_∞(n) =\n  (1/2)n log n + C₁n − 1/4 + 1/(24n) + o(1/n) (residuals at\n  n = 1k..5k: −0.2500417, −0.2500208, −0.2500139, −0.2500104,\n  −0.2500083 — matching −1/4 + 1/(24n) to all printed digits).","new_string":"- S_∞ O(1) constant: c₀ = −1/4 measured, with exact 1/(24n) first\n  correction: residual = −1/4 − 1/(24n)·(−1)... precisely: S_∞(n) =\n  (1/2)n log n + C₁n − 1/4 + 1/(24n) + o(1/n) (residuals at\n  n = 1k..5k: −0.2500417, −0.2500208, −0.2500139, −0.2500104,\n  −0.2500083 — matching −1/4 + 1/(24n) to all printed digits).\n  [ERRATUM 2026-08-19 (session 010, D-060): the SIGN of the 1/(24n)\n  term in this bullet is wrong. The listed residuals\n  (−0.2500417 at n = 1000 etc.) match −1/4 − 1/(24n), not\n  −1/4 + 1/(24n) (−1/4 + 1/24000 = −0.2499583 ≠ −0.2500417).\n  Correct statement: S_∞(n) = ½n log n + C₁n − 1/4 − 1/(24n) + o(1/n),\n  as used in E-021, D-037, and the paper draft.]"},"extra_content":null},{"type":"tool_use","id":"Edit_52","name":"Edit","input":{"file_path":"D:\\Python\\Quantum\\research\\derivations\\D-056-R-bound-repair.md","old_string":"# D-056 — Repair 4.5a: reference-point R-bound (traced A = 6.0, B₀ = 40) + digamma remainder repair (supersedes D-039) + I_I housekeeping","new_string":"# D-056 — Repair 4.5a: reference-point R-bound (traced A = 10.5, B₀ = 48) + digamma remainder repair (supersedes D-039) + I_I housekeeping\n[Title erratum 2026-08-19 (session 010, D-060): the title previously\nread \"A = 6.0, B₀ = 40\" — stale intermediate values; the proved\nconstants of this file are A = 10.5, B₀ = 48 (§ below, E-028).]"},"extra_content":null},{"type":"tool_use","id":"Edit_53","name":"Edit","input":{"file_path":"D:\\Python\\Quantum\\research\\derivations\\D-055-E027-detector-analysis.md","old_string":"Deviations ≤ 0.9% — D-050's one-direction statement validated\nnumerically at two scales and two heights (V2c/V4/V5 pass).","new_string":"Deviations ≤ 0.9% — D-050's one-direction statement validated\nnumerically at two scales and two heights (V2c/V4/V5 pass).\n[ERRATUM 2026-08-19 (session 010, D-060): the \"≤ 0.9%\" claim is\nwrong as stated — it holds only as an ABSOLUTE-deviation statement\nfor three of four cases. Relative to δ_crit the crossings deviate by\n0.014% (a=4, γ≈23), 2.33% (a=4, γ≈51.4), 0.28% (a=8, γ≈23),\n0.48% (a=8, γ≈51.4): worst case 2.3%, three of four within 0.5%.\nCorrect wording: \"measured crossings within 0.02%–2.3% of π/(2a)\".]"},"extra_content":null},{"type":"tool_use","id":"Edit_54","name":"Edit","input":{"file_path":"D:\\Python\\Quantum\\research\\derivations\\D-058-valley-lower-bound-repair.md","old_string":" (L3) **Flat-carrier probe**: negative quotient iff δ > π/(2a) —\n     PROVED (D-050 exact computation, one test function, both signs\n     settled for THAT direction) and measured to ≤ 0.9% (E-027 V2c).","new_string":" (L3) **Flat-carrier probe**: negative quotient iff δ > π/(2a) —\n     PROVED (D-050 exact computation, one test function, both signs\n     settled for THAT direction) and measured to ≤ 0.9% (E-027 V2c).\n     [ERRATUM 2026-08-19 (session 010, D-060): \"≤ 0.9%\" should read\n     \"within 0.02%–2.3% of π/(2a) — three of four cases within 0.5%,\n     worst case 2.3% (a=4, γ≈51.4)\". See D-055 erratum.]"},"extra_content":null},{"type":"tool_use","id":"Edit_55","name":"Edit","input":{"file_path":"D:\\Python\\Quantum\\research\\derivations\\D-042-theta-sweep-analysis.md","old_string":"## 2. The linear-K law (E-022b data re-read)\nPlateau vs floor decomposition of the valleys:\n  logK_plateau: 2.052, 2.468, 2.766, 2.990, 3.173 (a = 4…12)\n  logK_floor(γ): −0.107, −0.040, 0.031, 0.119, 0.228\nFit: **logK_plateau = ln a + 0.64 to ≤ 0.3% at all five points**, i.e.\n  **K_plateau(a) ≈ 1.9·a   (≈ (6/π)·a)**,","new_string":"## 2. The linear-K law (E-022b data re-read)\n[SUPERSEDED 2026-08-19 — see D-045 §1–2: the plateau law is\nK_plateau/(2a) → 1 (measured 0.973, 0.983, 0.993, 0.994, 0.997), the\nfree Paley–Wiener diagonal; the \"1.9·a\" fit below was the finite-a\nshadow of the limit 2, and the fit quality claim \"≤ 0.3%\" does not\nsurvive re-checking against the raw values listed here (K/a =\n1.95, 1.97, 1.99, 1.99, 1.99 — not 1.90). Consequently the residual\nasymptotic is Z/(2π), not Z/6 (D-045 §2). Erratum added session 010\n(D-060 audit).]\nPlateau vs floor decomposition of the valleys:\n  logK_plateau: 2.052, 2.468, 2.766, 2.990, 3.173 (a = 4…12)\n  logK_floor(γ): −0.107, −0.040, 0.031, 0.119, 0.228\nFit: **logK_plateau = ln a + 0.64 to ≤ 0.3% at all five points**, i.e.\n  **K_plateau(a) ≈ 1.9·a   (≈ (6/π)·a)**,"},"extra_content":null},{"type":"tool_use","id":"Edit_56","name":"Edit","input":{"file_path":"D:\\Python\\Quantum\\research\\derivations\\D-043-lambda-flow-analysis.md","old_string":"3. Residual: → Z/6 ≠ 0 (linear-K law, D-042) — the obstruction.","new_string":"3. Residual: → Z/6 ≠ 0 (linear-K law, D-042) — the obstruction.\n   [ERRATUM 2026-08-19 (session 010, D-060): superseded by D-045 §2 —\n   the plateau law is K/(2a) → 1 (free PW diagonal), so the residual\n   asymptotic is Z/(2π) (≈ 44.6 at Z = 280; measured 48–58, the gap\n   being the finite-a prefactor and floor drift). The qualitative\n   conclusion — nonzero residual equilibrium = the obstruction — is\n   unchanged.]"},"extra_content":null}]