← Session 24 — ii′-2…4: swaps, (4.10) design, contour + website roadmap fixes
thinking (1223 chars)
The live spot-check confirms the two ii′-3a capstone theorems have exactly the 3 standard axioms.
Summary of the audit for the user:
**ii′-3 closure audit (per NGUYEN.md §8.4 protocol):**
| Protocol item | Status |
|---|---|
| Checklist marker | `[~]` at NGUYEN.md:485 — CORRECTLY partial (not [x]) |
| Journal | session-019.md (design + piece B) + session-020.md (piece A complete) ✓ |
| Derivations index | D-066 row (line 73, status "complete (design)") ✓ |
| research.db | sessions 19/20 + D-066 registered ✓ |
| Commits | e28a81e (piece B), 0b4133e/b7ff872 (piece A), closures df74ad6/722eded ✓ |
| Axiom audit | 18 decls, 3 standard axioms — re-verified live just now on the two capstones ✓ |
**The nuance**: ii′-3 is NOT fully complete — it's deliberately split (D-066 §5 resequencing):
- ii′-3a (pieces A+B: archimedean + ζ-piece coefficients) — DONE, properly closed.
- ii′-3b (contour moments) — pending, sequenced after ii′-5 (shares the R-bound).
- ii′-3c (assembly → crux) — pending, after 3b.
So the `[~]` on the roadmap is the honest marker and everything completed-so-far follows the protocol. Answer: yes, properly closed per protocol for the completed parts; the item as a whole is correctly partial.
Yes — ii′-3 is properly closed per the protocol, with the correct **partial** marker. Audit results:
## Protocol checklist for ii′-3 (§8.4)
| Item | Status |
|---|---|
| NGUYEN.md checklist marker | `[~]` at line 485 — correctly *partial*, not `[x]` |
| Journal | session-019.md (design + piece B) and session-020.md (piece A, capstone) ✓ |
| Derivations index | D-066 registered (index.md:73, status "complete (design)") ✓ |
| research.db | sessions 19 + 20 and D-066 all registered ✓ |
| Commits | `e28a81e` (piece B), `0b4133e`/`b7ff872` (piece A), closures `df74ad6`/`722eded` ✓ |
| Axiom audit | recorded 18 decls clean; **just re-verified live**: both capstones (`iteratedDeriv_logDeriv_Gammaℝ`, `iteratedDeriv_hLiExt`) depend on exactly `[propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound]` — no `sorryAx` ✓ |
## The important nuance
ii′-3 as a whole is **not** complete — it's deliberately `[~]`, because the D-066 resequencing split it:
- **ii′-3a** (pieces A+B: archimedean + ζ-piece Taylor coefficients) — DONE and fully protocol-closed.
- **ii′-3b** (contour moments σ_k = −g^(k−1)(0)/(k−1)!) — pending, sequenced *after* ii′-5 because both share the R-bound machinery.
- **ii′-3c** (assembly → the crux identity Sf = Res₁) — pending after 3b.
So the roadmap's `[~]` is the honest state, and STATE.md's remaining map (…→ ii′-5c back half → 5d → 5e → 5f → **ii′-3b → ii′-3c** → ii′-6 → ii′-7) reflects it. Nothing is mis-marked as done, and nothing done is unrecorded.
raw content_json (database row)
[{"type":"thinking","thinking":"The live spot-check confirms the two ii′-3a capstone theorems have exactly the 3 standard axioms.\n\nSummary of the audit for the user:\n\n**ii′-3 closure audit (per NGUYEN.md §8.4 protocol):**\n\n| Protocol item | Status |\n|---|---|\n| Checklist marker | `[~]` at NGUYEN.md:485 — CORRECTLY partial (not [x]) |\n| Journal | session-019.md (design + piece B) + session-020.md (piece A complete) ✓ |\n| Derivations index | D-066 row (line 73, status \"complete (design)\") ✓ |\n| research.db | sessions 19/20 + D-066 registered ✓ |\n| Commits | e28a81e (piece B), 0b4133e/b7ff872 (piece A), closures df74ad6/722eded ✓ |\n| Axiom audit | 18 decls, 3 standard axioms — re-verified live just now on the two capstones ✓ |\n\n**The nuance**: ii′-3 is NOT fully complete — it's deliberately split (D-066 §5 resequencing):\n- ii′-3a (pieces A+B: archimedean + ζ-piece coefficients) — DONE, properly closed.\n- ii′-3b (contour moments) — pending, sequenced after ii′-5 (shares the R-bound).\n- ii′-3c (assembly → crux) — pending, after 3b.\n\nSo the `[~]` on the roadmap is the honest marker and everything completed-so-far follows the protocol. Answer: yes, properly closed per protocol for the completed parts; the item as a whole is correctly partial.","signature":""},{"type":"text","text":"Yes — ii′-3 is properly closed per the protocol, with the correct **partial** marker. Audit results:\n\n## Protocol checklist for ii′-3 (§8.4)\n\n| Item | Status |\n|---|---|\n| NGUYEN.md checklist marker | `[~]` at line 485 — correctly *partial*, not `[x]` |\n| Journal | session-019.md (design + piece B) and session-020.md (piece A, capstone) ✓ |\n| Derivations index | D-066 registered (index.md:73, status \"complete (design)\") ✓ |\n| research.db | sessions 19 + 20 and D-066 all registered ✓ |\n| Commits | `e28a81e` (piece B), `0b4133e`/`b7ff872` (piece A), closures `df74ad6`/`722eded` ✓ |\n| Axiom audit | recorded 18 decls clean; **just re-verified live**: both capstones (`iteratedDeriv_logDeriv_Gammaℝ`, `iteratedDeriv_hLiExt`) depend on exactly `[propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound]` — no `sorryAx` ✓ |\n\n## The important nuance\n\nii′-3 as a whole is **not** complete — it's deliberately `[~]`, because the D-066 resequencing split it:\n\n- **ii′-3a** (pieces A+B: archimedean + ζ-piece Taylor coefficients) — DONE and fully protocol-closed.\n- **ii′-3b** (contour moments σ_k = −g^(k−1)(0)/(k−1)!) — pending, sequenced *after* ii′-5 because both share the R-bound machinery.\n- **ii′-3c** (assembly → the crux identity Sf = Res₁) — pending after 3b.\n\nSo the roadmap's `[~]` is the honest state, and STATE.md's remaining map (…→ ii′-5c back half → 5d → 5e → 5f → **ii′-3b → ii′-3c** → ii′-6 → ii′-7) reflects it. Nothing is mis-marked as done, and nothing done is unrecorded."}]