[{"type":"thinking","thinking":"Compile clean: 13 pages, zero overfull boxes, no undefined refs (the grep -i \"undefined\" returned nothing — output shows nothing between the 0 count and end). \n\nBoth changes done. Report concisely. Also flag the first abstract occurrence as an optional consistency item.","signature":""},{"type":"text","text":"Both changes in, compile clean — 13 pages, zero overfull boxes, no undefined refs.\n\n**1. Abstract** (paperA.tex:50-53): now reads\n> \"...Johansson's rigorous Keiper-coefficient table to $10^5$ transferred to the Li normalization, a zero-location certificate...\"\n\nI dropped the internal comma after \"$10^5$\" from your draft — inside a comma-separated list it read like a separate item. Say the word if you want it back.\n\n**2. Step 3** (paperA.tex:262): now reads\n> \"...the count majorized at $T_n$); all other contour terms are independent of the finite-height RH assumption.\"\n\nAlso removed the `\\emph{}` — the narrower phrasing carries its own weight.\n\nOne adjacent spot you may want to look at: the abstract's earlier sentence still says \"finite Li-coefficient computations (Johansson's rigorous table to $10^5$ and this project's to $3000$)\". Strictly, Johansson's table is Keiper-normalized there too. With your new clause now in the same abstract, a referee gets the precision from context — but I can tighten it if you want full consistency."}]