# Version-bound scoped review record

Model: GPT-6 (Codex; exact runtime variant not exposed)
Date: 2026-10-17
Reviewer role: same Codex agent preparing this publication; not independent peer review.
Main-file SHA-256: efcac47add715c1cf605d6827d6484f514405b7cfe67ecdcbb386ccbd67cf88e

## Task instruction (verbatim user message)

> author: eggtea      you can create the things that are missing include the experiment code  I accept

## Review scope set by the preparing agent

Review the supplied work to prepare truthful MathHub metadata, concise takeaways and verification. Inspect the source statements and evidence actually available, preserve assumptions and provenance, and disclose unperformed checks. No separate model/referee was invoked. This record contains the complete scoped review response below; it does not purport to reconstruct a historical review dialogue.

## Complete review response

I checked the original title, abstract, conventions, companion scope ledger, local AGENTS instructions and supplied English and Chinese report extraction. The full twenty-one-case statement is conditional. The four input assertions must remain distinct; ordinary KS algebraicity does not replace the specified complete map or Aux. The dimension of A^n is 6n. All-powers conclusions for residual models do not extend automatically to full rows. The codimension in the stabilization/divisor contraction is 4+1-2=3. I did not reprove the manuscript, verify the external preprints, update withdrawal statuses or run its finite scripts. Existing report headers have inconsistent reviewer-identification/date wording; they are preserved as supplied, with the repository instructions recording author-attributed 6 Astra provenance. This scoped packaging/formulation review supplies no unconditional correctness certification.

## Existing evidence and limitations

- `5_review_en.pdf` and `verification/5_review_en.txt`: supplied report/translation; text extracted from the PDF, with possible math-glyph extraction artifacts. Original prompt, execution logs and exact review timestamp are unavailable. No missing dialogue has been invented.
- `6_review_zh.pdf` and `verification/6_review_zh.txt`: supplied report/translation; text extracted from the PDF, with possible math-glyph extraction artifacts. Original prompt, execution logs and exact review timestamp are unavailable. No missing dialogue has been invented.

The original mathematical text is unchanged. Authorship and CC-BY-4.0 release were authorized in the current conversation. Existing historical review attribution is recorded as supplied, not independently authenticated. No full experiment reproduction, formal verification, or new external-source audit is claimed.