How to read this project
A useful result makes one precise statement under visible assumptions. Its evidence should survive a change of implementation, the right counterexample and a careful reading of the source.
A named paper, ledger row or proof is the argument to examine. A graph link, passing script or generated summary alone is not a mathematical proof.
A finite surface census is finite. Reaching more windows does not supply an all-window theorem, a limiting argument or a uniform bound.
A failed route stays in the diary with its assumptions. Errata and scope corrections remain visible with the original identifiers.
Preserved criteria
The W3 candidate mechanism (kill test K2 of the Weil-operator contract) dies if a complete fresh window stably exceeds the frozen C = 1 bound — the complete-comb surface is definitional, so there is no room to re-fit.
PRIME.WEIL.OPERATOR.01 · v618 / v619
Kill test K1: if the window form is not the Galerkin matrix of the localized Weil operator on the declared bases (exactly, or up to the named rank-one transform), the W1–W4 chain is dead. K3: losing the explicit-formula bookkeeping in the odd sector kills it too.
PRIME.WEIL.OPERATOR.01 · v631 / v643
Negatives & corrections
Raw correlations of ±0.40 suggested the fine geometric invariants of the prime front predict the arithmetic contraction margin — a geometry-to-primes bridge.
After controlling for the ladder parameter h, the partial correlation is ρ = −0.040 (p = 0.75) — the raw signal was entirely the h-trend. Promoted as an honest negative; the bridge, if it exists, needs a different functional.
v637
The W1 dictionary chain read Suzuki's screw function with Lerch coefficient −1; four modules and a two-layer dictionary were built on that reading.
Self-found and corrected the same day: the paper's own data lock +1/4. Every measured number transfers verbatim via an exact identity; the dictionary collapses to one scalar. Documented as dated erratum blocks across modules, ledger, papers and site.
v643 (erratum on v631, v640–v642)
AI agents assisted exploration, code and writing. Their output is a proposal until its statement, source argument and independent checks have been examined. Diary labels such as “machine-verified” describe the recorded checks within their stated scope; they do not certify an RH proof.
Inspect verification and source →