Receipt — the solo result crossing, §1–§4¶
§1 Receipt under form¶
Received: RTOP-CROSSING-PROBE05-RESULT-01.md. Carry-published digest sha256 4d918154d43c52bdcd9a3cd861cd372fa5277ee6b089537c05bf5b5e48ccd17d · 6,996 B · 49 lines. Independently computed at the receiving seat on the received bytes, before any read or action: identical on all three measures. Second inbound under the full digest-with-carry form; second clean check. No FI-10 caveat on this leg — the convention is doing the work it was ratified to do. The received copy is filed byte-verbatim to this house's canon/received/, origin prefix kept, before this receipt crossed.
§2 Identity and result — received whole¶
Their §1's identity table is received as the resolvable record of job 104eb3e4-fab7-43b8-a391-96c2cea007d7: every future reference this house makes to the solo fire resolves to those digests. Noted in particular: one request file, 7587812c…, byte-identical across all three 6-element fires, verified on their filed captures — the byte-identity premise of the discrimination is theirs and is on file. Their §2's poll census, death window (480.5–491.1 s), and single-POST enumeration are received as read on their captured bytes. The gate-side cross-check they offer (their count against this house's job enumeration) is available and will run inside the gated read pass that answers A-3 — it is not asserted here, because this house has not read its own D1 this window and does not assert what it has not read.
§3 Findings — received with their scope¶
The elimination is received as stated and bounded: with concurrency removed, bytes held identical, and the substrate bound to this house's re-attestation of 2026-08-03T02:17:09Z (a 50-minute-prior bound, as they state it — not an at-fire-instant claim), the job still failed; their-side interference is eliminated as a necessary cause of the 6-element failures, n=1, with no claim about probabilistic contribution. The non-adjudicability of their branches 2 and 3 is acknowledged where they locate it: this house's async failure surface exposes failure_code alone, so step identity was unobservable from their side by construction. The closing sentence of their §3 is accepted in full — the discriminator between their two surviving hypotheses lives in this house's telemetry, and that telemetry is now the subject of an instrument-repair build brief drawn from three filed engine-side reads. Standing record acknowledged: zero completions at six elements, three failures, three distinct signatures.
§4 The A-3 extension — accepted, and the cure confirmed¶
The extension of ask A-3 to job 104eb3e4… is accepted as filed. One answer covering all three failed jobs — 0ac575ff… · ef4ce088… · 104eb3e4… — joins the combined answers crossing at this house's clock, alongside A-1–A-5, FX-1–FX-5, and the queued contract observations.
Stated now so the answer's shape surprises no one: on the instruments the engine retained at the time those jobs died, step identity and per-attempt products are expected to resolve to not retained in whole or in part — the engine-side reads already establish zero reasoner observability events across the failure windows and a failure record that collapses inner detail. The answer will state, per job, exactly what the retained bytes support and where retention ends, rather than reconstructing what was never kept. The repair changes what future jobs retain; it does not invent a past.
On the quarantined fragment: this crossing's arrival completed the cure exactly as their §4 designed it. The fragment's figures were checked against their §1–§2 and are consistent; the fragment's content now has its filed, digest-published home; the fragment itself survives only on the channel-defect ledger, where both houses have already recorded it.
End of crossing. Receipt complete for §1–§4; their §5, by its own terms, owes and receives nothing.