Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
4325 lines (3560 loc) · 222 KB

File metadata and controls

4325 lines (3560 loc) · 222 KB

Node [181]: structural accounting through [185]

This document lists every fact that holds for the minimal counterexample $G$ when the proof reaches node [181], the arm taken at every diamond on the way, the technique (register T01–T19) that produced each fact and the register property (A01–I06) it evaluated, and the exact typed data at the leaf. Nothing is projected, summarized, or dropped. Section 0 records the implemented strict transition from [181] to [124] or [183], followed by the strict shortest-trace boundary-support reduction from [183] to [184] and the strict visible-first prefix exhaustion from [184] to [185]. The existing exit-(4) producer now also retains target-completeness for each selected Q1 response pair, at its original receiver and peeling set. This does not identify an internal vertex fold with a Q1 response-coordinate identification. The fold calculation below is retained, but its former closure claim is withdrawn. Sections 6–12 retain the earlier trace--ear attempt and its audit because several of its local identities are correct and useful. They are not used in the implemented transition. Sections 13–20 retain a superseded block--cut draft for audit history only. That draft incorrectly treated every unpaid unified entry as silent, whereas the live route8UnifiedEntries family contains both visible-first and silent-excess loads. No assertion from §§13–20 is part of the proof DAG.

Sources: to_formalize/erdos_64_proof.tex (labels in backticks; node numbers in brackets), closure_proofs.md (Theorems 1.3–1.5, 3.1–3.4), the live statement types in HypostructureErdos64EG/StrategyDag.lean and Graph/Strategy/SpineVocabulary.lean, and the register web/frontend/src/structural-survey/data.ts.


0. Implemented reductions and retained Q1 semantics through [185]

The first new textbook move on the literal node-[181] residual is a one-entry augmentation of a lexicographically maximal finite packing. It uses no silence assumption, does not rerun the demand construction, and does not pass to another graph or another support.

Let entries be the retained unified entry family, let core(ξ) be its canonical essential-carrier set, and let

[ \operatorname{priv}(\xi) :={c\in\operatorname{core}(\xi): c\notin\operatorname{core}(\eta) \text{ for every }\eta\in\texttt{entries},\ \eta\ne\xi}. ]

The incoming demand fact supplies a partition

[ P=(\Xi_3(P),\Xi_2(P),\Xi_{\rm res}(P);A_P) ]

which is lexicographically maximal in ((|\Xi_3(P)|,|\Xi_2(P)|)), subject to the pinned-entry condition. Put

[ \Xi_{\rm un}(P):=\Xi_2(P)\mathbin{\dot\cup}\Xi_{\rm res}(P). ]

Theorem 0.1 (unpaid entries have at most two private carriers)

For every (\xi\in\Xi_{\rm un}(P)),

[ |\operatorname{priv}(\xi)|\le2. \tag{0.1} ]

Proof

Suppose instead that some unpaid (\xi) has at least three private carriers, and choose a three-element set (D\subseteq\operatorname{priv}(\xi)). Define a new ledger (Q) by

[ \Xi_3(Q)=\Xi_3(P)\cup{\xi},\qquad \Xi_2(Q)=\Xi_2(P)\setminus{\xi},\qquad \Xi_{\rm res}(Q)=\Xi_{\rm res}(P)\setminus{\xi}, ]

set (A_Q(\xi)=D), and leave every other assignment unchanged. The three classes still form a disjoint partition of entries. The new assignment is available because (D\subseteq\operatorname{core}(\xi)), and has cardinality three. Every old size-two or size-three assignment is unchanged.

For disjointness, if (\eta\ne\xi), then the old assignment (A_P(\eta)) lies in (\operatorname{core}(\eta)). Privacy of every (c\in D) therefore gives (c\notin A_P(\eta)). Thus (D) is disjoint from every old assignment, while old assignments remain pairwise disjoint. Finally, a pinned entry different from (\xi) keeps its assignment. The entry (\xi) itself cannot be pinned: every pinned entry already belongs to (\Xi_3(P)), whereas (\xi\in\Xi_2(P)\cup\Xi_{\rm res}(P)). Hence (Q) is an admissible pinned ledger and

[ |\Xi_3(Q)|=|\Xi_3(P)|+1, ]

contradicting the first coordinate of maximality. This proves (0.1). ∎

In Lean this exchange is proved anonymously inside route8UnpaidExitFourDichotomy. The decision reads the incoming demand partition, constructs the comparison partition (Q), verifies every partition, availability, disjointness, cardinality, and pinned-assignment clause there, and contradicts the first coordinate of the retained maximality statement. No detached helper theorem or stronger intermediate API is introduced.

Theorem 0.2 (exhaustive exit-(4) split)

Exactly one of the following occurs.

  1. Some (\xi\in\Xi_{\rm un}(P)) has no exit-(4) witness. Then the retained unified census makes (\xi) target-complete-minimal, gives (\alpha(\xi)\ge2), and Theorem 0.1 gives its two-carrier bound. These are exactly the inputs of the existing node-[124] proposition, so this arm closes there.
  2. Every (\xi\in\Xi_{\rm un}(P)) has an exit-(4) witness. Together with Theorem 0.1 this is the exact intermediate residual fact at node [183].

Proof

Choose an unpaid entry with no witness if one exists. The unified census says that its basin is either target-complete-minimal, or target-defective together with an exit-(4) witness for the same indexed load. The second alternative contradicts the choice. Thus the entry is target-complete-minimal. The census also supplies (\alpha\ge2), and (0.1) supplies the two-carrier condition. The retained no-witness statement is therefore literally route8UnifiedTrueTwoCarrierEntry; its unique existing consumer route8UnifiedTerminalNoGoRow closes node [124].

If no such entry exists, classical negation gives a witness for every unpaid entry, and (0.1) holds for each of them. This is precisely Route8UnpaidExitFourResidualStatement. ∎

For quantitative accounting define

[ H_{181}(P)={\xi\in\Xi_{\rm un}(P): |\operatorname{priv}(\xi)|\ge3},\qquad N_{181}(P)={\xi\in\Xi_{\rm un}(P): \xi\text{ has no exit-(4) witness}}. ]

Theorem 0.1 proves (|H_{181}(P)|=0) on both arms. A positive value of (|N_{181}(P)|) closes at [124]; the only surviving arm [183] has

[ (|H_{181}(P)|,|N_{181}(P)|)=(0,0). \tag{0.2} ]

Thus the residual predicate has strictly fewer admissible structural profiles, while the entry family, demand units, assignments, peel chain, absorption, window blockers, unified census, and every earlier ledger key are retained.

The Lean decision is route8UnpaidExitFourDichotomy; the Assembly consumer is selectedRouteEightUnpaidExitFourReduction. On its right arm the fact route8UnpaidExitFourResidual is appended to the unchanged ExactLedger.

Theorem 0.3 (shortest-trace visible-ownership reduction)

Let entries := route8UnifiedEntries data object be the same broad unified family retained from [123]. It contains both visible-first and silent-excess loads; it is not replaced by a silent subfamily. Define only the residual coordinate

[ S_{184}:= {\xi=(X,w,u)\in\texttt{entries}: u\notin\operatorname{visibleLoads}(X,w)}. \tag{0.3} ]

On the literal node-[183] state,

[ \forall\xi=(X,w,u)\in\texttt{entries},\quad u\in\operatorname{visibleLoads}(X,w), \qquad S_{184}=\varnothing, \qquad |S_{184}|=0. \tag{0.4} ]

Proof

Fix an actual retained entry (\xi=(X,w,u)), and suppose that its load is silent. Let (P:u\leadsto w) be its canonical path selected by tracePath?, and let (T) be the vertex set of (P). Every object in this sentence is already determined by the incoming entry and its fixed path schedule.

1. Exact cubicity on the incoming support. Membership of (X) in the unified negative collection gives ambient surplus zero. The incoming minimum-degree baseline gives (d_G(x)\ge3) for every (x), while ambient surplus is the sum over (X) of the nonnegative terms (d_G(x)-3). Hence

[ d_G(x)=3\qquad(x\in X). \tag{0.5} ]

2. The selected trace is induced. The path schedule used by tracePath? is ordered first by length. Consequently the selected trace is no longer than any other trace-shaped (u)--(w) path. Take a shortest (u)--(w) path in the induced graph on (T). Its vertices are vertices of the original trace, so it inherits the original trace-shape conditions; it is therefore one of the candidates in the same schedule. The selected trace is no longer than it, while shortestness gives the reverse inequality. Thus the selected trace is itself shortest in the induced graph on (T), and the standard chord-shortening argument makes it induced.

The source and target are distinct: the routed-load clause makes (u) internally cubic in (X), whereas the receiver clause makes (w) internally deficient. Every vertex of an induced nontrivial path has at most two neighbours in its vertex set. Equation (0.5) therefore gives an edge leaving (T) at every trace vertex. In the exact boundary notation,

[ T\subseteq\partial_VT. \tag{0.6} ]

3. Silence makes the trace support complete. For each supported D1--D4 coordinate, the retained coordinate census has two exhaustive readings. It either meets the selected trace at a vertex declared in its support, or its declared support is owned by an actual scheduled receiver-entry return for (u). The second reading contradicts the assumed silence of (u). In the first reading the declared vertex belongs to (\partial_VT) by (0.6). The trace itself supplies containment and connectedness. Thus (T) satisfies every clause of TraceComplete for this same entry.

4. Basin minimality identifies the basin with the trace. The selected basin (B_u) contains the selected trace. Since (T) is now a complete candidate, the minimum-cardinality selection rule gives (|B_u|\le|T|). Therefore

[ B_u=T. \tag{0.7} ]

5. A boundary-only basin has empty essential core. Equations (0.6)--(0.7) put every basin vertex on the basin boundary. In the literal definition of retainedBasinPiece, a retained coordinate set can alter only an edge whose two decoded endpoints are interior vertices. A boundary-only basin has no such endpoints. Hence every retained coordinate set produces the same boundaried piece and the same response state. In particular the empty coordinate set is complete. The canonical essential core has minimum complete cardinality, so

[ \alpha(\xi)=|\mathcal C_{\rm ess}(\xi)|=0. \tag{0.8} ]

The incoming unified census, on this same index, says (\alpha(\xi)\ge2). This contradiction eliminates the silent assumption. Since the entry was arbitrary, every entry is visible and (0.4) follows. ∎

This is the first new structural move after [183]: shortest-path chord elimination followed by boundary-support collapse. It does not rerun visible routing, demand packing, or exit-(4) peeling. The anonymous proof lives inside the Type-A atomic row route8UnifiedVisibleResidualRow; that row reads route8UnifiedEntryCensus, appends route8UnifiedVisibleResidual, and retains the complete incoming key list. Assembly enforces the literal predecessor by running it only on a ledger that already contains route8UnpaidExitFourResidual; its consumer is selectedRouteEightVisibleResidual.

For quantitative accounting, append the third coordinate to (0.2):

[ \bigl(|H_{181}(P)|,|N_{181}(P)|,|S_{184}|\bigr) =(0,0,0). \tag{0.9} ]

The transition [183]→[184] removes the entire silent structural profile, not any entry. The exact entry family, the partition (\Xi_3\mathbin{\dot\cup}\Xi_2\mathbin{\dot\cup}\Xi_{\rm res}), every demand assignment, every exit-(4) witness, the peel chain, both absorption classes, the unique-window blocker map, the unified census, and every earlier ExactLedger key remain attached. Node [184] is therefore a strict residual: all retained entries have actual return ownership, and no claim that this remaining all-visible overlap structure is empty has been inserted.

Theorem 0.4 (visible-first prefix exhaustion)

Keep the same broad family route8UnifiedEntries and write (s) for the retained discharge scale. For an entry (\xi=(X,w,u)), let (\mathcal P_X(w)) be the actual completion ports of (w), and let (\mathcal L_{\rm vis}(X,w;h)) be the visible loads owned through port (wh). Define the remaining non-overload coordinate

[ O_{185}:= \left{\xi=(X,w,u)\in\texttt{entries}: \forall h\in\mathcal P_X(w),\quad |\mathcal L_{\rm vis}(X,w;h)|<s\right}. \tag{0.10} ]

On the literal node-[184] state,

[ O_{185}=\varnothing, \qquad |O_{185}|=0, \tag{0.11} ]

and every retained entry has an actual canonical package consisting of an overloaded port, (s) distinct visible loads owned through that port, and the first scheduled actual receiver-entry return for each selected load.

Proof

Fix (\xi=(X,w,u)\in\texttt{entries}). Literal membership in the incoming family gives

[ u\in E_X(w):=\mathcal L_X(w)\setminus A_X(w), \tag{0.12} ]

where (A_X(w)) is the visible-first payable prefix of length (s q_X(w)-1), and (q_X(w)=3-d_X(w)). Node [184] gives the additional fact (u\in\mathcal L_{\rm vis}(X,w)) for this same entry. Nothing is reselected.

Suppose (\xi\in O_{185}). The zero ambient-surplus and minimum-degree facts already used in Theorem 0.3 give (d_G(x)=3) for every (x\in X). Hence (w) has exactly (q_X(w)) completion ports. Since (w) is a receiver, (d_X(w)<3), so (q_X(w)\ge1). The defining inequality of (O_{185}) gives at most (s-1) visible loads at each port. Counting every visible load at one of its actual owning ports yields the retained port-cap estimate

[ |\mathcal L_{\rm vis}(X,w)|+q_X(w) \le s q_X(w), \qquad |\mathcal L_{\rm vis}(X,w)|\le s q_X(w)-1. \tag{0.13} ]

The second inequality says that the entire visible block fits inside the visible-first prefix. Thus (\mathcal L_{\rm vis}(X,w)\subseteq A_X(w)), and the node-[184] ownership of (u) gives (u\in A_X(w)). This contradicts (0.12). Therefore every entry lies outside (O_{185}), proving (0.11).

For each entry, the negation of membership in (O_{185}) supplies an actual completion port carrying at least (s) distinct visible loads. The already fixed finite orders choose the first such port, the first (s) loads at that port, and the first scheduled visible return for each load. These choices form VisibleFourUnpeeledPackage at the empty peeling set. They are all paths and vertices of the selected graph, not profile-context data. ∎

The anonymous Lean proof is the Type-A atomic row route8UnifiedVisibleOverloadRow. It reads only route8UnifiedVisibleResidual, appends route8UnifiedVisibleOverload, and leaves every incoming key queryable. Its Assembly consumer is selectedRouteEightVisibleOverload; all three selected route-8 continuations run it immediately after selectedRouteEightVisibleResidual.

Appending the fourth exact coordinate to (0.9) gives

[ \bigl(|H_{181}(P)|,|N_{181}(P)|,|S_{184}|,|O_{185}|\bigr) =(0,0,0,0). \tag{0.14} ]

This is not another peel and does not reconstruct the payable order. It consumes the all-visible ownership fact that first becomes available at [184] and eliminates the complete non-overloaded ownership profile. The entry family, demand partition and assignments, exit-(4) witnesses, peel chain, absorbers, blockers, basins, essential cores, and all prior ExactLedger keys remain unchanged. The exact [185] frontier therefore consists entirely of entries whose receivers carry canonical actual visible-four packages.

Theorem 0.7 (target-completeness of the retained Q1 response pairs)

Take the selected history at [185], including its original no-exit-(4) statement. Let (P) be its VisibleFourUnpeeledPackage, at its actual receiver (w) and current peeling set (P_4(w)). For every (p:P.\texttt{Q1OriginPair}), put

[ A_p=\texttt{visibleResponsePiece}(p.\texttt{leftResponseCoordinate}), \qquad B_p=\texttt{visibleResponsePiece}(p.\texttt{rightResponseCoordinate}). ]

The two pieces have the same boundary-degree profile and are context-equivalent for the retained target predicate. Consequently the set of target-defective Q1 origin pairs in this package is empty.

Proof

Both profiles are the profile of the same selected support, by visibleResponsePiece_boundaryDegreeProfile. Fix an origin pair (p). Context universality gives context equivalence or a target defect between exactly (A_p) and (B_p). In the second case, the original Q1 constructor gives P.witnessOfPairTargetDefect p: its load is the selected left load, which belongs to the current unpeeled selected list. It is therefore a witness excluded by the no-exit-(4) statement for this very package and peeling set. This contradiction excludes the second alternative and proves context equivalence. Together with equality of profiles this is TargetComplete. Since the argument holds for every origin pair, none is target-defective. ∎

The proof is published by the original exit-(4) decisions, including their terminal retests, in the visible conjunct of ExitFourFreeAt. Both the no-witness statement and the pairwise conclusion are retained through typeAExitFiveFree, typeAExitSixFree, and the selected no-handoff state. The node-[185] atomic row reads that state and publishes the conclusion for the same package under route8UnifiedVisibleHistory. All existing keys and their ancestry remain in ExactLedger; no new key, hypothesis, or node is introduced. This is the explicit retention of an upstream consequence, not a new residual reduction or a proof of False at [181].

The internal-fold calculation and its exact semantic consequence

Work on the literal selected history retained at [185]. Its VisibleFourUnpeeledPackage contains four distinct selected loads

[ U={u_1,u_2,u_3,u_4}. \tag{0.31} ]

No equality of channels, nesting of traces, or additional comparison hypothesis is used. There is a pair (u,v\in U) for which one of the following alternatives holds.

  1. (u) and (v) have no common neighbour.
  2. (u) and (v) have a unique common neighbour (x), and there is (c\in U-{u,v}) with (c\ne x) and (xc\notin E(G)).

Identifying (u) and (v), and in the second alternative adding the edge (xc), gives a canonical boundaried piece (X^{\rm fold}) inside the same selected Type A support (X) such that

[ \mathbf d_\partial(X^{\rm fold})=\mathbf d_\partial(X), \qquad \delta\bigl(X^{\rm fold}\oplus_\partial(G-X)\bigr)\ge3, \qquad |V(X^{\rm fold}\oplus_\partial(G-X))|=|V(G)|-1. \tag{0.32} ]

The comparison of this fold with the original piece is target-defective: context equivalence would contradict the incoming replacement exclusion. This statement concerns the original support and its fold, not the two response pieces in Theorem 0.7.

Proof

1. The four selected vertices are full interior cubic vertices. The presentation facts retained by cubicBaseline give (delta=3) and (s=4). The package's selected list has length (s) and is repetition-free, proving (0.31). Every selected load lies in unpeeledLoads, hence in the selected support (X), and mem_routedLoads gives

[ d_X(u_i)=3. \tag{0.33} ]

The selected Type A support has ambient surplus zero. Since the incoming baseline gives (d_G(y)\ge3) for every vertex, the defining nonnegative surplus sum forces (d_G(y)=3) for every (y\in X). Combining this with (0.33) shows that every neighbour of every (u_i) belongs to (X). Thus all four selected vertices are full interior vertices of the actual boundaried piece; none is a boundary label.

2. A foldable pair always exists. Any two distinct vertices of (G) have at most one common neighbour. Otherwise two distinct common neighbours (a,b) give the simple four-cycle (uavbu), contrary to the retained target avoidance and quadrilateralAccepted.

Choose two vertices (u,v\in U). If they have no common neighbour, the first alternative holds. Otherwise let (x) be their unique common neighbour. If (x\notin U), then (x) already uses two of its three incident edges on (u,v); among the two members of (U-{u,v}), at least one, say (c), is not adjacent to (x). This is the second alternative. If (x\in U), let (c) be the fourth member of (U). Again the second alternative holds unless (xc\in E(G)).

It remains to treat (x\in U) and (N_G(x)={u,v,c}). If one of the three pairs (xu,xv,xc) has no common neighbour, use that pair and the first alternative holds. Suppose instead that each has a common neighbour. A common neighbour of (x) and a member of ({u,v,c}) must itself be one of the other two members of this set. Therefore the graph induced by ({u,v,c}) has minimum degree at least one and hence at least two edges. Two such edges share one of these three vertices; together with the two corresponding edges incident with (x), they form a simple four-cycle. This contradiction exhausts the last case and proves the asserted dichotomy.

3. The local fold preserves the baseline and the exact boundary fibre. Identify (u) and (v) to a new vertex (z), delete the resulting loop if (uv\in E(G)), and merge duplicate incidences, as required for a simple graph.

If (u,v) have no common neighbour, no other vertex loses degree. The new vertex has degree six when (uv\notin E(G)), and degree four when (uv\in E(G)). Thus the ambient minimum degree remains at least three.

Suppose (x) is the unique common neighbour and (c) is supplied by the second alternative. After the identification, (x) is the only vertex whose degree decreases: its two incidences (xu,xv) merge to (xz), so its degree is two. The vertex (z) has degree five if (uv\notin E(G)), and degree three if (uv\in E(G)). Add the missing edge (xc). This restores the degree of (x) to three, raises the degree of the full interior vertex (c) from three to four, and changes no other degree. The repaired graph again has minimum degree at least three.

The boundary accounting is exact in both cases. The removed vertices (u,v), the optional repair endpoint (c), and the folded vertex (z) are interior. Every retained boundary vertex other than (x) merely replaces an incident edge to (u) or (v) by one incident edge to (z), so its internal degree is unchanged. If (x) is a boundary vertex, the fold removes exactly one internal incidence and the repair adds exactly one internal incidence. All outside edges and all boundary labels are untouched. Hence the identity on the original boundary gives the first equality in (0.32). Finally, two internal vertices have been replaced by one and the repair adds no vertex, so the glued realization has exactly one fewer vertex. This proves (0.32), with no remaining construction arm.

4. Replacement exclusion forces target defect of the fold. Apply Response.contextEquivalent_or_targetDefect to (X^{\rm fold}) and the original piece (X). If they are context-equivalent, the one-way target implication holds for every compatible outside context. The selected support is connected and proper, and (0.32) supplies the unchanged boundary profile, the minimum-degree bound, and strict lexicographic decrease. These are the fields of InterfaceReplacement.ReplacementSupport, contradicting the retained replacementExclusion fact. Thus the fold is target-defective. ∎

There is no contradiction with Theorem 0.7: its pieces are (A_p,B_p), whereas this comparison uses (X,X^{\rm fold}). The first assertion is (\operatorname{TargetComplete}(A_p,B_p)); the second is (\operatorname{TargetDefect}(X,X^{\rm fold})). Their arguments are different. The original Q1 record fixes the former response pieces definitionally. Adding an originFold constructor to that record changes the exit family; it does not prove that the latter comparison was excluded upstream.

The counts in (0.32) concern a comparison graph with one fewer vertex. They do not decrease the incoming residual: the target-defective fold is not a permitted target-complete replacement. In particular, neither (X^{\rm fold}) nor an assumed equivalence with it is appended as a successor state. The earlier claim (\mathcal B_{185}\Rightarrow\bot), equation (0.34), and its alleged closure-key producer were incorrect and are removed. The valid degree and boundary accounting of steps 1–3 is preserved above.

Corollary 0.6 (simultaneous global concentration on the incoming indices)

On the large node-[185] branch the following are exact integer inequalities:

[ p\ge3b+1,\qquad O\ge9b+1. \tag{0.30} ]

Let (E:=\widetilde\Xi) be the unchanged unified entry set, let (P\subseteq E) be the set of entries occurring in the recorded peel chain, and put

[ \begin{aligned} K&:={\xi\in\Xi_2\mathbin{\dot\cup}\Xi_{\rm res}: \xi\text{ owns at least one open demand unit}},\ J&:=P\cap K. \end{aligned} \tag{0.31} ]

Then the same entries, demand units, and supply incidences satisfy

[ a+B\le b,\qquad O=3N-a-B\ge3N-b,\qquad |K|\ge3b+1,\qquad |J|\ge2b+1. \tag{0.32} ]

Every (\xi=(X,w,u)\in E) has, by Theorem 0.3, at least one actual completion port through which (u) is visible. Choose the first such port and the first scheduled visible return through it; call them (e(\xi)) and (R_\xi). The values of (e) lie in the actual boundary-incidence supply (\mathscr P), where (|\mathscr P|=b). If an open unit (\upsilon) is owned by (\xi), put (e(\upsilon):=e(\xi)). There are canonically first incidences (e_P,e_K,e_J,e_O\in\mathscr P) for which

[ \begin{array}{c|c} \text{fibre}&\text{forced size}\ \hline P\cap e^{-1}(e_P)&\ge4\text{ distinct peeled entries},\ K\cap e^{-1}(e_K)&\ge4\text{ distinct open-owner entries},\ J\cap e^{-1}(e_J)&\ge3\text{ distinct peeled open-owner entries},\ {\upsilon\in\mathcal O:e(\upsilon)=e_O} &\ge10\text{ open units belonging to at least four entries}. \end{array} \tag{0.33} ]

There are also canonically first supply incidences (c_5,c_7) such that

[ \begin{aligned} |{\xi\in J:c_5\in\mathcal C_{\rm ess}(\xi)}|&\ge5,\ |{\xi\in P:c_7\in\mathcal C_{\rm ess}(\xi)}|&\ge7. \end{aligned} \tag{0.34} ]

All entries in (0.33)--(0.34) retain their receivers, traces, basins, essential cores, demand classes and units, absorber/open status, blocker windows, original peel stages and witnesses, and the actual visible returns chosen above. The selected incidences may coincide or may belong to different Type A supports; no coincidence is assumed. Each port fibre itself lies at one receiver of one connected ambient-cubic, (P_{13})-free support of order at most (6142).

Proof

The retained stub identity and orbit calculation give

[ \frac b r\le\tau^\ast+o(1),\qquad \tau^\ast=\frac{45}{4c_{13}-138},\qquad \frac h r=o(1). \tag{0.35} ]

Indeed, (b+2e_\times(W)=15p_{13}+\sigma_W), (\sigma_W\le\sigma(G)=o(r)), (\theta=p_{13}/n\le\theta^\ast+o(1)), and (r=(1-13\theta)n). The registered constant gives the positive margin

[ 3-22\tau^\ast =\frac{12c_{13}-1404}{4c_{13}-138}>0 \tag{0.36} ]

because (c_{13}=118.108581006\ldots>117). On the literal large-(r) arm the two incoming error terms are eventually smaller than this fixed margin, and multiplication by (r) gives

[ 3r>22b+6h. \tag{0.37} ]

Combining (0.37) with (0.29) gives (p>3b), and combining it with (0.28) gives (O>9b+3h\ge9b). Integrality gives (0.30).

The base assignment uses (a) distinct supply incidences and the type-(A1) absorption uses (B) further distinct incidences, so (a+B\le b). The exact demand-unit partition gives (O=3N-a-B), and hence (O\ge3N-b). More is true supportwise. If (O_X>0) and an incidence of (\delta_G(X)) were unused by both the base assignment and the type-(A1) absorber assignment, assigning it to the first open unit owned by an entry of (X) would preserve the retained same-support clause (0.16a), injectivity, and disjointness while enlarging the committed absorption. Maximality forbids this. Therefore [ O_X>0\quad\Longrightarrow\quad a_X+B_X=b_X, \qquad O_X=3N_X-b_X. \tag{0.32a} ] No incidence of another support is used in this argument.

Every entry of (K) owns either one or three demand units, and every open unit has one owner. Hence (O\le3|K|), so (0.30) yields (|K|\ge3b+1). A peeled entry outside (J) is either in (\Xi_3), or is unpaid and owns no open unit. In the second case all of its demand units are absorbed; choosing its first demand unit injects such entries into the (B) absorbed units. Consequently

[ p\le |J|+N_3+B. \tag{0.38} ]

Because (3N_3+B\le a+B=b), one has (N_3+B\le b). Thus (|J|\ge p-b\ge2b+1), proving the remaining part of (0.32).

The maps (e:E\to\mathscr P) and (e:\mathcal O\to\mathscr P) use only actual incoming objects. Applying the pigeonhole principle to (0.30) and (0.32) gives the four fibre sizes in (0.33). An entry owns at most three open units, so a ten-unit fibre has at least four distinct owners. A physical completion port has one endpoint in one receiver of one canonical support, so every listed fibre is automatically local even though the count producing it was global.

Finally, every entry core has at least two incidences and is contained in the same global supply of size (b). Therefore

[ \sum_{\xi\in J}|\mathcal C_{\rm ess}(\xi)| \ge2|J|\ge4b+2, \qquad \sum_{\xi\in P}|\mathcal C_{\rm ess}(\xi)| \ge2p\ge6b+2. \tag{0.39} ]

If every incidence occurred in at most four of the first family of cores, its incidence count would be at most (4b); if every incidence occurred in at most six of the second, that count would be at most (6b). Both conclusions contradict (0.39), proving (0.34). (\square)

0.7 The exact node-[186] residual

Corollary 0.6 creates no hypothetical child. It appends to the full [185] state the canonical fibres and incidences forced by the incoming equalities. Every diffuse alternative is arithmetically empty:

[ \begin{array}{rcl} \max_e|P\cap e^{-1}(e)|\le3&\Longrightarrow&p\le3b,\ \max_e|K\cap e^{-1}(e)|\le3&\Longrightarrow&|K|\le3b,\ \max_e|J\cap e^{-1}(e)|\le2&\Longrightarrow&|J|\le2b,\ \max_e|{\upsilon\in\mathcal O:e(\upsilon)=e}|\le9 &\Longrightarrow&O\le9b,\ \max_c|{\xi\in J:c\in\mathcal C_{\rm ess}(\xi)}|\le4 &\Longrightarrow&2|J|\le4b,\ \max_c|{\xi\in P:c\in\mathcal C_{\rm ess}(\xi)}|\le6 &\Longrightarrow&2p\le6b. \end{array} \tag{0.40} ]

Thus the literal residual is not one support with a locally maximal absorber; that would add a property absent from the incoming ledger. It is the complete global state together with several forced local fibres of that state. What has evaded the upstream moves is cross-index reuse: a supply incidence is spent once by the demand/absorption ledger but may occur in many response cores, and many entries may choose the same actual port while their target-defect witnesses use different Q-clauses. Demand, peeling, visibility, and essentiality counted four projections of this tensor; (0.30)--(0.40) put them on the same entry indices without asserting that the canonically selected high fibres coincide.

0.8 One state carrying every inherited restriction

The literal state after [186] is

[ \mathcal B_{186}:= \bigl(\mathcal B_{185};P,K,J,e(\cdot),R_{(\cdot)}, e_P,e_K,e_J,e_O,c_5,c_7\bigr), \tag{0.41} ]

where (\mathcal B_{185}) is the complete immutable ExactLedger and all new coordinates are the canonical objects proved in Corollary 0.6. The following is a simultaneous account, not a projection.

Retained block Restriction on the same state (\mathcal B_{186}) Exact effect
A, B Every port fibre is contained in one actual connected ambient-cubic Type A support; all supply incidences form one global set of size (b). Base and absorber incidences are globally disjoint and exhaustive. (a+B=b). Cross-support absorber reuse is allowed and already paid; no local occupancy equality is used.
C Each entry has its own selected actual scheduled return through (e(\xi)); all Mersenne, target-sum, and illegal-window exits remain absent. Four entries in one fibre give four actual visible returns at one physical port.
D Entry, support, port, return, fibre, peel stage, demand unit, core, and all witnesses use the fixed orders. Every supportwise excess and every later leaf/path suppression is selected canonically on the incoming object.
E Exits (5)--(7) are absent and every recorded peel remains a strict earlier descent. Proposition 0.7 excludes only the literal Q2 clause from an original peel witness; Q1, Q3, Q4 and Q5 records remain attached.
F Each core has size at least two; every unpaid entry has at most two private carriers; all deletion witnesses remain attached. The five-core and seven-core fibres (0.34) coexist with the port fibres.
G, H Equations (0.17)--(0.29), the orbit cap, peel identity, maximal demand partition, global maximal absorption, and blocker partition all remain live. Equations (0.30)--(0.40) force peeled, open-owner, peeled-open, open-unit, and repeated-core concentrations simultaneously.
I Every support met by a selected fibre is (P_{13})-free, has diameter at most eleven, and has at most (6142) vertices. Each local fibre is bounded, but no finite enumeration or generic graph statement is introduced.
Rest of the ledger Every other support, all Type B exceptional mass, all window states, and all prior exact tests remain in (\mathcal B_{185}). Nothing outside a selected fibre is discarded or reclassified.

The remaining unmeasured coordinate is now precise: the global inequalities do not force their high fibres to belong to one support. The maximally adversarial state may put its deficit excess, peeled excess, open-owner excess, peeled-open excess and open-unit excess on different supports. Theorem 0.8 therefore localizes each currency separately and then uses the deficit-heavy support, which independently carries a linear entry excess, as the one support on which all topological and entry data can be measured together.

Proposition 0.7 (the Q2 peel clause is absent)

No original PeelChain witness of an entry (\xi\in P) is of type Q2. Hence its retained clause lies in ({\mathrm{Q1},\mathrm{Q3},\mathrm{Q4},\mathrm{Q5}}).

Proof

Let the peel step for (\xi=(X,w,u)) occur at the recorded stage (P_{<\xi}). If its witness were Q2, the supports field and the third conjunct of SilentUnpeeledExcessAt would give

[ u\in\operatorname{unpeeledExcess}(X,w;P_{<\xi}) \subseteq \operatorname{unpeeledLoads}(X,w;P_{<\xi}) \setminus\operatorname{visibleLoads}(X,w). \tag{0.42} ]

But (\xi) is a member of the unchanged unified entry set, so Theorem 0.3 gives (u\in\operatorname{visibleLoads}(X,w)). This contradicts (0.42). The five constructors of CanonicalMember are exhaustive, so only Q1, Q3, Q4, and Q5 remain. This consequence is appended to each existing peel record; it neither replaces that witness nor creates a child residual. (\square)

Theorem 0.8 (simultaneous supportwise localization)

Let (\mathscr A=\widetilde{\mathcal X}) be the retained family of negative, zero-surplus, no-handoff Type A supports. For (X\in\mathscr A) write

[ \begin{aligned} b_X&:=|\delta_G(X)|=\defp(X), &D_X&:=|X|-4b_X,\ E_X&:={\xi\in E:\operatorname{supp}(\xi)=X}, &N_X&:=|E_X|,\ P_X&:=P\cap E_X, &K_X&:=K\cap E_X,\ J_X&:=J\cap E_X, &O_X&:=|{\upsilon\in\mathcal O: \operatorname{supp}(\operatorname{owner}\upsilon)=X}|. \end{aligned} \tag{0.43} ]

Put (b_{\mathscr A}=\sum_{X\in\mathscr A}b_X). Then

[ \begin{gathered} b_{\mathscr A}\le b, \qquad D=\sum_XD_X,\quad N=\sum_XN_X,\quad p=\sum_X|P_X|,\ |K|=\sum_X|K_X|,\quad |J|=\sum_X|J_X|,\quad O=\sum_XO_X. \tag{0.44} \end{gathered} ]

The complete node-[186] state canonically selects supports

[ X_D,X_P,X_K,X_J,X_O\in\mathscr A \tag{0.45} ]

(not asserted to be distinct or equal) such that

[ \begin{array}{rclcrcl} D_{X_D}&\ge&3b_{X_D}+1, &\qquad&N_{X_D}&\ge&3b_{X_D}+1,\ |P_{X_P}|&\ge&3b_{X_P}+1, &&|K_{X_K}|&\ge&3b_{X_K}+1,\ |J_{X_J}|&\ge&2b_{X_J}+1, &&O_{X_O}&\ge&9b_{X_O}+1. \tag{0.46} \end{array} ]

Moreover, the following local fibres are present simultaneously in the same global state.

  1. In (X_D), some physical port is chosen by at least four entries of (E_{X_D}), and some cut incidence lies in at least seven of their essential cores.
  2. In (X_P), some physical port is chosen by at least four peeled entries, and some cut incidence lies in the essential cores of at least seven peeled entries.
  3. In (X_K), some physical port is chosen by at least four open-owner entries, and some cut incidence lies in the essential cores of at least seven open-owner entries.
  4. In (X_J), some physical port is chosen by at least three peeled open-owner entries, and some cut incidence lies in the essential cores of at least five such entries.
  5. In (X_O), some physical port carries at least ten open units, belonging to at least four distinct owners. The support also has at least (3b_{X_O}+1) distinct open-owner entries.

Every entry in these fibres keeps its actual visible return, visible-four package, receiver, trace, basin, demand class and units, absorption/open status, blocker window, core and deletion witnesses, and, when applicable, its original peel stage and witness. This statement makes no intersection claim between canonically selected high fibres.

Proof

The supports in (\mathscr A) are distinct components of the retained remainder decomposition. Their entry and demand-owner families are therefore disjoint. Their cut incidences have distinct inside endpoints, so their union is contained in the global supply. This proves (0.44).

The exact StageAccounting coordinate gives

[ p\le D. \tag{0.47} ]

Corollary 0.6 gives

[ p\ge3b+1,qquad |K|\ge3b+1,qquad |J|\ge2b+1,qquad O\ge9b+1. \tag{0.48} ]

Consequently

[ D\ge3b_{\mathscr A}+1,\quad p\ge3b_{\mathscr A}+1,\quad |K|\ge3b_{\mathscr A}+1,\quad |J|\ge2b_{\mathscr A}+1,\quad O\ge9b_{\mathscr A}+1. \tag{0.49} ]

If the first inequality in (0.46) failed at every support, summing would give (D\le3b_{\mathscr A}), contradicting (0.49). The same argument, with coefficients (3,3,2,9), selects (X_P,X_K,X_J,X_O). The supportwise identity (0.24) says (N_X=D_X+U_X) with (U_X\ge0), so the selected (X_D) also satisfies the second inequality in the first line of (0.46). All choices are made first in the fixed support order.

Every member of (\mathscr A) is a nonempty proper connected shore of bridgeless (G); hence (b_X\ge2). It has exactly (b_X) physical completion ports. Assigning each entry to its already selected port gives the port bounds by the pigeonhole principle. Every entry has an essential core of size at least two contained in those same (b_X) incidences. Thus the core-incidence totals in (X_D,X_P,X_K,X_J) are respectively at least

[ 6b_{X_D}+2,\quad6b_{X_P}+2,\quad 6b_{X_K}+2,\quad4b_{X_J}+2. \tag{0.50} ]

If all carrier multiplicities were at most (6,6,6,4), respectively, these totals would be at most (6b_{X_D},6b_{X_P},6b_{X_K},4b_{X_J}), a contradiction. This gives the four core fibres. Finally an entry owns at most three open units. Hence (O_{X_O}\ge9b_{X_O}+1) forces at least (3b_{X_O}+1) owners, and ten units at one of its (b_{X_O}) ports force at least four owners. No absorber has been localized in this proof; (0.32) remains the exact global occupancy statement. (\square)

Theorem 0.9 (degree-chain exhaustion on the deficit-heavy support)

Write (X=X_D), (b_0=b_X), and

[ n_i:=|{v\in X:d_X(v)=i}|. ]

The incoming residual forces

[ n_0=0,qquad b_0=n_2+2n_1,qquad D_X=n_3-3n_2-7n_1,qquad n_3\ge6n_2+13n_1+1. \tag{0.51} ]

In particular

[ |X|\ge7b_0+2,qquad b_0\le877,qquad \beta(X)=\frac{|X|-b_0}{2}+1\ge3b_0+2. \tag{0.52} ]

There is a canonical exact encoding of this same support by the following data.

  • Repeatedly delete the first internal leaf, retaining the deleted vertex, its two old boundary edges and its unique edge toward the survivor. Let (L) be the number deleted and let (Y) be the terminal connected induced shore.
  • Suppress every maximal internal-degree-two path of (Y), retaining its ordered vertex list and its positive edge-length. The resulting connected cubic weighted multigraph is denoted (\Gamma); loops and parallel edges are permitted only in this encoding.
  • Let (s) be the number of edges of (\Gamma) having weight greater than one, and let (U) be the actual simple graph on (V(\Gamma)) consisting of the weight-one edges. Equivalently, (U=G[V(\Gamma)]).

These data satisfy the exact identities and inequalities

[ \begin{gathered} |Y|=|X|-L,qquad b(Y)=b_0-L\ge2,\qquad \delta(Y)\ge2, \tag{0.53}\ |V(\Gamma)|=|Y|-b(Y)=|X|-b_0\ge6b_0+2, \tag{0.54}\ \beta(\Gamma)=\beta(X)=\frac{|V(\Gamma)|}{2}+1 \ge3b_0+2, \tag{0.55}\ \sum_{e\in E(\Gamma)}(\ell(e)-1)=b(Y),qquad 1\le s\le b(Y)\le b_0, \tag{0.56}\ n_1\le L\le b_0-2,\qquad 2\le b(Y)\le n_1+n_2,\qquad s\le n_1+n_2, \tag{0.56a}\ c(U)\le s+1,qquad \beta(U)\ge\beta(\Gamma)-s\ge2b_0+2, \tag{0.57}\ |{v\in V(U):d_U(v)=3}|\ge|V(\Gamma)|-2s \ge4b_0+2. \tag{0.58} \end{gathered} ]

Every component of (U) contains an endpoint incidence of a weight-greater- than-one edge. The graph (U) is induced in the original support, is (P_{13})-free and target-free, and has empty internal (3)-core. The reconstruction fibre (X\setminus V(\Gamma)) has exactly (b_0) vertices and contains every receiver and every inside endpoint of an edge in (\delta_G(X)). Distinct cut edges are not asserted to have distinct inside endpoints. More precisely it is the disjoint union of all (n_2) one-port receivers, all (n_1) two-port receivers, and exactly (n_1) vertices which had internal degree three in (X):

[ |X\setminus V(\Gamma)|=n_2+2n_1=b_0,\qquad |{v\in X\setminus V(\Gamma):d_X(v)=3}|=n_1. \tag{0.54a} ]

At least (2b_0+1) entries of (E_X) have their load vertex in (V(\Gamma)). Let (M) be the canonical set of all such marked entries. On these same marked vertices:

[ |M|\ge2b_0+1, \tag{0.59} ]

some physical port is chosen by at least three members of (M), and some cut incidence belongs to the essential cores of at least five members of (M). Finally, two distinct marked entries have canonical shortest paths in (U), each of length at most eleven, to the same oriented endpoint of the same weight-greater-than-one edge of (\Gamma). Internal vertices of each path have degree three in (U). The paths are not asserted to be disjoint. In addition, two (possibly different) marked entries have actual canonical trace prefixes in (U) which leave the kernel through the same oriented endpoint incidence, and hence through the same first edge of the same suppressed path. The two loads lie in the same component of the original internal-degree-three subgraph and therefore have the same canonical receiver. These trace prefixes are induced and have length at most eleven; no disjointness or coincidence with the port/core fibres is asserted.

If (m_t) denotes the number of marked canonical traces whose first kernel-exit is the oriented weighted-edge incidence (t), then

[ \sum_t\max(m_t-1,0) \ge |M|-2s\ge2n_1+1. \tag{0.59a} ]

Proof

The first three identities in (0.51) are the ambient-cubic degree count and (0.24). Combining (D_X\ge3b_0+1) with (b_0=n_2+2n_1) gives the last inequality. Hence (|X|\ge7b_0+1). The ambient degree sum gives (b_0\equiv|X|\pmod2), so the strict difference is even and (|X|\ge7b_0+2). Since (|X|\le6142), this gives (b_0\le877). Finally

[ 2|E(X)|=3|X|-b_0,qquad \beta(X)=|E(X)|-|X|+1=\frac{|X|-b_0}{2}+1, ]

which proves (0.52).

If (v) is an internal leaf of the current shore (S), deleting it removes its two old cut edges and makes its unique internal edge a new cut edge. Thus

[ |S-v|=|S|-1,qquad b(S-v)=b(S)-1,qquad (|S-v|-7b(S-v))=(|S|-7b(S))+6. \tag{0.60} ]

The new shore is connected and induced. It is still a nonempty proper shore of bridgeless (G), so its cut has size at least two. The finite canonical deletion therefore terminates at the stated (Y), proving (0.53). Since all vertices of (Y) have ambient degree three and internal degree two or three, the number of its degree-two vertices is exactly (b(Y)). The positive quantity (|Y|-7b(Y)) excludes the case that (Y) is a cycle. Consequently maximal degree-two suppression produces the connected cubic weighted multigraph (\Gamma).

The deleted leaf set has size (L), and the suppressed path interiors have total size (b(Y)=b_0-L). Exactly (b_0) original vertices therefore lie outside (V(\Gamma)), giving (0.54). Leaf deletion and degree-two suppression preserve cycle rank, and the cubic handshake identity in (\Gamma) gives (0.55). Each weighted edge consumes exactly (\ell(e)-1) suppressed vertices. This proves (0.56). Every one of the (n_1) original internal leaves is removed by the leaf-stripping process, so (L\ge n_1); and (b(Y)\ge2) gives (L\le b_0-2). Using (b_0=n_2+2n_1) now gives [ b(Y)=b_0-L\le n_2+n_1. ] Together with (s\le b(Y)), this proves (0.56a).

Deleting the (s) weighted edges from connected (\Gamma) leaves (U), so it creates at most (s+1) components and destroys at most (s) independent cycles. This proves (0.57). The deletion removes exactly (2s) cubic incidences, counting the two incidences of a loop separately. Thus at most (2s) vertices of (U) can have degree below three, proving (0.58). If a component of (U) met no deleted-edge endpoint, all three incidences of each of its vertices would remain inside that component. It would be a nonempty induced subgraph of minimum degree three, contradicting the retained empty-internal-(3)-core fact. The remaining inheritance claims follow because (U) is the induced graph on an actual vertex subset of (X). The weights, rather than the unweighted multigraph, record cycle lengths; no cycle of (\Gamma) is treated as a cycle of (G) without summing its weights. A kernel vertex has degree three in (Y), and hence degree three already in (X); it is neither a receiver nor the inside endpoint of a cut edge of (X). This proves the assertion about the (b_0)-vertex reconstruction fibre. All (n_1+n_2) deficient vertices therefore lie in that fibre. Its remaining cardinality is [ b_0-(n_1+n_2)=(n_2+2n_1)-(n_1+n_2)=n_1, ] which proves (0.54a).

Entry loads are distinct internal-degree-three vertices, and (N_X\ge3b_0+1). Since exactly (b_0) vertices of (X) lie outside the kernel vertex set, at least (N_X-b_0\ge2b_0+1) entry loads survive there. This proves (0.59). Their selected ports take only (b_0) values, forcing a three-entry port fibre. Their essential cores contain at least (2|M|\ge4b_0+2) incidences counted with multiplicity, so one of the (b_0) cut incidences occurs at least five times.

There are exactly (2s\le2b_0) oriented endpoint incidences of weighted edges. Every component of (U) contains at least one. Assign each member of (M) to the first closest such incidence in its component and retain the first shortest path. Since (|M|>2s), two distinct marks receive the same incidence. A shortest path of twelve edges would be an induced (P_{13}) in (G), so both selected paths have length at most eleven. Minimality of the endpoint distance makes every internal path vertex incident with no weighted edge and hence of degree three in (U). All selected entries and all of their inherited records remain attached.

Every vertex of (\Gamma) has degree three already in (Y), and therefore also has internal degree three in the original support (X). A receiver has internal degree at most two, so the receiver of every entry in (M) lies outside (V(\Gamma)). Follow its already selected canonical trace from its marked load and take the first edge leaving (V(\Gamma)). No kernel vertex is adjacent to the deleted leaf forest, since such an edge would lower its degree in (Y). The first leaving edge is therefore precisely the first edge at one oriented endpoint of a weight-greater-than-one suppressed path. Its preceding trace prefix lies in the actual induced graph (U).

This assigns the (2b_0+1) or more marked entries to the same set of (2s\le2b_0) oriented incidences. Two distinct entries therefore receive the same incidence and use the same first leaving edge. Theorem 0.3 proved that every selected trace is induced. Since (X) is (P_{13})-free, the trace, and hence its prefix, has at most eleven edges. This proves the final trace assertion without replacing either trace by a profile event. Both prefixes lie in one component of (U), hence in one component of (X[{v:d_X(v)=3}]). The fixed receiver order assigns the same canonical receiver to all loads in that component, proving the receiver assertion. There are at most (2s) nonempty fibres of the trace-exit map, and hence [ \sum_t\max(m_t-1,0) =|M|-|{t:m_t>0}| \ge |M|-2s. ] Equations (0.59) and (0.56a), together with (b_0=n_2+2n_1), give [ |M|-2s\ge2(n_2+2n_1)+1-2(n_1+n_2)=2n_1+1, ] which proves (0.59a). (\square)

0.10 Exact residual, exact decrease, and the maximally adversarial shape

The literal post-[186] state is

[ \mathcal B_{187}:= \bigl(\mathcal B_{186};X_D,X_P,X_K,X_J,X_O; Y,\Gamma,\ell,U,M;\text{all selected fibres and reconstruction data} \bigr). \tag{0.61} ]

Its first coordinate is the complete immutable incoming ledger. The leaf lists and suppressed path lists partition exactly the (b_0) vertices outside (V(\Gamma)); entries whose loads occur there remain attached to those lists. Thus the normalization discards neither a vertex nor an entry. It nevertheless strictly reduces the active support-internal cycle-skeleton order:

[ \mu_{186}=|X_D|,qquad \mu_{187}=|V(\Gamma)|=|X_D|-b_0 \le\mu_{186}-2. \tag{0.62} ]

This is the unused A08/E04 textbook move: canonical leaf stripping followed by safe suppression of maximal degree-two chains, with exact lengths and all ledger decorations retained. It is not another demand packing, peel, visible-four routing, trace-ear argument, or theorem about an arbitrary graph.

The complete ledger acts on (\mathcal B_{187}) as follows.

Retained block Simultaneous restriction on the normalized state Quantitative effect
A, B (X_D) remains the actual connected ambient-cubic component selected from the incoming support family; its cut and every inside endpoint remain actual. (0.51)--(0.56a), including the exact (b_0)-vertex reconstruction fibre and (
C Every edge of (U), every trace prefix, and every suppressed path is made of actual edges of (G). Target avoidance is read only after summing the retained path weights. (U) is target-free; the selected actual trace prefixes have length at most eleven and share one first kernel-exit edge.
D Supports, stripping order, maximal paths, weights, marked entries, ports, carriers, endpoint incidences and traces use the inherited fixed orders. (\mathcal B_{187}) is a canonical coordinate of the same labelled counterexample.
E No quotient, replacement graph, or fresh peel is introduced. Safe suppression stores an inverse reconstruction for every contracted path and leaf. The strict support-internal cycle-skeleton decrease is exactly (b_0), as in (0.62).
F Each marked entry keeps its essential core and all deletion witnesses; the core is still contained in the original cut of (X_D). At least five kernel-marked entries share one actual carrier.
G, H The demand partition is global, while every type-(A1) absorber retains the cut of its owner support; deficit, peel, open-owner, peeled-open and open-unit excesses are localized separately. (0.46)--(0.50), together with the exact local saturation implication (0.32a).
I (P_{13})-freeness, the order bound (6142), and empty internal (3)-core are applied to the actual induced graph (U). (b_0\le877), every component of (U) meets a weighted endpoint, and every selected shortest path has length at most eleven.
Other supports and Type B mass They remain in the first coordinate (\mathcal B_{186}), with all exceptional mass, window, entropy, rank and blocker data. Selecting and normalizing (X_D) removes no mass or fact elsewhere.

The transition audit is exact.

Test on the incoming active coordinate Exhaustive outcome Progress
Supportwise excess Some support has the required excess, or all supportwise bounds hold. The second outcome sums to a contradiction; the first canonically selects (0.45).
Current shore has an internal leaf Delete the first leaf, or the shore has minimum internal degree two. A deletion changes ((
Degree-two mass in (Y) It lies on the canonical maximal paths. Exact suppression removes (b(Y)) active skeleton vertices and stores every path and weight.
A component of (U) misses all weighted endpoints It exists, or every component meets one. The first arm is an induced minimum-degree-three subgraph and closes by A-9; the second is the retained arm.
First kernel-exit map on (M) It is injective, or two marks share an oriented incidence. Injectivity gives (

Thus no child repeats the incoming unnormalized support: it either closes or retains the whole ledger with the strict active-skeleton decrease (0.62).

The earlier star-kernel draft does not provide a second decrease. Indeed, even if a port-overlap certificate partitions (E=Z\mathbin{\dot\cup}Q) with (|Z|\le3b), equations (0.30) and (0.32) give

[ 3|Q|=3N-3|Z|=O+b-3|Z|\ge O-8b\ge b+1. \tag{0.63} ]

Thus the leaves (Q) are provably nonempty and still carry their peel, demand, core and blocker obligations. A hub assignment is a correlation certificate, not payment, and (N\mapsto|Z|) is not a residual measure.

The maximally adversarial survivor has now been quantified without assuming that unrelated high fibres coincide. It consists of the whole [186] state, five possibly different concentration supports, and one distinguished deficit-heavy support whose exact weighted cubic kernel has at least (6b_0+2) branch vertices and cycle rank at least (3b_0+2), while at most (b_0) subdivided kernel edges carry all degree-two structure. After those edges are removed, the actual induced graph still has cycle rank at least (2b_0+2) and at least (4b_0+2) cubic vertices. At least (2b_0+1) actual entry loads remain marked on the kernel; five share an essential carrier, three share an actual port, and two feed the same oriented subdivision-chain endpoint through induced paths of length at most eleven. A pair of actual canonical traces (not asserted to be any of those earlier pairs) also uses the same first kernel-exit edge, and the total excess reuse of these first-exit incidences is at least (2n_1+1). The selected fibres may be different and are all retained.

Structurally, this is the one mechanism by which the residual has evaded the earlier moves: a boundary/reconstruction fibre of only (b_0) vertices controls a cubic kernel with more than (6b_0) branch vertices and more than (3b_0) independent cycles. Demand consumes a boundary incidence once, but essential cores, visible ports and actual traces may all reuse the same incidence or subdivision endpoint. The upstream ledgers measured each of those projections; they did not measure the multiplicity with which the large internal kernel funnels through the small reconstruction fibre. Equations (0.54a), (0.59), and (0.59a) are the first joint quantitative account of that funnel.

Every alternative in which one of these numerical conclusions fails is already contradicted by (0.47)--(0.60). This decorated high-rank, few-subdivision kernel is therefore the exact structure left for the next local textbook move.


1. The path from the root to [181]

Each row: node(s) → arm taken → fact retained on the branch state → technique → register rows evaluated.

Node(s) Arm taken Fact retained Technique Rows
[1]–[2] yes $G$ finite simple, $\delta(G)\ge3$, no cycle of length $2^j$ (def:counterexample) A04, C03
[4] $G$ is the lexicographically minimal counterexample: minimum $\lvert V\rvert$, then $\lvert E\rvert$, then lexicographic order T02 E01
[5]–[7] no Mersenne return $R_e(G)\cap\mathrm{Mers}=\varnothing$ for every oriented edge $e$, $\mathrm{Mers}={2^k-1:k\ge2}$ (lem:return-equivalence) T08 C02
[8] every proper subgraph $H\subsetneq G$ has $\delta(H)\le2$ (lem:no-proper-core) T02 E02, A07
[9]–[10] every edge has an endpoint of degree $3$; $V_{\ge4}(G)$ is independent (lem:deletion-critical) T03, T02 E03, A06
$G$ is bridgeless (lem:bridgeless, by contraction of a bridge) T03, T02 B02
[11] boundaried pieces $X\oplus_TY$ with boundary degree profile $\mathbf d_\partial$ (def:boundaried-gluing, lem:degree-profile-fibres) T05 B05, B06
[12] context universality: a target-complete identification agrees against every $T$-context; an identification valid only for the actual outside is target-defective (lem:context-universality) T05 B07, E06
[13] replacement: no $T$-boundaried $X'\preceq_TX$ with the same $\mathbf d_\partial$, no internal power-of-two cycle, internal degrees $\ge3$, strictly smaller (lem:replacement) T02, T03 E05
[14] hereditary target-uncompressibility: no proper boundaried piece admits a nontrivial target-complete compression (cor:uncompressible) T02, T05 E05
retained spine facts contraction criticality and all four gadget-closure clauses remain in the exact ledger: a contractible edge has an actual severed return of length $2^k$ ($k\ge2$); smaller target-free cubic two-terminal pieces have the one-piece, doubled-piece, paired-piece, and complementary Mersenne/power path conclusions stated in §2.C T02, T03, T08 E03, C01, C02
[15]–[16] no $G$ contains an induced $P_{13}$ (cor:p13-exists, via the black box thm:p13free: $P_{13}$-free $+\ \delta\ge3\Rightarrow$ power-of-two cycle) T18 I06, C08
[17] $\mathcal P$: a maximum-cardinality family of vertex-disjoint induced $P_{13}$'s, $p_{13}=\lvert\mathcal P\rvert=\theta n$, chosen lexicographically first among maximum ones; $W=\bigcup V(P)$, $R=G-W$ T06, T16 C09, C10
[18] $P_{13}$ label algebra: $399$ legal labels (sizes $13,60,122,122,63,17,2$), relations $C_s$, obstruction tensor $\Omega_2$ (lem:labels) T17 D01, G02
[19]/[20]; [125]–[144] no non-near-cubic surplus survives near-cubic spine: $m=\tfrac32n+O(\sqrt n)$, $\sigma(G)=2m-3n=O(\sqrt n)$, $\lvert V_{\ge4}\rvert\le\sigma(G)$ (def:near-cubic-spine, prop:nonnear-cubic-sharp-overload-routing, thm:tokenized-surplus-accounting-closure) T13, T14, T15 A02, A05, A14
[21] finite constants: $c_\Omega=2.28922315244$, $c_{13}=118.108581006$; two-step obstruction enumeration $543958,432672,111286$ (lem:curv-enum, lem:p13-window-package) T17 I05, A09, G02
[158] yes the joint window package of $\mathcal P$ is realized by the labelled skeleton class: $\ge2^{c_{13}p_{13}\log_2n}$ target-complete states assigned canonically to skeletons in $\mathcal G_{n,m}$ (def:window-realization-test) T12 G01, G03, G06
[22]/[145]–[157] the live-hot entropy comparison does not close; the cold machinery returns to [24] on its bounded arm clause (v) of def:surviving-cold-branch scopes thm:cold-branch-quantitative-closure to branches that exclude node [181]; its outputs are therefore not [181] facts. What is retained here is only the return at [24] T12, T13 G03, H08
[24] the original window-only bound is $\theta\le\theta_{\rm win}+o(1)$, $\theta_{\rm win}=1.5/c_{13}=0.0127002$; the retained relabelling-orbit facts remainderRelabelingEntropy (key 501) and relabelingDensityCap (key 502), specialized to the realized hot window state, give Theorem 1.5: $\theta\le\theta^\ast+o(1)$ and $\tau\le\tau^\ast+o(1)$ T12, T16 G09, G04, I02
[25]–[27] $\lvert R\rvert\ge(1-13\theta)n$; every component of $R$ is $P_{13}$-free, hence of diameter $\le11$ and $\le6142$ vertices, and has empty internal $3$-core: every $P_{13}$-free induced subgraph of $G$ has a vertex of degree $\le2$ (lem:remainder-empty-internal-3-core, black box) T06, T18, T04 C10, C08, A07
[28]–[29] $\defp(X)=\sum_v\max(0,3-d_X(v))$; $\defp(R)\le e(R,W)\le15p_{13}+o(n)$; exact split $e(R,W)+2e_\times(W)=15p_{13}+\sigma_W$; $(\defp(R)-\sigma_R)/\lvert R\rvert\le15\theta/(1-13\theta)+o(1)$, hence the live $\tau_{\rm win}=0.2281749\ldots$ bound T01, T15 A10, A11, H01
[30] $W_2(C)\ge3\lvert V(C)\rvert-2\defp(C)$ per component; $W_2(R)\ge\omega_{\rm win}\lvert R\rvert-o(\lvert R\rvert)$, $\omega_{\rm win}=2.54365$ (high entropy $2.57407$) (lem:wedge-lower) T01 A09, F01
[31]–[47] no rank drop full obstruction rank $r_\Omega(R)\ge W_2(R)-o(W_2)$; every rank-reducing dependence is target-defective, a proper compression (forbidden), a proper-support dependence (forbidden, lem:proper-smearing), or a whole-graph dependence that is target-defective, has a smaller closed representative, or is exact on labels (lem:no-silent-global-smearing); repair identity $s=p-2+2\beta_Z-\sigma_Z$ (lem:smearing-support-repair); separated identical wedges are context-universal or defective (lem:separated-testers) T11, T10, T05 F01–F07, A12
[48] forced obstruction cost $c_\Omega r_\Omega(R)\ge K_{\rm win}\lvert R\rvert-o(\lvert R\rvert)$, $K_{\rm win}=5.82298$ (high entropy $K=5.89263$) (cor:forced-curvature-cost) T12 G03, H09
[49]–[50] high entropy $\eta(R)=\log_2\lvert\mathcal G(R)\rvert/\lvert R\rvert\ge(1-\tau)\log_2\lvert R\rvert-O(1)&gt;\tfrac1{10}\log_2n$: the low-entropy arms (b),(c) of prop:two-budget are empty (Corollary 1.4, relabeling orbits) T12, T16 G01, G04, I02
[51]–[53] remaining non-obstruction budget not $&lt;K\lvert R\rvert$ large-budget branch: the skeleton budget minus the forced obstruction cost is at least $K\lvert R\rvert$; the entropy cap prop:entropy-high-theta ($\theta>\Theta(n)$) does not apply; $\Theta(n)=(1.4-K/\log_2n)/(116.808581006-13K/\log_2n)$ T12 H09, G08
[55]–[56]; [173] Residual C: $\Delta_{\rm net}(R)=(\defp(R)-\sigma_R)/\lvert R\rvert\le\tau_{\rm win}+o(1)&lt;\tfrac14$, with the manuscript's stated collision decided exactly at [173] (lem:exact-collision-test) T01, T13 H01, I03
[57]–[61] $\No(R)&lt;0$ net charge $\No(X)=\defp(X)-\sigma(X)-\tfrac14\lvert V(X)\rvert$; $\sum_i\No(X_i)=\defp(R)-\sigma(R)-\tfrac14\lvert R\rvert\le-(\tfrac14-\tau)\lvert R\rvert$; some connected canonical support has $\No(X)&lt;0$ (def:net-charge, lem:netcharge-superadd, prop:negative-net-charge); canonical decomposition of $R$ into components with surplus assigned to the piece containing the high-degree vertex (def:canonical-decomp) T13, T04 H01–H03, D08
[62]; [64]–[85] Type B closed high-degree supports: centers independent, fan neighbours cubic, certificate-marked cap $d_G(h)\le8$, the fan-window ledger, B2 disjointness; every Type B support with $\No&lt;0$ outside the bridge residual has a route-8 profile or a positive-deficit fan residual; the bridge residual mass is $M_B\le16\sigma(G)=o(\lvert R\rvert)$ (lem:typeB-exclusion, prop:typeB-bridge-sublinear, thm:branch-kill(b)) T07, T13, T14, T15 D03, D04, H05, H06, H08
[63], [86]–[88] Type A the negative supports of linear mass are Type A: $\sigma(X)=0$, so every $v\in V(X)$ has $d_G(v)=3$; $X$ is connected, subcubic, $P_{13}$-free, $\operatorname{diam}X\le11$, $\lvert X\rvert\le6142$, empty internal $3$-core, contextually target-safe, hereditarily uncompressible, every deficient vertex supplied from $W$; $\defp(X)&lt;\lvert X\rvert/4$; receivers $w$ with $d_X(w)\le2$, $q(w)=3-d_X(w)$ ports; canonical traces $T_u$ and loads $L(w)$ (def:typeA-support, def:typeA-receiver-load) T04, T05, T07 A03, A11, B05, C08, D08
[89] some receiver saturated $L(w)\ge4q(w)$ for some receiver (else lem:typeA-unsaturated-discharge: $\defp(X)\ge\tfrac14\lvert X\rvert$, $n_3\le3n_2+7n_1+11n_0$, closing) T13 H04, H05
before [93] the live portPowerReturn key retains its witness selected Type A piece; at every completion port of every receiver of that piece, absence of a common ambient-cubic neighbour supplies an actual anchored return of length $2^k$, $k\ge2$. It is not silently generalized to every member of $\tilde{\mathcal X}$ T03, T08 E03, C01, C02
[93] tested at every stage a visible-four port routes to exits (1)–(7); exits (1)–(3), (5), and (6) close, exit (7) hands off to Type B, and exit (4) is recorded and peeled. Thus the node-[181] ledger retains the exit-(4) records but no universal no-visible-four assertion T07, T08, T19 C01, C02, E08
[94] visible-first excess: $S^{\rm exc}_{\rm sil}(X)=\sum_w\lvert\mathcal U(w)\rvert\ge n_3-3n_2-7n_1-11n_0=4D_A(X)$, $D_A(X)=\tfrac14\lvert X\rvert-\defp(X)$ (lem:typeA-silent-excess-count, def:typeA-excess-basin) T13, T15 H05, G07
[95]–[108] exits (1),(2),(3),(5),(6) closed; (7) absent; (4) peels at every saturated receiver of every $X\in\tilde{\mathcal X}$: no anchored return of Mersenne length through a port; no two internally disjoint receiver-entry returns through one port with lengths summing to a power of two (lem:typeA-common-port-return-cycle); no violated label relation $C_s$ on a shared window; no nontrivial target-complete response compression; no delocalizing response equality; no decorated handoff fan (exit (7)) since $X\in\tilde{\mathcal X}$ produces none; continuation routing at a port gives exits (4)–(6) or a surviving first separator of degree $\ge4$ (lem:typeA-continuation-routing, lem:typeA-cubic-switch-absorption, lem:typeA-high-degree-handoff) T08, T09, T05, T07 C01–C05, D01, E05, E06, D03
[109]–[113] the unified negative collection $\tilde{\mathcal X}={X:\sigma(X)=0,\No(X)&lt;0,\text{no handoff}}$ with $\tilde D_A=\sum(\tfrac14\lvert X\rvert-\defp(X))\ge(\tfrac14-\tau)\lvert R\rvert-o(\lvert R\rvert)$; entries $\tilde\Xi={(X,w,u,B_u):u\in\mathcal U_X(w)}$, $\tilde N\ge4\tilde D_A$ (def:typeA-unified-negative, lem:typeA-unified-deficit, lem:typeA-unified-burden) T13, T15 H03, H08, G07
[114]–[116] every entry passes to its canonical minimal target-complete response-support core $\mathcal C_{\rm ess}(\xi)\subseteq\partial_EX$, $\alpha(\xi)=\lvert\mathcal C_{\rm ess}\rvert\ge2$ (lem:typeA-unified-carriers; entries with $\alpha\le1$ realize exits (4)–(7)) T11, T05 F02, F04, B08
[117]; [119]–[122] two-support entry exists if every entry had $\pi(\xi)\ge3$ private essential incidences then $3\tilde N\le\defp(R)$ against $\tilde N\ge12(\tfrac14-\tau)\lvert R\rvert$, impossible; so some $\xi$ has $\pi(\xi)\le2$ (prop:typeA-unified-reduction) T15, T01 G07, H06
[118], [124] route-8 two-support closed no terminal two-support route-8 obstruction (thm:typeA-two-carrier-nogo); Theorem 3.2: every two-support entry realizes exit (4), so route-8 two-support entries do not occur T05, T11 E06, F05
[101]–[102], [123] target-defect two-support: peel each such entry is peeled: its load leaves the receiver sum, $\Lambda_4=\sum_w\lvert\mathcal L(w)\setminus P_4(w)\rvert$ decreases by one, the deficit by $\tfrac14$, no invariant weakened (lem:typeA-exit4-discharge, lem:typeA-exit4-finite-descent); iterate while $\tilde D_A^{P_4}\ge(\tfrac14-\tau_{\rm win})\lvert R\rvert-o(\lvert R\rvert)$ T19 E08, H10
[181] the reduced-rate test fails the full peeled-demand leaf (§4); maximal-ledger augmentation forces ( H_{181} =0), and the no-witness arm closes at [124]
[183] every unpaid entry has a witness the complete [181] ledger plus (( H_{181} ,
[184] silent ownership eliminated the same unified entries and all inherited ledger facts, with every entry owned by an actual scheduled return and ( S_{184} =0)
[185] non-overloaded ownership eliminated the same unified entries and complete ledger, with an actual canonical visible-four package at every entry receiver and ( O_{185} =0)
[186] exact simultaneous balance and silent-terminal exclusion the whole [185] ledger plus universal saturated-load visibility, zero silent-unpeeled excess for every retained component/receiver/peeling-set triple, (p\le D\le N), (N=D+U), the ambient deficit, demand/open pressure, coupled pressure, failed-rate peel balance, and the exact demand/absorption identities direct invariant elimination on the incoming peel, deficit, demand, and absorption ledgers A03, B09, G07, H05, H06, H10

Arms not on the path (for completeness): [3] not a counterexample; [16] $P_{13}$-free; [20] non-near-cubic surplus (routed back to the spine); [23] live-hot overflow; [159]–[172] dense-packing residual ($\theta&gt;\theta_{\rm win}$, the no-arm of [158]) and its nodes [163]–[172], [178]–[180], [182]; [60] net-cap contradiction; [90]–[92] unsaturated; [96], [98],[100], [104], [106] closed exits; [108] handoff; [124] closed.


2. The complete hypothesis ledger, by register category

Every unqualified fact below is on the branch state $\mathcal B_{181}$. Rows explicitly labelled “candidate” or “exploratory” are included only to audit the attempted closure and are not incoming live-ledger facts. “Produced by” names the technique; “Row” the register property it evaluates.

A — size, degree, sparsity, local incidence

# Fact Source Produced by Row
A-1 $\delta(G)\ge3$; $n=\lvert V(G)\rvert\to\infty$ along the branch def:counterexample A04, A01
A-2 $m=\tfrac32n+O(\sqrt n)$; $\sigma(G)=2m-3n=O(\sqrt n)$; $\lvert V_{\ge4}(G)\rvert\le\sigma(G)$ def:near-cubic-spine T13/T14/T15 (surplus ledger) A02, A05, A14
A-3 $m\ge\lceil3n/2\rceil$, $m\le2n-2$; $\beta=m-n+1\ge n/2+1$; $\beta+\lambda=n-2$; $\sigma=2\beta-n-2$ invariants 9–13 T01 A02, A12, A13
A-4 $V_{\ge4}(G)$ independent; every edge has a degree-3 endpoint lem:deletion-critical T03/T02 A06, E03
A-5 every vertex of every Type A support has $d_G=3$; a vertex of internal degree $3-q$ has $q$ stubs to $W$; $\defp(X)=\sum q$; $\defp(X)&lt;\lvert X\rvert/4$ on $\tilde{\mathcal X}$ def:typeA-support T05 A03, A11
A-6 $\defp(R)\le e(R,W)\le15p_{13}+o(n)$; $e(R,W)+2e_\times(W)=15p_{13}+\sigma_W$; each window carries at most $15$ stubs (interior vertex one, end two) lem:stub-positive T01/T15 A10, A11
A-7 $(\defp(R)-\sigma_R)/\lvert R\rvert\le\tau^\ast+o(1)$, where $\theta^\ast=\frac{3/4}{c_{13}-39/4-15}$ and $\tau^\ast=\frac{15\theta^\ast}{1-13\theta^\ast}=0.13456\ldots&lt;1/7$ prop:p13-density; closure_proofs.md, Theorem 1.5; live orbit keys 501–502 T12/T16 A11, H01
A-8 $W_2(C)\ge3\lvert V(C)\rvert-2\defp(C)$; $W_2(R)\ge2.54365\lvert R\rvert-o(\lvert R\rvert)$ lem:wedge-lower T01 A09
A-9 every $P_{13}$-free induced subgraph of $G$ has a vertex of degree $\le2$ lem:remainder-empty-internal-3-core T18 A07
A-10 every component of $G-V(X)$ sends $\ge2$ edges to $X$; $\defp(X)\ge2$ lem:bridgeless T03/T02 A11, B02

B — connectivity, cuts, boundaries, contexts

# Fact Source Produced by Row
B-1 $G$ is bridgeless; every edge lies on a cycle lem:bridgeless T03/T02 B02
B-2 every proper subgraph has $\delta\le2$ lem:no-proper-core T02 E02, B01
B-3 $R=G-W$; its components are the canonical supports; no edges of $R$ between distinct components; surplus units of $V_{\ge4}\cap V(R)$ assigned to their component def:canonical-decomp T04 B01, D08
B-4 boundaried pieces, boundary degree profiles, gluing $X\oplus_TY$; quotients fibrewise over $\mathbf d_\partial$ def:boundaried-gluing, lem:degree-profile-fibres T05 B05, B06
B-5 context universality (target-complete identifications agree against every context) lem:context-universality T05 B07
B-6 trace basins $B_u$: lexicographically first inclusion-minimal trace-complete connected subgraph containing $T_u$; trace-response state $\rho_u(B_u)=(\mathbf d_\partial(B_u),\mathcal R_u(B_u),\profile)$ def:typeA-trace-basin T05/T10 B08, B06
B-7 boundary incidences $\partial_EX$, $\lvert\partial_EX\rvert=\defp(X)$; every $u$-supported coordinate leaving $X$ records one def:typeA-route8-carriers T05 B05, B09
B-8 the demand ledger on $\tilde\Xi$: partition $\Xi_3\sqcup\Xi_2\sqcup\Xi_{\rm res}$ with disjoint incidence sets $A(\xi)$ ($3$ or $2$ per entry), lexicographically first maximizing $N_3$ then $N_2$; $\mathsf P_{\rm ext}=N_2+3N_{\rm res}$; $3N_3+2N_2\le\defp(R)$ def:typeA-pressure-ledger, lem:typeA-pressure-ledger-no-overcount T14/T15 B09, H06
B-9 absorbers: (A1) single-use unused incidences of the global supply, each lying in the cut of its owner entry's support and disjoint from every base assignment; the committed (A2) dependence set is empty; $\mathsf P_{\rm open}=\lvert\mathcal U_{\rm press}\setminus\mathcal U_{\rm abs}\rvert$ and $3\tilde N\le\defp(R)+\mathsf P_{\rm open}$ Route8DemandAbsorptionStatement, route8DemandAbsorptionRow, lem:typeA-pressure-absorber-no-overcount T14/T15 B09, H06
B-10 window blockers: each open unit is assigned a packed window through its owner entry, and $\mathsf P_{\rm open}=\sum_P B_{\rm open}(P)$; the live schema stores the window map, not an additional boundary-incidence map Route8WindowBlockersStatement, lem:typeA-open-window-blocker-count T15 B09, A10
B-11 $\mathsf P_{\rm open}\ge(3-13\tau)\lvert R\rvert-o(\lvert R\rvert)$ and $\mathsf P^{+}{\rm zero}\ge\varepsilon{\rm prim}\lvert R\rvert-o(\lvert R\rvert)$ on the branch (so the offered consumers of [181] are vacuous) Theorem 3.1 T01 B09, H09

C — paths, cycles, lengths

# Fact Source Produced by Row
C-1 no cycle of $G$ has length in $\mathrm{Pow}={2^j}$; $R_e(G)\cap\mathrm{Mers}=\varnothing$ for every oriented edge lem:return-equivalence T08 C02, C03
C-2 every completion port has at least one actual anchored return lem:typeA-port-return T08 C02
C-3 receiver-entry returns are actual simple connector–channel paths, and the finite schedule contains every such return def:typeA-visible-load; VisibleReceiverEntry.lean T08/T16 C01, C02
C-4 connector/channel arithmetic: for a receiver-entry return $\Gamma\circ Q$ through $(w,h)$ with connector length $g$, $g+\lambda\notin\mathrm{Mers}$ for all $\lambda\in\Lambda_X(r,w)$; interval form with $I_X(r,w)$ lem:typeA-spectral-pressure, def:typeA-channel-spectrum T09 C01, C04
C-5 theta closure: all branch-pair sums in a theta avoid $\mathrm{Pow}$; ear closure; symmetric difference of overlapping cycles avoids $\mathrm{Pow}$ invariants 31–33 T08/T09 C05–C07
C-6 two-path criterion: two internally disjoint returns through one port with lengths summing to $2^k$ give a forbidden cycle lem:typeA-common-port-return-cycle, invariant 30 T08 C05
C-7 every cycle length has an odd prime divisor; no single odd prime divides all cycle lengths; overlap formula $q_p(E)=q_p(C)+q_p(D)-2t$ flat and non-killing invariants 36–38 T09/T11 C04
C-8 $G$ has an induced $P_{13}$; $R$ has none; every component of $R$ has diameter $\le11$ and $\le6142$ vertices cor:p13-exists, lem:remainder-empty-internal-3-core T18/T06 C08
C-9 $p_{13}$ is the maximum number of vertex-disjoint induced $P_{13}$'s; the incoming live rate is $\theta=p_{13}/n\le\theta_{\rm win}+o(1)$ [17], prop:p13-density T06/T12 C09, G09
C-10 gadget closure, one-piece and doubled: if $K$ is a smaller target-free cubic two-terminal piece with terminals $a,b$, then closing $a,b$ produces an actual $a$--$b$ path of length $2^e-1$; if $2 K < G
C-11 gadget closure, paired and complementary: two smaller target-free cubic two-terminal pieces whose closed gluing has minimum degree $3$ supply terminal paths whose lengths, plus the two joining edges, sum to a power of two; a complementary closure supplies an outside terminal path of length $2^e-1$ live key gadgetClosure, clauses 1 and 4 T02/T03/T08 C01, C02, E03

D — local configurations, motifs, overlap, symmetry

# Fact Source Produced by Row
D-1 $399$ legal $P_{13}$ labels; relations $C_s$; the zero-defect quotient through path lengths $1,2,3$ is the identity lem:labels T17 D01, G02
D-2 $0.795414$ of locally safe wedges are obstructing; $c_\Omega=2.2892$ bits per independent obstruction coordinate lem:curv-enum T17 D02, G02
D-3 Type B: fan-safe graphs, certificate labellings, $d_G(h)\le8$ for certificate-marked fans, degree-4 profiles, B2 disjointness, bridge residual sublinear [64]–[85] T07/T13/T14 D03, D04
D-4 canonical decomposition, canonical traces (lexicographically first receiver-reaching paths in $X_3$), canonical payable set $A(w)$ (visible-first order), lexicographically first ledgers and assignments def:canonical-decomp, def:typeA-receiver-load, def:typeA-excess-basin, def:typeA-pressure-ledger T16 D08, I02
D-5 all auxiliary objects are functions of the labelled adjacency matrix under a fixed tie-break; states are $\mathrm{Sym}(R)$-invariant relative to $W$ lem:skeleton-dominates, Theorem 1.3 T16/T12 D09, G06

E — extremality, criticality, replacement, quotients

# Fact Source Produced by Row
E-1 lexicographic minimality of $G$ ($\lvert V\rvert$, then $\lvert E\rvert$, then lexicographic) [4] T02 E01
E-2 no proper subgraph with $\delta\ge3$; deletion criticality [8]–[9] T02/T03 E02, E03
E-3 replacement lemma and hereditary uncompressibility (I5) lem:replacement, cor:uncompressible T02/T05 E05
E-4 a quotient is valid only if target-complete against every context; otherwise target-defective lem:context-universality T05 E06
E-5 exit-(4) peeling is a well-founded descent on $\Lambda_4$ preserving every invariant lem:typeA-exit4-finite-descent T19 E08, H10
E-6 exits (5) and (6) never occur at any saturated receiver of $\tilde{\mathcal X}$ (standing-invariant contradictions); exit (7) is absent lem:typeA-exits-discharged, lem:typeA-unified-burden T02/T05 E05, E09
E-7 contraction criticality: for an oriented edge $xy$, if no common neighbour of $x,y$ has ambient degree $3$, then the severed graph contains an actual simple $x$--$y$ path of length $2^e$, $e\ge2$ live key contractionCritical T02/T03 E03, C01

F — local tests, rank, dependence

# Fact Source Produced by Row
F-1 full obstruction rank $r_\Omega(R)\ge W_2(R)-o(W_2)$ lem:full-rank T11 F02, F07
F-2 rank drop routes to target defect, proper compression, or support enlargement; proper enlargements $Z\subsetneq G$ are impossible; whole-graph dependence cannot silently reduce rank lem:curvature-dependence-routing, lem:proper-smearing, lem:no-silent-global-smearing T10/T11 F03–F07
F-3 separated identical wedges are context-universal or target-defective lem:separated-testers T05/T11 F05
F-4 every entry's trace basin fails target-complete-minimality only through alternative (a) — a trace-local quotient forgetting a coordinate on an internal edge of $B_u$ is distinguished by a compatible context; (b),(c),(d) do not occur def:typeA-trace-basin, Theorem 3.2 T05/T16 F04, E06
F-5 $\lvert\mathcal C_{\rm ess}(\xi)\rvert\ge2$; every $c\in\mathcal C_{\rm ess}$ has a declared deletion witness (internal/mixed) with boundary-incidence support lem:typeA-unified-carriers, def:typeA-carrier-deletion-witness, lem:typeA-deletion-witness-declared T05/T11 F04, F05

G — counting and information

# Fact Source Produced by Row
G-1 $\lvert\mathcal G_{n,m}\rvert=\binom{\binom n2}{m}$; skeleton budget $\tfrac32n\log_2n+o(n\log n)$ lem:skeleton-dominates, lem:near-cubic-budget T12 G01
G-2 the joint window package is realized: $\ge2^{c_{13}p_{13}\log_2n}$ states [158] yes T12 G03
G-3 $\log_2\lvert\Phi(\mathcal S)\rvert\le\log_2\lvert\mathcal S\rvert-(\tfrac34\lvert R\rvert-15p_{13})\log_2\lvert R\rvert+O(n)$; the finite orbit inequalities are registered by remainderRelabelingEntropy and relabelingDensityCap closure_proofs.md Theorem 1.3; live keys 501–502 T12/T16 G01, G04
G-4 $\eta(R)\ge(1-\tau)\log_2\lvert R\rvert-O(1)$ and the specialization of G-3 on the hot arm gives $\theta\le\theta^\ast+o(1)$ closure_proofs.md Corollary 1.4 and Theorem 1.5 T12/T16 G04, G09
G-5 forced cost $c_\Omega r_\Omega\ge K_{\rm win}\lvert R\rvert$; the large-budget arm: remaining budget $\ge K\lvert R\rvert$ [48], [53] T12 G03, H09
G-6 no double counting: demand incidences pairwise disjoint; absorbers single-use; the exact stage identity $4\tilde D_A=4\tilde D_A^{P_4}+p_4$ lem:typeA-pressure-ledger-no-overcount, lem:typeA-peeling-stage-accounting T15 G07
G-7 the exact collision actually stated at [173] is decided there; it does not exactify a newly introduced coefficient comparison lem:exact-collision-test T12/T17 G08

H — charging and discharging

# Fact Source Produced by Row
H-1 $\No(X)=\defp(X)-\sigma(X)-\tfrac14\lvert V(X)\rvert$; superadditivity; some connected support has $\No&lt;0$ def:net-charge, lem:netcharge-superadd, prop:negative-net-charge T13 H01–H03
H-2 Type A: each cubic vertex charges $\tfrac14$ to its receiver; receiver charge $q(w)-\tfrac14-\tfrac14L(w)$; unsaturated receivers ($L\le4q-1$) pay; thresholds $H_0\le4,H_1\le8,H_2\le12$ lem:typeA-threshold-algebra, lem:typeA-unsaturated-discharge, lem:typeA-exit4-peeling-charge T13 H04, H05
H-3 saturated receivers with silent excess: $S^{\rm exc}_{\rm sil}\ge4D_A(X)$; the unified deficit $\tilde D_A\ge(\tfrac14-\tau)\lvert R\rvert$; $\tilde N\ge4\tilde D_A$ [94], [111]–[113] T13/T15 H05, H08
H-4 private-support budget: three private incidences per entry would force $3\tilde N\le\defp(R)$, contradiction; hence two-support entries exist prop:typeA-unified-reduction T15 H06
H-5 the demand ledger, absorbers and blockers (B-8–B-11) T14/T15 H06
H-6 Type B bridge mass $o(\lvert R\rvert)$ prop:typeB-bridge-sublinear T13/T15 H08
H-7 with the retained cap $\tau^\ast&lt;1/7$, the local inequality $\lvert X\rvert\le7\defp(X)$ on every negative Type A support is sufficient for a global contradiction closure_proofs.md Theorems 1.5 and 3.4 T13 H09
H-8 finite descent $\Lambda_4$ lem:typeA-exit4-finite-descent T19 H10

I — finite certification and external inputs

# Fact Source Produced by Row
I-1 the black box thm:p13free (HSS): $P_{13}$-free $+\ \delta\ge3\Rightarrow$ power-of-two cycle; consumed as A-9 and C-8 [15]–[16] T18 I06
I-2 Bondy--Vince: except for $K_1,K_2$, a graph with at most two vertices of degree below $3$ contains two cycles whose lengths differ by $1$ or $2$. Only this exact theorem is used below; neither the appendix's quiet-block estimate nor a Gao--Ma consequence is assumed Bondy--Vince, Cycles in a graph whose lengths differ by one or two T18 I06
I-3 finite constants $c_\Omega$, $c_{13}$, label counts; the $91$-barrier computation; the two-strand table app:curv-code, lem:labels, [167] T17 I05, I01
I-4 exact small-order collision decided on the object [173] T17 I03, I04

3. Techniques already used upstream, and the structural properties each one consumed

Technique Where used Properties consumed (register rows) What it left behind
T01 Direct invariant calculation [28]–[30], [56], [119]–[122], Theorems 3.1, 3.4 A02, A09–A12, H01, H06, H09 the inequalities of A-3, A-6–A-8, H-3, H-4, B-11
T05 Boundary-interface analysis [11]–[14], trace basins, response states, cores, deletion witnesses, contexts B05–B08, E05, E06, F04, F05 B-4–B-7, E-3, E-4, F-4, F-5
T08 Path–cycle and cycle-space analysis [5]–[7], invariants 30–33, lem:typeA-port-return, lem:typeA-common-port-return-cycle C02, C03, C05–C07 C-1, C-3, C-5, C-6
T10 Uncrossing and minimal obstruction [31]–[47] (dependence localization), trace-basin minimality, continuation routing F03–F07, B08, D05 (cold branch only) F-2; on the [181] branch the corridor/overlap consumers of [169]–[172] are not available (they live on the dense-packing residual)
T11 Linear-algebraic rank [31]–[47], response-support cores F01–F07, A12 F-1, F-2, F-5
T12 Counting and information [21], [48]–[55], [158], Theorems 1.3–1.5, Corollary 1.4 G01–G09, H09 G-1–G-5, A-7, C-9; the low-entropy arms are empty
T13 Potential and discharging [56]–[62], Type A charging, Type B ledger H01–H05, H08 H-1–H-3, H-6
T14 Demand–supply and flow Type B B1/B2, the $2/3$-demand ledger, absorbers, surplus token ledger B09, H05, H06, D04 B-8–B-10; the failure of the matching is the leaf
T16 Symmetry and canonicalization lexicographic tie-breaks everywhere, $\mathrm{Sym}(R)$-invariance (Theorem 1.3), canonical traces/ledgers D08, I02, E07, G04 D-4, D-5, G-3; the refined-order swap [165]–[166] is used only on the dense residual
T18 External structural theorem [15]–[16] (HSS) I06, C08 I-1; Bondy--Vince is not invoked upstream and is consumed locally in Lemma 9.1; no Gao--Ma consequence is used
T19 Peeling and finite descent [101]–[102], [123] E08, H10 E-5, H-8, and the leaf's identity $4\tilde D_A=4\tilde D_A^{P_4}+p_4$

The move in Theorem 0.3 is not another application of any closing row in this table. Upstream path arguments construct returns or forbidden cycles, and upstream boundary arguments construct response supports. The new move instead uses the length-first order of the already selected trace to eliminate every chord, converts exact ambient cubicity into the pointwise boundary identity (0.6), and then evaluates the literal retained response state on that boundary-only basin. Its output is the new exact coordinate (|S_{184}|=0).

Theorem 0.4 then consumes precisely that new all-visible coordinate. It does not repeat the node-[93] split: node [93] allowed and recorded exit (4), while Theorem 0.4 asks whether an entry that is still outside its visible-first payable prefix can have no overloaded port. The port-cap count makes that profile impossible and yields the new exact coordinate (|O_{185}|=0).

Theorem 0.5 and Corollary 0.6 do not run another demand or peeling procedure. They put the already retained charge, failed-rate, peel, demand, absorption, blocker, carrier and density identities into one system, eliminate (D,N), and force the peeled, open-owner, peeled-open, open-unit, and repeated-core fibres (0.30)--(0.40) on the same incoming indices. The demand partition is global, but each absorber retains the cut of its owner support. Consequently every support carrying an open unit satisfies the local saturation identity (0.32a); no cross-support absorption is permitted.

Proposition 0.7 first removes Q2 from the original peel-witness alphabet by combining the literal Q2 silence clause with the all-visible fact at [184]. Theorem 0.8 then decomposes every live currency and the already owner-local absorber relation by actual support, and canonically selects the possibly different supports on which deficit, peel, open-owner, peeled-open-owner, and open-unit excesses occur. The deficit-heavy support itself carries at least (3b_X+1) entries, so its topology and its entry fibres can be counted on the same indices.

Theorem 0.9 consumes the previously unused A08/E04 structure by canonical leaf stripping and length-preserving suppression of every maximal degree-two path in that exact support. The resulting weighted cubic kernel has (|X|-b_X) vertices, while every removed vertex, path length, entry and witness remains in the reconstruction coordinate. Its actual unweighted subgraph retains cycle rank at least (2b_X+2), and more than (2b_X) entry loads remain marked on the kernel. Pigeonhole counting then forces the simultaneous marked port, carrier, and subdivision-endpoint collisions. Equation (0.63) separately proves why the retired star assignment could not serve as a residual measure: its leaves remain quantitatively nonempty and unpaid.


4. The leaf: the typed data of [181]

def:typeA-peeled-demand-residual, after the procedure of thm:large-budget-route8-only:

In the live vocabulary its proposition is definitionally [ \begin{gathered} \texttt{Route8StageRateFailedFact};\wedge; \texttt{Route8DemandLedgerStatement};\wedge\ \texttt{Route8DemandAbsorptionStatement};\wedge; \texttt{Route8WindowBlockersStatement}. \end{gathered} \tag{4.1} ] The four conjuncts are retained together with, rather than substituted for, the incoming ExactLedger facts.

  • (R1) a valid family (P_4=(P_4(w))w) of exit-(4) peeling sets at which (\tilde D_A^{P_4}<(\tfrac14-\tau{\rm win})|R|-o(|R|));
  • (R2) the disjoint partition (\tilde\Xi=\tilde\Xi^{P_4}\mathbin{\dot\cup}\tilde P_4), (p_4=|\tilde P_4|=\sum_w|P_4^{\rm un}(w)|), the exact identity (4\tilde D_A=4\tilde D_A^{P_4}+p_4), and the recorded exit-(4) witness for every index actually occurring in the peel chain;
  • (R3) the maximal (2/3)-demand ledger on the full unified entry family (\tilde\Xi), its maximal absorption ledger, and the unique-window blocker partition (\mathsf P_{\rm open}=\sum_P B_{\rm open}(P)).

The full unified family is not the peeled list and is not a purely silent family. An index (\xi=(X,w,u)\in\texttt{route8UnifiedEntries}) consists of a retained Type A support (X), a saturated receiver (w), and an unpaid load (u\in E_X(w)), where (E_X(w)) is the visible-first excess basin. Thus the family contains both unpaid visible-first loads and silent-excess loads. For every such index the retained unified census supplies the selected basin (B_u), the bound (|\mathcal C_{\rm ess}(\xi)|=\alpha(\xi)\ge2), and exactly the alternative

[ \text{target-complete-minimal}\quad\text{or}\quad \bigl(\text{trace-local target defect with the other three failures absent and a canonical exit-(4) witness for }u\bigr). \tag{4.2} ]

Neither silence, the two-private-carrier bound, nor the target-defect arm is asserted for every unified entry at node [181]. The two-private-carrier bound for entries unpaid by the selected maximal partition is the new conclusion of Theorem 0.1; the witness-free part of the first arm in (4.2) is what routes to [124] in Theorem 0.2.

The assertion (q(w)\in{1,2}) is a consequence, not an extra hypothesis. If a connected negative Type A support contained a receiver of internal degree (0), that vertex would be an isolated vertex of (X), hence (X={w}). Then (\defp(X)=3>1/4=|X|/4), contrary to (\No(X)<0). Thus (n_0(X)=0), and every receiver has internal degree (1) or (2), so (q(w)=2) or (1).

For an unpaid index on the target-defect arm, the demand ledger supplies a CanonicalDemandRecord. Its alternative realization, outside context, and profile event are certificate data, not paths of (G). The record must be in its profile disjunct: its actual disjunct would be a target cycle in [ \operatorname{glue}(\operatorname{piece}(B_u), \operatorname{outside}(B_u)). ] The owned-decomposition isomorphism SupportAtom.decomposition.reconstructionIso identifies this gluing with (G), and the target predicate is invariant under isomorphism; the actual disjunct would therefore contradict C-1. A profile event is retained as certificate data but is never used as an actual path of (G).

Derived facts at the leaf: Theorem 3.1 (the offered consumers are vacuous); Theorem 3.2 (every two-support entry realizes exit (4); no true route-8 two-support entry; at least one peel is performed); Corollary 3.3 ([181] is the only exit of [123]); Theorem 3.4 (diagnostic rate). The reduction in §0 does not strengthen this leaf by assumption. The reductions in §0 read the retained demand maximality and unified census from the same ExactLedger, prove Theorems 0.1--0.4, and append the exact node-[185] interface. Theorem 0.5 is now the attached Lean row at [186]. The later structural accounting continues from that exact implemented interface while retaining the complete ledger.


5. The newly consumed rows and the retired attempted move

At [186], A08 (degree-two chains) and E04 (safe suppression) are the first rows in this list that have not already been spent on the same observable. Theorem 0.9 consumes them together: leaf stripping exposes the exact degree-two mass and weighted suppression removes it from the active internal-cycle skeleton while retaining a reconstruction of every vertex and every attached entry. A07/C08 prevent a cubic component from escaping in the unweighted kernel, while G07/H05 keep the entry, core and port marks on that same support.

B02--B04 beyond bare bridgelessness (cyclic edge cuts, blocks and disjoint connections), C04/F08, C09, D07 and the unused part of I06 remain on the monotonically growing ledger. None is deleted or replaced by a weaker statement.

The older attempted move below was T10 followed by T18: uncross the actual canonical traces of all silent marks into a trace--ear forest, and apply Bondy--Vince only to the terminal two-pole shells produced by that forest. The move is on the complete state $\mathcal B_{181}$; $X$, a full-vertex component of $X$, and a shell are active regions on which the move acts, not replacements for the residual. The intended recursive measure and terminal arms are written in §8. Section 12 identifies the unhandled multi-boundary cyclic arm, so this move is not an admitted structural-exhaustion transition. It nevertheless isolates the exact new accounting that would be needed: no upstream row counted how many silent marks can survive in the cyclic part of a cubic support.


6. Retired trace--ear route to the target statement

Target statement [181]. Let (G) be a finite simple graph and suppose that all facts of §2 (A-1 through I-4), with the arms of §1 as stated, and all leaf data (R1)–(R3) of §4 hold. Then (G) contains a cycle whose length is a power of two.

Equivalently, the complete declared-support residual routed from [123] after [124] is empty. Section 0 does not assert that statement: it reduces the literal branch through [181] and [183] to the all-visible residual [184], then to the actual-overload residual [185], forces the joint concentration state [186], and performs the exact degree-chain normalization (0.61). The older draft below tried instead to act on silent target-defect traces. It did not account for the shortest-path boundary-support collapse proved in Theorem 0.3 or the prefix exhaustion proved in Theorem 0.4.

Sections 7–11 give the attempted derivation. Section 7 fixes the actual objects and the monotone ledger, §8 states the proposed local trace--ear exhaustion, §9 proves the valid finite shell estimate, §10 records the arithmetic of the failed draft, and §11 records the intended implementation interface. Section 12 audits every step and explains why that derivation does not prove the target statement. The audit is retained only to preserve its correct local identities; none of its failed children is used in the implemented [183]→[184]→[185] transitions.


7. Fixing the object: full vertices, actual traces and boundary half-edges

Throughout §§7–10 the ambient object is still the complete branch state $\mathcal B_{181}$. Fix one member $X$ of the unified negative Type A collection only as the active region of the next move. Put [ n_i=n_i(X):=|{x\in X:d_X(x)=i}|, \qquad d:=\defp(X)=n_2+2n_1+3n_0. ] By the argument in §4, $n_0=0$, so [ d=n_2+2n_1. \tag{7.1} ] Let [ U_X:=\mathop{\dot\bigcup}_{w\in\operatorname{Rec}(X)}\mathcal U_X(w) ] be the original, visible-first silent excess. This is the collection before any exit-(4) peel. The partition and witnesses (R1)–(R3) remain attached to its members; passing back from the peeled list to $U_X$ is not a loss of data. The exact support-level count at [94] gives [ |U_X|\ge n_3-3n_2-7n_1. \tag{7.2} ]

Let $X_3=X[{x:d_X(x)=3}]$, and let $F$ run over the connected components of $X_3$. Write $b(F)$ for the number of edges of $X$ with one end in $F$ and the other end a receiver. Attach a formal leaf to the $F$-end of each such edge; these are the boundary half-edges of $F$. Put [ U(F)=U_X\cap V(F),\qquad b_X=\sum_F b(F). ] Then the sets $U(F)$ partition $U_X$. Moreover, [ b_X\le2n_2+n_1. \tag{7.3} ] Indeed a degree-two receiver has at most two neighbours in $X_3$, and a degree-one receiver at most one; receiver--receiver edges only decrease the left side.

There is no ambiguity about the routing inside $F$. From any two vertices of $F$, exactly the same receivers are reachable by a path whose nonterminal vertices have internal degree three: they are precisely the receiver neighbours of $F$. Since traceReceiver? scans the fixed vertex order, it therefore chooses one and the same receiver $r(F)$ for every full vertex of $F$. The selected path tracePath? stays in $F$ until its last edge to $r(F)$. Thus the marks $U(F)$, their canonical paths and their terminal receiver are all actual objects of $G$.

Finally, every completion port used below has an actual return. Delete its port edge. Since $G$ is bridgeless, its ends remain joined; shortening the joining walk gives a simple anchored path $P$ from the outside endpoint $h$ to the receiver $w$. Let $r$ be the first vertex of $X$ on $P$ and let $\Gamma$ be the prefix from $h$ to $r$. Every vertex of $\Gamma$ before $r$ is outside $X$. Since $X$ is connected, choose a simple path $Q$ inside $X$ from $r$ to $w$. The supports of $\Gamma$ and $Q$ meet only at $r$, so $\Gamma Q$ is simple. It avoids the deleted port: $\Gamma$ is a prefix of the anchored path, while $Q$ lies in $X$ and the other endpoint $h$ of the port does not. Thus $(\Gamma,Q)$ is an actual receiver-entry return. This is the elementary content needed from C-2. The $b(F)$ half-edges are only the formal terminals at which such a channel may enter or leave $F$; they are not silently identified with completion ports. If an exposure enters a two-pole region whose two outside ends have coalesced, its two inside terminal incidences are kept distinct and the lexicographically first simple path between the two inside terminals is used as an internal exposed route. Such a path exists by connectedness. If the two incidences have the same inside endpoint, that cubic vertex is a branch vertex and the region is split there first. The stronger spectral paths of C-10 and C-11 remain on the ledger but are not needed for this elementary exposure. No profile context $Y$, alternative realization $S_1$, or profile event $E$ is used in the construction.


8. The new local move: marked cubic trace--ear exhaustion

The point not accounted upstream is that many silent traces cannot occupy the cyclic part of $F$ independently. The following lemma records the exact local statement needed by the count.

Proposed Lemma 8.1 (marked trace--ear lemma; not proved)

For every component $F$ above there are

  • pairwise vertex-disjoint connected induced subgraphs $K_1,\ldots,K_p\subseteq F$;
  • a set $Z$ of $B$ distinct vertices of $F\setminus\bigcup_iV(K_i)$; and
  • an injection [ \iota:U(F)\longrightarrow{K_1,\ldots,K_p}\mathbin{\dot\cup}Z ]

with the following properties.

  1. Every $K_i$ is receiver-free and has exactly two boundary edges in $F$. Equivalently, every vertex of $K_i$ has ambient degree three and [ \sum_{x\in K_i}(3-d_{K_i}(x))=2. \tag{8.1} ]
  2. After contracting each $K_i$ to a marked degree-two vertex, adjoining the $b(F)$ boundary leaves and suppressing every other degree-two vertex, the resulting connected multigraph $Q_F$ has $B$ cubic branch vertices and cycle rank $\beta_F\le p$.

Consequently [ |U(F)|\le p+B,qquad |F|\ge8p+B,qquad B\le b(F)+2p. \tag{8.2} ]

Attempted proof

The following is the attempted exhaustion. The audit in §12 shows that the multi-boundary cyclic case is not exhausted and that the asserted injection of rank tokens into terminal shells does not follow.

The exposure state. Adjoin the $b(F)$ formal boundary leaves to $F$. An exposed route is the $F$-part of an actual receiver-entry return from §7, or a tagged lexicographically first internal terminal path when the two exterior ends have coalesced. At any stage let $D$ be the union of the routes already exposed. The active regions are the induced connected shores cut off by the first and last contacts of a canonical trace with $D$; their interiors are chosen inclusion-minimally. Each active region carries precisely the still unassigned members of $U(F)$ in its interior and all of their original branch-state data. We order active states by [ \mu=(#\hbox{ unassigned marks}, \sum_A|V(A)|, #\hbox{ unsuppressed active edges}) \tag{8.3} ] lexicographically. When a region is replaced by several regions, the sums in (8.3) are over their disjoint interiors.

One exposure. Take the first unassigned mark $u$ in the fixed order and read its canonical trace from $r(F)$ towards $u$. Up to the last point at which it follows $D$ there is nothing to decide. At the next edge exactly one of the following happens.

  1. The trace never leaves $D$. If the containing route is tagged as an actual receiver-entry channel, it is a terminal segment of that channel, so $u$ is visible. This is excluded by the definition of $U(F)$ (and, at an overloaded port, is one of the already closed exits (1)–(3)). If the containing route is an internal terminal route, its two ordered terminal incidences delimit a two-pole active region; the mark is passed to that region, where the two-mark argument below either splits it or leaves the unique terminal shell. Thus the internal-route case does not pretend to prove visibility.
  2. The new segment first returns to $D$ at a vertex different from its first contact. Its first and last contacts bound an ear. Add the ear to $D$ and replace its shore by the inclusion-minimal induced shore with those two contact incidences. If the shore has a third boundary incidence, use the first one in the fixed edge order: the first vertex at which the three routes separate is put in $Z$, a mark there (if any) is assigned to that vertex, and the remaining marks pass to the strict components after that vertex is deleted. If there is no third incidence, the shore is a two-pole active region.
  3. The new segment has no second contact with $D$. Continue from its loose end through unused edges. Finiteness gives either a first return to $D$ (case 2), a boundary half-edge, or a repeated vertex. A repeated vertex is shortened to its first repetition and again gives an ear. At a boundary half-edge, let $C$ be the component of $G-X$ incident with that half-edge. If $C$ is the component of the outside connector already in $D$, a path in $C$ closes the new segment to an actual receiver-entry return whose channel contains $T_u$, contrary to silence. If it is a different component, that half-edge is retained as a new terminal of the active route diagram. A region with only one retained boundary edge would make that edge a bridge of $G$, contrary to B-1. Hence this case again gives either a branch vertex or a two-pole region.

This list is exhaustive because every vertex of $F$ has three incidences when the formal boundary half-edges are counted. Notice also that it handles the apparently exceptional lobe whose two boundary edges meet the same outside vertex: delete that outside vertex and regard the two incidences as distinct ordered poles. Connectedness supplies the terminal-to-terminal route used as $D$. If that route and the current trace do not have distinct first and last contacts, their first repeated contact is a cubic branch vertex; if they do, they give case 2. Thus a one-vertex attachment is not discarded as a new residual.

Why a two-pole region with two marks splits. Let $A$ be such a region and let $u\ne v$ be its first two marks. Compare the two canonical traces from the receiver side. If their first divergence has two different later contacts, those contacts give the ear of case 2. Otherwise one trace is a terminal segment of the other until the first unused incidence. Start at the other pole and seek a path to that unused incidence avoiding the common terminal segment. If it exists, concatenating it with the common segment has two readings, according to the tag of the parent route. For an actual receiver-entry route, adjoining the exposed outside connector makes a simple actual channel containing one of $T_u,T_v$, so that mark is visible. For an internal terminal route, the new path and the tagged route have distinct first and last contacts and hence give the strict ear of case 2; if their contacts coincide, the common contact has three continuations and is the branch case. If the avoiding path does not exist, the elementary vertex form of Menger's theorem gives a separating vertex on the common segment. Its three incident directions are the parent route and the two marked sides; it is again the branch vertex of case 2, and deletion of it puts the two marks in strict active regions. This proves that a terminal two-pole region contains exactly one unassigned mark.

This paragraph also covers overlap of more than two basins: take the first pair in the canonical order. It is precisely the D05 overlap consumer. No target-defect event is substituted for either trace. The only paths in the Menger argument are subpaths of $F$ and of the actual exposed connector.

Uncrossing. If two two-pole shores cross, edge-cut submodularity gives [ |\delta(A\cap A')|+|\delta(A\cup A')| \le |\delta(A)|+|\delta(A')|=4. \tag{8.4} ] Neither nonempty shore has cut size zero, and cut size one is forbidden by bridgelessness. Hence both new shores have cut size two. Replacing the crossing pair by its intersection and union preserves every mark in the union and makes the ordered pair laminar; marks outside the intersection stay active in the corresponding difference region of the union. Repeating this finite uncrossing leaves pairwise disjoint terminal shores. These are the $K_i$. A terminal shore receives its unique mark; a mark met at a cubic separation vertex receives that vertex. The preceding paragraph shows that no two marks receive the same object, proving the injection.

Termination and cycle rank. Assigning a mark decreases the first coordinate of (8.3). Replacing a shore by strict shores moves at least one contact path into $D$, and therefore decreases the second coordinate or, when the vertex sets agree, the third. Thus every arm closes or strictly decreases $\mu$, so the construction terminates.

Contract the terminal shores and suppress the unmarked degree-two chains. Orient every exposed ear by its exposure time. A tree extension does not increase rank. An ear whose two ends already lie in the same exposed component increases rank by one and places one rank token on its inclusion-minimal two-pole shore. Tokens are followed down the laminar family. If two tokens were to reach the same active shore, compare the two corresponding ears after their last common segment. Their first distinct contacts either give two disjoint strict shores, one for each token, or give three continuations at their first common contact, in which case that contact is retained as a branch vertex and deletion again puts the two ear interiors in different strict regions. This is the same first-divergence argument as for two marks, now with the two ear interiors in place of $T_u,T_v$. Consequently no terminal shore receives two rank tokens. The number of rank tokens is exactly the cycle rank left after contraction and suppression, so $\beta_F\le p$. All remaining nonleaf, nonshell vertices have degree three, and they are exactly the vertices counted by $B$. The handshake identity in the connected multigraph $Q_F$ is [ B=b(F)-2+2\beta_F\le b(F)+2p. \tag{8.5} ] The assertion that the shells are disjoint and avoid the branch vertices depends on the missing rank-token injection. That injection is not produced, so the argument proves neither $|F|\ge8p+B$ nor (8.2); see §12.


9. The terminal shell estimate

Lemma 9.1 (a target-free cubic two-pole shell has at least eight vertices)

Let $K$ be a connected simple graph all of whose vertices have ambient degree three and with exactly two edges leaving $K$. If $K$ contains no cycle of power-of-two length, then $|K|\ge8$.

Proof

The degree sum is [ 2|E(K)|=3|K|-2, \tag{9.1} ] so $|K|$ is even. The case $|K|=2$ would require two parallel internal edges and is impossible in a simple graph. If $|K|=4$, then $|E(K)|=5$, so $K=K_4-e$ and contains a $4$-cycle.

It remains to exclude $|K|=6$. Equation (9.1) gives $|E(K)|=8$, and the total internal deficiency is two; hence at most two vertices have degree below three. Bondy--Vince (I-2) supplies two cycles whose lengths differ by one or two. Since a $4$-cycle is already a target, in a target-free graph on six vertices the possible cycle lengths are $3,5,6$, and every pair among these differing by one or two contains a $5$-cycle. Let $C$ be such a $5$-cycle and let $x$ be the sixth vertex. Besides the five edges of $C$ there are exactly three edges. If $d_K(x)\le2$, at least one of them is a chord of $C$; that chord together with the three-edge arc of $C$ is a $4$-cycle. If $d_K(x)=3$, the three neighbours of $x$ on $C$ include two at cyclic distance two; their two edges to $x$ and the two-edge arc between them again form a $4$-cycle. Both cases contradict C-1. Thus the next possible even order is eight. $\square$

This is the sole use of I-2. In particular the proof does not assume the appendix's quiet-block estimate and does not enumerate bounded graphs.


10. Arithmetic of the failed trace--ear draft (not a transition)

10.1 The exact component inequality

The draft substituted the unproved displays (8.2) and (8.5) into the following calculation. Because (8.2) has no producer, the calculation records no fact of the node-[181] residual. Its algebra is retained for audit: [ \begin{aligned} 10|U(F)| &\le10(p+B)\ &=3(8p+B)+7(B-2p)\ &\le3|F|+7b(F). \end{aligned} \tag{10.1} ] Summing over the full-vertex components and using (7.3) gives [ 10|U_X|\le3n_3+7b_X \le3n_3+14n_2+7n_1. \tag{10.2} ] Combine this with the retained visible-first lower bound (7.2): [ 10(n_3-3n_2-7n_1) \le3n_3+14n_2+7n_1, ] and hence [ 7n_3\le44n_2+77n_1. \tag{10.3} ] Using (7.1), [ \begin{aligned} 7|X| &=7(n_3+n_2+n_1)\ &\le51n_2+84n_1\ &\le51(n_2+2n_1)=51\defp(X). \end{aligned} \tag{10.4} ] Thus every negative, zero-surplus, no-handoff Type A component in the full unified collection satisfies the exact estimate [ |X|\le\frac{51}{7}\defp(X). \tag{10.5} ] The argument used the full $U_X$, including every member later recorded as a peel. Therefore (10.5) closes the original [123] continuation and, a fortiori, its complete [181] descendant; it does not prove a surrogate about the reduced list.

10.2 Summing without dropping a component

Use the canonical decomposition B-3. A component with $\No(X)\ge0$ satisfies $|X|\le4(\defp(X)-\sigma(X))\le4\defp(X)$ and hence (10.5). A negative zero-surplus no-handoff component satisfies (10.5) by §10.1. A negative handoff or positive-surplus component is already in the Type B ledger; all of it is closed except the bridge residual of total mass $M_B\le16\sigma(G)$. Consequently the exact pre-asymptotic statement is [ 7|R|\le51\defp(R)+7M_B. \tag{10.6} ] This summation includes nonnegative components, the unified collection, handoff pieces and the bridge residual exactly once. No piece and no surplus unit disappears.

Since $|R|=(1-13\theta)n=\Omega(n)$, A-2 gives $M_B=o(|R|)$ and $\sigma_R\le\sigma(G)=o(|R|)$. A-7 bounds $\defp(R)-\sigma_R$; adding the preceding estimate for $\sigma_R$ gives [ \defp(R)\le\tau^|R|+o(|R|), \qquad \tau^=\frac{15\theta^}{1-13\theta^}. \tag{10.7} ] The margin is strict. Indeed [ \theta^=\frac{3/4}{118.108581006-39/4-15} =0.008033\ldots <\frac7{856}, ] and direct cross-multiplication shows [ \frac{15\theta^}{1-13\theta^}<\frac7{51} \quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad 856\theta^<7. \tag{10.8} ] Substitution of (10.7) into (10.6) now gives [ |R|\le\frac{51}{7}\tau^|R|+o(|R|), \tag{10.9} ] where $(51/7)\tau^=0.9803\ldots<1$. Dividing by $|R|$ contradicts (10.9) on the branch.

The earlier draft tried to read G-7 and I-4 as an exactification of the $o(|R|)$ terms and to reuse [173] for (10.8). That reuse is not justified: [173] decides a different integer collision. The repaired simultaneous account in §0 does not make that inference. It derives the sharpened cap from the retained orbit keys and uses the literal large-$r$ arm to obtain the exact eventual inequality (0.36). Hence the numerical producer is now present.

The trace--ear calculation nevertheless does not close node [181], because its first local input (8.2) is still not produced: the multi-boundary cyclic arm does not yield the asserted forest or decrease its measure. Arithmetic cannot repair that earlier structural failure.


11. Candidate exhaustion ledger (not an admitted proof DAG)

The following table records what the attempted proof intended to establish. It is not a list of descendants that may be added to the proof graph. A row is admissible only when its status says that it is a certificate or a closed arm; every failed row must remain outside the proof DAG.

Move Fact or claimed output Required progress Audited status
actual/profile record every canonical demand record at [181] is profile-only the actual disjunct contradicts reconstruction of $G$; append the profile-only consequence without creating a child valid certificate
degree-zero receiver $n_0(X)=0$ and $q(w)\in{1,2}$ the $q=3$ case contradicts connectedness and negative charge valid certificate
trace follows one exposed channel the oriented trace is a terminal segment of one actual channel visibility contradicts membership in $U(F)$ closed
first divergence and rejoining an actual ear and an induced shore prove the shore proper and transport every mark before claiming fewer vertices or edges failed: neither properness nor transport is proved
three continuations a distinct cubic articulation vertex delete it and pass marks to strict components failed: a multi-terminal region need not have an articulation
dangling continuation a same-component outside path, or a different-component terminal the first must give a simple visible return; the second must have a consumer or shrink the shore closed on the first arm; failed on the second
crossing two-pole shores laminar intersection/union shores preserve every mark and decrease a declared measure while obtaining disjoint terminal shores failed
terminal two-pole shore one mark assigned to one shell decrease the unassigned-mark count failed: neither the shore nor uniqueness is produced
shell orders $2,4,6$ impossible by simplicity, a $C_4$, or Bondy--Vince plus a $C_4$ surviving shell has at least eight vertices valid certificate
component/global sum (10.5), then (10.6) pay every component exactly once algebra only: the forest input is absent, so no branch fact is produced
final rate coefficient strictly below one use the retained orbit cap and the literal large-$r$ arm valid by (0.34)--(0.36), but unusable here because the forest row fails first

The recursive measure (8.3) would certify termination only after every arm is shown to decrease it. The union-of-routes arm, the multi-boundary cyclic arm, the different-outside-component arm, the separator-of-order-at-least-two arm, and the crossing-shore replacement do not have such a proof, so none may be installed as a descendant and the displayed measure does not certify a recursion. The ledger is monotone: R1–R3, the profile tokens, essential cores and deletion witnesses, demand/absorption/blocker assignments, window data, entropy and rank facts, gadget and contraction facts, and every exit exclusion remain attached throughout. Some are not needed in the final numerical line, but none is projected away.

The failed draft suggested the following interface names. They are not Lean implementation obligations because the required producer is absent:

  1. canonicalDemandRecord_profile_only, proved from the owned-decomposition reconstruction isomorphism and target invariance;
  2. negative_typeA_no_degree_zero;
  3. markedTraceEarExhaustion, which is not yet available: it would have to return $p,B,b$, the injection, disjoint two-pole shells and $\beta\le p$ while taking the complete [181] ledger as its input;
  4. targetFreeTwoPole_eight_le, the proof of §9;
  5. negativeTypeA_card_le_51_sevenths_defect and the exact aggregate form (10.6).

At the entrance to this retired attempt, the live [181] proposition is exactly Route8StageRateFailedFact ∧ Route8DemandLedgerStatement ∧ Route8DemandAbsorptionStatement ∧ Route8WindowBlockersStatement. The five suggested trace--ear interfaces above do not exist, because the attempt does not prove them. The current implementation instead retains that conjunction on its full inherited ExactLedger, derives the maximal-ledger residual at [183], and then appends (0.4) through route8UnifiedVisibleResidualRow and then appends the overload package and zero non-overload count through route8UnifiedVisibleOverloadRow. It does not return False; its exact frontier is node [185].


12. Airtightness audit of the attempted closure

The full node-local red-team report is audits/erdos-64-red-team/reports/node-181.md. Its verdict for the trace--ear proposal is NONEXHAUSTIVE. The audit preserves all incoming facts and separates the valid textbook consequences from the unsupported trace--ear producer. It is independent of the implemented shortest-trace boundary-support reduction in §0.

12.1 What is valid

  1. The live proposition (4.1) and the append-only ExactLedger reading are exact.
  2. The arguments $n_0(X)=0$, (7.1), the silent-excess lower bound (7.2), and the boundary count (7.3) are valid on the stated Type A support.
  3. Full vertices in one component $F$ have the same set of traceable receivers and hence the same receiver selected by the fixed order.
  4. Lemma 9.1 is valid. Total internal deficiency two leaves at most two vertices of degree below three, exactly the hypothesis of Bondy--Vince Theorem 1; the orders $2,4,6$ are then excluded by the written elementary argument.
  5. The substitutions in (10.1)–(10.5) are arithmetically correct, but their input (8.2) is unproved and therefore none is a branch fact.

The port-return sentence in §7 has been repaired as follows. From an anchored return, take the prefix ending at its first entry into $X$; every earlier prefix vertex is outside $X$. Join that first-entry receiver to the terminal receiver by a simple path inside connected $X$. The two paths meet only at the first entry, their concatenation is simple, and it avoids the deleted port. This produces a genuine receiver-entry return. The earlier first/last-visit split did not ensure that the connector stayed outside $X$.

12.2 First unhandled residual

The first nonlocal inference is case 2 of “One exposure.” If an induced ear shore has a third boundary incidence, the proof chooses that incidence and asserts a “first vertex at which the three routes separate.” A two-connected three-terminal cyclic region need not have a single vertex whose deletion separates the three routes. Cubicity limits local degree; it does not create an articulation vertex. No fact in (4.1), no retained exit exclusion, and no ancestor of [181] supplies that articulation. The cold-branch overlap consumers [169]–[172] are not on this branch.

This arm neither closes nor replaces the active region by strict active regions. It can return the same cyclic region with the same unassigned marks, so it does not decrease any coordinate of $\mu$ in (8.3). It is therefore a literal violation of the residual-shrink rule, not a presentational omission.

12.3 Further failed inferences

  • If a trace is contained in the union $D$ of exposed routes, it may switch between intersecting routes. Containment in the union does not make it a suffix of one actual receiver-entry channel, so case 1 does not establish visibility.
  • In the two-mark paragraph, failure of a path avoiding an entire common segment says that the segment contains a separator. Vertex Menger does not imply that a separator of order one exists; a minimum separator can have two or more vertices.
  • Cut submodularity can make crossing cut-two shores laminar under additional nonempty/proper checks. Intersection and union are nested, however, not pairwise disjoint, and the proof does not preserve and reassign all marks in the difference regions. Moreover, the number of crossings is not a coordinate of $\mu$; an uncrossing can leave all three coordinates in (8.3) unchanged.
  • In the dangling-continuation case, retaining a terminal in a different outside component adds information to the route diagram but does not by itself replace the active shore by a strict shore or route it to a closed consumer.
  • The rank-token paragraph assumes the missing conclusion. Independent ears can end in one multi-boundary cyclic core; first divergence does not give a distinct cut-two terminal shore for each ear. Thus $\beta_F\le p$ has no proof.

A minimal abstract stress test is a triangle with one formal boundary leaf at each vertex. The reduced diagram has $b=3$, three cubic branch vertices, cycle rank one, and no induced cut-two shore. Hence $p=0$ and the asserted $\beta_F\le p$ would read $1\le0$. This is not claimed to be a realization of the full node-[181] counterexample ledger; it isolates the exact topological inference that the local argument lacks.

12.4 A standalone forest-count identity (not a transition)

The following is a complete identity about an already given forest configuration; it does not assert that node [181] produces such a configuration. Fix pairwise disjoint two-pole shells $K_1,\ldots,K_p$, a set $Z$ outside them, and an injection [ U(F)\longrightarrow{K_1,\ldots,K_p}\mathbin{\dot\cup}Z, ] and an embedded forest whose leaves are among the $b(F)$ boundary leaves and the two formal poles of each shell, with every member of $Z$ of forest degree at least three. The forest leaf identity gives [ |Z|\le b(F)+2p. ] Lemma 9.1 and disjointness give $|F|\ge8p+|Z|$, while injectivity gives $|U(F)|\le p+|Z|$. Therefore [ 10|U(F)| \le10(p+|Z|) =3(8p+|Z|)+7(|Z|-2p) \le3|F|+7b(F). ] This proof is complete, local, and uses only textbook moves. What is not proved is that the full node-[181] residual produces this forest certificate. Splitting on its existence would not repair the proof: the negative arm can be the same multi-boundary cyclic core and hence would not shrink the residual.

12.5 Global ledger check

The global-rate part of this old audit is superseded by the simultaneous account in §0. The sharper $\theta^,\tau^$ estimate is derived there from the retained realized-window and relabelling-orbit keys, and (0.35)--(0.36) turn its positive constant margin into an exact inequality on the literal large branch. Node [173] is not reused. This repair does not validate the trace--ear transition: that proposal still fails earlier, at the missing forest certificate identified in §§12.2--12.4.

12.6 Transition-by-transition progress audit

For this audit a child residual means the complete state carried after a case distinction, not merely the active shore drawn in the local picture. A deterministic construction may append a proved certificate without creating a child. Every genuine child must either be closed or carry the whole incoming ledger together with a strict decrease of [ \mu=(M,V,E), \qquad M=#\text{unassigned marks},\quad V=\sum_A|V(A)|,\quad E=#\text{unsuppressed active edges}. ] The following table checks every transition used in the attempted proof.

Transition Exact incoming predicate Textbook move Output on each arm Progress verdict
Construct one port return a completion-port edge of a connected support in bridgeless $G$ delete the edge, shorten a return walk, take the prefix to the first entry into $X$, then join inside connected $X$ an actual simple receiver-entry return, appended as a certificate; no child residual valid certificate step
Trace already exposed $T_u$ is an oriented terminal segment of one tagged actual channel take the corresponding connector--channel subpath $u$ is visible, contradicting $u\in U(F)$ closed
Trace contained only in the union $T_u\subseteq D$, but it is not an oriented terminal segment of one tagged actual channel none the same active region and the same mark $u$ invalid: $\mu$ unchanged
Proper two-contact ear the new trace segment has two distinct contacts and its chosen induced shore is proper with exactly two boundary incidences first/last-contact ear extraction a strict two-pole active shore, carrying every inherited fact whose objects lie in it and retaining the ambient ledger invalid transition: the move does not prove properness or transport, so no child is created
Third incidence with a cut vertex three relevant route sectors meet a vertex $z$ whose deletion separates their marked interiors articulation decomposition assign at most the mark at $z$ to $z$ and pass all other marks to strict components of $A-z$ valid: $M$ decreases, or $V$ decreases by deletion of $z$
Third incidence without such a cut vertex the ear shore is a two- or three-connected multi-terminal cyclic region cubicity alone gives no separator the same cyclic region with the same marks and edges invalid: $\mu$ unchanged
Loose end returns to $D$ or repeats the continuation first meets $D$, or first repeats a vertex shorten at the first contact/repetition the preceding two-contact-ear case inherits that case's invalid verdict
Loose end reaches the same outside component the outside connector and the new boundary incidence lie in one component and can be joined without meeting the channel internally path shortening and concatenation an actual channel containing $T_u$, hence visibility closed
Loose end reaches a different outside component the new boundary incidence belongs to another component of $G-X$ retain the incidence as a terminal the same active shore with one more terminal tag invalid: no coordinate of $\mu$ decreases
One-edge shore the retained incidence is the only edge from an actual nonempty proper shore to its complement bridge criterion contradiction to B-1 closed, but only for an actual cut of $G$, not for a formal route-diagram boundary
Two marks, avoiding path exists the required path avoids the whole common trace segment, and its concatenation is simple path concatenation / first--last contact visibility on an actual-route tag, or a strict ear on an internal tag actual-route arm closed; internal-tag arm invalid because no proper transported child is produced
Two marks, separator of order one the avoiding path fails and a one-vertex separator $z$ is independently proved vertex separation strict components of $A-z$ valid: $V$decreases
Two marks, separator of order at least two the avoiding path fails but the minimum separator has size at least two vertex Menger gives only the separator set the same two-connected cyclic core invalid: the claimed one-vertex child does not exist
Uncross two cut-two shores both intersection and union are nonempty proper shores and all four cut lower bounds are established cut submodularity a laminar pair $A\cap A'\subseteq A\cup A'$ invalid: the shores are nested, not disjoint; marks in the differences are unassigned; $\mu$ has no crossing coordinate
Create a rank token a new ear raises cycle rank ear-decomposition rank identity a token is asserted to lie on a new terminal cut-two shore invalid in a multi-boundary cyclic core: no such shore follows
Terminal shell a receiver-free induced shore with exactly two leaving edges has been produced degree sum and Lemma 9.1 at least eight vertices paid to that shell closed certificate
Forest count the disjoint shells, injection, and embedded forest of §12.4 have all been produced the forest leaf identity $10 U(F)

Thus the first failed child is not a later numerical edge: it is the multi-terminal cyclic child in the third-incidence arm. The same failure reappears in the union-of-routes, different-outside-component, higher-separator, uncrossing, and rank-token arms. Adding any of those arms as a descendant of [181] would violate monotonicity because its complete state has the same $M,V,E$ as its parent. The implemented reduction never creates any of these children: Theorem 0.3 proves that their required silent mark set is empty before a trace--ear state is formed, while retaining the broad unified entry family.

12.7 No retained fact removes the nonshrinking child

The Lean producer makes the retention check literal. Its output index is [ [\texttt{peeledResidual},\texttt{windowBlockers}, \texttt{demandAbsorption},\texttt{demandLedger}, \texttt{stageRateFailed},\texttt{peelingDescent}] \mathbin{+!+}\texttt{known}. ] In particular the required keys route8UnifiedNegative, typeAExclusion, typeBBridgeReduction, route8PiecesClassified, typeBBridgeSublinear, route8ExtractedEntryCensus, typeBSublinearLedger, route8UnifiedDeficit, route8QuotientFree, typeAReceiverRouting, route8UnifiedEntryCensus, and selection remain in known. The proposed local proof is therefore not permitted to forget any of them. Checking them by mathematical content, rather than by name, gives:

Retained ledger block What it actually supplies on the cyclic child Why it does not close or shrink that child
A, B subcubic/full-degree incidence, connectedness, bridgelessness, boundary profiles, and absence of a proper internal $3$-core bridgelessness excludes cut size one but permits two- and three-connected multi-terminal cyclic regions; none of these facts creates an articulation or cut-two shore
C target avoidance, actual returns, length exclusions, and the gadget/contraction conclusions under their exact terminal hypotheses visibility is available only after one actual simple channel containing the whole canonical trace is constructed; a union of routes or a profile context is not such a channel, and a multi-terminal core is not a two-terminal gadget
D canonical choices, label data, and symmetry a tie-break chooses among existing objects; it neither creates a separator nor turns a laminar family into disjoint marked shores
E minimality, replacement exclusion, quotient rules, and the completed peel descent minimality can be invoked only after constructing an admissible smaller target-complete representative; no such representative is produced from the cyclic child, while another peel only re-encodes the already recorded mass
F essential response supports, declared deletion witnesses, quotient-freeness, and the trace-local target-defect alternative these are statements about response coordinates and boundary-compatible realizations. The surviving CanonicalDemandRecord is in its profile disjunct, whose outside context is explicitly non-actual; it supplies no path or separator in $G$
G, H the exact deficit, disjoint incidence ledger, failed stage rate, maximal absorption, and blocker partition these facts prove how many unpaid units remain and prevent double counting; they do not inject those units into vertices or two-pole shells of the cyclic core
I the $P_{13}$-free theorem, finite constants, exact previously registered collision, and Bondy--Vince HSS applies to a graph of minimum degree at least three, not to the present multi-boundary piece; Bondy--Vince yields the proved eight-vertex bound only after a cut-two shell has been produced; [173] decides a different comparison

This table also rules out the tempting misuse of the demand token. In the live definition TraceLocalTargetDefect is a context-distinguishability statement about a retained reading. CanonicalDemandRecord is a disjunction of an actual-exterior record and a record in a context unequal to the actual exterior. Target avoidance eliminates the first disjunct on this branch, so only the second remains. Treating its certificate, event, or corridor as a path in $G$ would drop the inequality of contexts and hence drop an upstream fact.

12.8 Final audit verdict for the trace--ear attempt

Accordingly, the honest present conclusion is: Lemma 9.1 and the displayed coefficient arithmetic are sound, but Proposed Lemma 8.1 is nonexhaustive, its supposed recursive residuals do not all shrink, and node [181] is not closed by §§7–11.


13. Retired block--cut shore draft (not part of the proof)

Audit status. The material in §§13–20 is retained only to preserve any independently useful shore identities. Its proposed transition is invalid for the actual node-[181] input because Lemma 15.1 assumes every unpaid owner is silent. The live unified family also contains visible-first excess entries. Consequently Proposition 16.3 is unavailable, the block--cut recursion is not exhaustive, and none of §§13–20 may be cited as closing [181] or [183]. The implemented proof chain is Theorems 0.1–0.4 above, ending at [185].

Reading convention for §§13–20. Identities about an already given ambient-cubic shore remain ordinary proved identities. Any statement using a newly rebuilt shore ledger, the assertion that every unpaid or open owner is silent, or recursive application of Proposition 16.3 is false as a node-[181] transition and is labeled as such below. No extra hypothesis is introduced to rescue it. The remaining calculations are retained only to show what is independently correct and exactly where the implication breaks.

The conclusion of §12.8 concerns only the trace--ear proposal of §§7--11. The retired draft below does not use Proposed Lemma 8.1 or a trace ear. It attempted to enrich the node-[181] state at every stage to

[ \mathcal B_{181}[S,\mathscr L_S] :=(\mathcal B_{181};S,\delta_G(S),\mathscr L_S), \tag{13.1} ]

where the first coordinate would be the complete immutable ledger of §§1--4, (S) is the current connected induced shore inside one member of (\widetilde{\mathcal X}), and (\mathscr L_S) is the canonical local restriction of the already established receiver, trace, response-support and demand interfaces. In particular, (R1)--(R3), every peel witness, every closed exit, the relabelling cap, and the original support remain in the state. This notation records the intended monotone bookkeeping; it does not prove that (\mathscr L_S) exists with the claimed inherited properties.

For a nonempty vertex set (S\subseteq V(G)), write

[ b(S):=|\delta_G(S)|. ]

Every vertex of every shore considered below has ambient degree three. Consequently

[ b(S)=\sum_{v\in S}(3-d_S(v))=3|S|-2|E(G[S])|. \tag{13.2} ]

The draft proposed the following textbook move.

Retired block--cut transition. Take the first open demand unit in the canonical shore ledger and its silent owner ((S,w,u,B_u)). Visibility forces (d_S(w)=2) and forces (S-w) to have exactly two components. Replace the active shore (S) by those two components, retaining the whole parent ledger.

If a silent open owner on a transported shore ledger had been available, the resulting split would use B03 and would have the exact progress measure

[ M(\mathscr F):=\sum_{S\in\mathscr F}|S|. \tag{13.3} ]

Such a block--cut move replaces (S) by (K,H) with (|K|+|H|=|S|-1). Hence it changes (M) to (M-1), not merely to a lexicographically selected subproblem. The removed separator vertex is not discarded: it appears as the (+1) in the order identity and as the exact (+1) in the boundary identity proved in §16.

The remainder of the retired draft attempted to establish the three facts needed to iterate this move:

  1. the local burden and pressure interfaces transport to every derived shore (§§14--15);
  2. every open unit supplies the stated strict block--cut decomposition (§16);
  3. a shore on which no unit is open either satisfies the required (7b-8) estimate or already contains a forbidden (4)- or (8)-cycle (§17).

The first item is not established on the incoming residual: rebuilding the ledger on (S) neither preserves the original indexed family nor eliminates its unpaid visible-first entries. Consequently the second and third items do not form an exhaustive recursion. Sections 18–19 retain only the arithmetic and bookkeeping identities of that failed draft, not a transition.


14. Elementary shore identities and the claimed interface transport

Definition 14.1 (derived shore)

Fix (X\in\widetilde{\mathcal X}). A derived shore of (X) is obtained recursively as follows.

  • The root shore is (V(X)).
  • If (S) is a derived shore and the block--cut move selects (w\in S), the two connected components of (G[S]-w) are its children.

The choice is canonical: use the first open unit in the retained demand-unit order, then the first owner in the retained entry order. Thus this is one well-founded recursion, not an uncontrolled family of choices.

Lemma 14.2 (elementary shore identities)

Every derived shore (S) has the following properties.

[ \begin{array}{ll} \text{(a)}&\varnothing\ne S\subseteq V(X),\quad G[S]\text{ is connected and induced};\ \text{(b)}&d_G(v)=3\text{ for every }v\in S;\ \text{(c)}&b(S)=3|S|-2|E(G[S])|\text{ and }b(S)\equiv |S|\pmod2;\ \text{(d)}&b(S)\ge2;\ \text{(e)}&G[S]\text{ is }P_{13}\text{-free and every nonempty induced}
&\qquad\text{subgraph of }G[S]\text{ has a vertex of degree at most }2;\ \text{(f)}&G[S]\text{ contains no power-of-two cycle.} \end{array} \tag{14.1} ]

Proof

The root has (a) and (b) by the definition of a Type A support. A child is a connected component after deleting one vertex from an induced graph, hence is again a nonempty connected induced vertex set; ambient degrees do not change. This proves (a) and (b) inductively. Summing ambient degree three over (S) gives

[ 3|S|=2|E(G[S])|+|\delta_G(S)|, ]

which proves the equality and parity assertion in (c).

The packing is nonempty because the counterexample contains an induced (P_{13}), so (S\subseteq R\subsetneq V(G)). Since (G) is connected, (b(S)>0). If (b(S)=1), the unique edge of (\delta_G(S)) disconnects (S) from its complement and is a bridge of (G), contrary to B-1. Hence (b(S)\ge2), proving (d).

An induced subgraph of the (P_{13})-free graph (G[X]) is (P_{13})-free. By A-9, every nonempty (P_{13})-free induced subgraph of (G) has a vertex of internal degree at most two. This proves (e), including the empty internal (3)-core condition. Finally any cycle of (G[S]) is a cycle of (G), so C-1 proves (f). (\square)

Failed Claim 14.3 (boundary-interface transport)

Let (S) be a derived shore. The draft claimed that every boundary and response statement used by the Type A local ledger remains valid with (S) in place of (X):

  1. every edge of (\delta_G(S)) is an actual oriented completion incidence;
  2. the outside context is the actual induced complement together with the boundary vertices, so gluing reconstructs (G);
  3. a target-complete quotient on a proper subpiece of (S) is forbidden by hereditary target-uncompressibility;
  4. a target-defective event meeting an internal edge of (S) and an edge outside (S) uses at least two distinct incidences of (\delta_G(S));
  5. the node-[124] two-carrier terminal accepts a target-complete-minimal shore entry with at most two private essential incidences;
  6. a decorated handoff produced inside (S) is the same actual Type B handoff when the omitted vertices (X-S) are glued back.

Audit of the argument

Items 1–2 are elementary descriptions of the actual cut, and the cycle-cut parity used in item 4 is independently valid. What is not supplied by the incoming ledger is a new entry census on (S), target-complete-minimality for those new entries, or transport of the closed alternatives and absorber ownership to that census. Thus items 3–6 do not jointly establish the claimed ledger transport. The following argument is retained to identify its valid cut identities and invalid transport inferences; it is not a lemma.

Items 1 and 2 are definitions: no formal half-edge is introduced. The vertex partition

[ \partial S\ \dot\cup\ (S-\partial S)\ \dot\cup\ (V(G)-S) ]

and the ownership of each internal or external edge give a canonical graph isomorphism from the glued actual piece and actual outside to (G).

For item 3, a proper boundaried subpiece of (S) is also a proper boundaried piece of (G). The boundary degree profile is the actual one, so cor:uncompressible applies without changing its fibre. The same gluing observation transports proper- and whole-support dependence to the already closed rows E-3, F-2.

For item 4, add the root edge when the event is edge-rooted. The result is a simple cycle meeting both (S) and its complement. A cycle crosses every edge cut an even number of times. It crosses this cut positively, and a simple cycle cannot traverse one cut edge twice, so it uses at least two distinct cut incidences. This is precisely the proof of lem:typeA-pressure-token-two-carriers; it does not require the cut edges to end in (W).

For item 5, inspect the terminal contract of [124]. It asks for ambient cubicity, contextual target-safety, a target-complete-minimal trace basin, an essential core of size at least two, at most two private essential incidences, and the declared deletion witnesses. Ambient cubicity and actual target-safety are Lemma 14.2(b),(f), while contextual target-safety is the inherited boundaried-piece fact in (\mathcal B_{181}); the response-state construction and its deletion witnesses use the actual boundary just established; and the one-carrier case is excluded by the cut-parity argument of item 4. The terminal's smaller two-terminal-piece clauses are supplied by the retained gadgetClosure fact (key 500), whose statement is uniform in the chosen proper piece. Thus all clauses of the [124] input interface, and no stronger clause, hold.

For item 6, the handoff certificate consists of actual connector tails, their first high-degree separator, and the decorated core. Gluing (X-S) back does not change any of those ambient vertices, edges, degrees, or return tests. Hence it is a handoff for the original branch state. Members of (\widetilde{\mathcal X}) have already taken the no-handoff arm, so it cannot occur on a surviving derived shore. (\square)

The important point is that an edge of (\delta_G(S)) may end in (X-S), rather than in a packed window. None of items 1--6 uses a window blocker. The closing proof retains the blocker partition from (R3) but does not spend it again.


15. Retired hereditary-shore ledger construction

The draft next reruns the receiver, trace, visible-first, demand, and absorption constructions on (G[S]). This is not transport of the incoming node-[181] ledger. That ledger is indexed by the original full unified family, whose excess basins contain unpaid visible-first as well as silent loads; no upstream statement identifies it with a newly constructed silent-only family on every derived shore. The construction therefore stops here. The notation below is retained as notation from the failed draft and creates no fact or child residual.

Write

[ n_i(S):=|{v\in S:d_S(v)=i}|, \qquad N(S):=\text{number of indexed silent-excess entries on }S. \tag{15.1} ]

The retired draft let (o(S)) be the number of open demand units after the lexicographically first maximal (2/3)-ledger and maximal same-shore type-(A1) absorption have been formed on these entries and all type-(A2) conclusions have routed to their already closed compression/support-dependence rows. This is a derived quantity. It is not supplied by the incoming residual.

Failed Claim 15.1 (local burden)

The retired draft asserted

[ N(S)\ge n_3(S)-3n_2(S)-7n_1(S)-11n_0(S) =|S|-4b(S). \tag{15.2} ]

Audit

For a receiver (w), put (q_S(w)=3-d_S(w)) and (c_S(w)=4q_S(w)-1). The visible-first normalization first routes a four-visible configuration through the exhaustive exits and repeats after an exit-(4) record; finite peeling terminates because its integer load measure decreases. The unavailable step is the next one: the draft transports all closed exits and then concludes that every unpayable load in the rebuilt family is silent. The live node-[181] family disproves that identification at the level of available data, since it also contains unpaid visible-first loads. The implication to the next display is therefore invalid on the incoming ledger. The draft wrote

[ |\mathcal U_S(w)|\ge L_S(w)-c_S(w), \tag{15.3} ]

where the right side may be negative. The exact peeling identity retains a recorded load on the entry side when it is removed from a receiver sum, so (15.3) is unchanged by each normalization step; this is the local form of (4D=4D^{P_4}+p_4).

Every internal-degree-three vertex is routed exactly once, hence (\sum_wL_S(w)=n_3(S)). Receivers of degrees (2,1,0) have capacities (3,7,11). Summing (15.3) gives the first inequality. Finally,

[ b(S)=3n_0(S)+2n_1(S)+n_2(S), \qquad |S|=n_0(S)+n_1(S)+n_2(S)+n_3(S), ]

and direct subtraction gives

[ |S|-4b(S)=n_3(S)-3n_2(S)-7n_1(S)-11n_0(S). ]

The last degree identity is correct, but the false silence step means that the lower bound for (N(S)), and hence (15.2), has not been proved on the incoming residual. (\square)

Failed Claim 15.2 (local three-unit pressure)

The retired draft asserted

[ 3N(S)-o(S)\le b(S). \tag{15.4} ]

Moreover every open unit has a silent owner (\xi=(S,w,u,B_u)) in the ledger of (15.1).

Proof

For each entry, the four trace-basin failure alternatives are exhaustive. The compression and support-dependence alternatives are already closed, and the handoff alternative is excluded by Lemma 14.3(6). Thus an entry is either target-complete-minimal or target-defective.

If it is target-complete-minimal and has at most two private essential incidences, Lemma 14.3(5) routes it to [124]. Therefore every surviving target-complete-minimal entry has three private incidences; these incidences are pairwise disjoint by privacy. If it is target-defective, Lemma 14.3(4) gives a canonical token with at least two actual boundary incidences. The lexicographically first maximal ledger therefore partitions the (N(S)) entries as

[ \Xi_3(S)\ \dot\cup\ \Xi_2(S)\ \dot\cup\ \Xi_{\rm res}(S), ]

uses

[ a(S)=3N_3(S)+2N_2(S) \tag{15.5} ]

distinct incidences, and creates

[ d(S)=N_2(S)+3N_{\rm res}(S) \tag{15.6} ]

demand units. Equations (15.5)--(15.6) give the exact identity

[ 3N(S)=a(S)+d(S). \tag{15.7} ]

Let (A_1(S)) be the number of these units absorbed by unused incidences of the same shore. These incidences are disjoint from the base assignment and from one another. Type-(A2) certificates have left through their closed rows, so maximal absorption gives

[ o(S)=d(S)-A_1(S), \qquad a(S)+A_1(S)\le|\delta_G(S)|=b(S). \tag{15.8} ]

Substituting (15.8) into (15.7) proves (15.4). Demand units exist only for entries in (\Xi_2(S)\cup\Xi_{\rm res}(S)), all of which are members of the silent-excess family used to define (N(S)). Hence every open unit has the stated silent owner. (\square)

Invalid draft consequence 15.3 (no-open shore estimate)

If (o(S)=0), then

[ |S|\le\frac{13}{3}b(S). \tag{15.9} ]

Proof

By Lemmas 15.1--15.2,

[ 3(|S|-4b(S))\le3N(S)\le b(S). ]

Rearranging gives (3|S|\le13b(S)). (\square)

The identities (15.5)--(15.8) are correct algebra for the newly defined draft ledger, and the displayed boundary incidences are counted once. That ledger is not the incoming one, while (15.2) is unproved. Therefore (15.9) is not a node-[181] consequence and this section supplies no child.


16. Valid cut facts and the failed open-owner split

Lemma 16.1 (an ambient cubic vertex is not a cut vertex of (G))

If (d_G(v)=3), then (G-v) is connected.

Proof

The minimal counterexample is connected: otherwise one connected component would be a smaller graph of minimum degree at least three with no power-of-two cycle. Suppose (G-v) has (k\ge2) components. Each such component sends at least two edges to (v), because a component sending one edge would make that edge a bridge. Hence (d_G(v)\ge2k\ge4), contrary to (d_G(v)=3). (\square)

Lemma 16.2 (nonseparating receivers make every load visible)

Let (S) be a derived shore, (w) a receiver, and (u) a routed load whose canonical trace ends with the edge (tw). Fix a completion port (wh). If (t) lies in a component of (S-w) that is reached by an actual (h)-to-(S) connector avoiding (w), then (u) is visible through (wh). In particular this holds through every port if

[ d_S(w)=1, \quad\text{or}\quad d_S(w)=2\text{ and }S-w\text{ is connected}. \tag{16.1} ]

Proof

By Lemma 16.1, (G-w) is connected. Choose a simple path in (G-w) from (h) into the component of (S-w) containing (t), and stop it at its first vertex (r) in (S). Such a path is exactly the connector assumed in the first sentence; in the two cases of (16.1), any (h)-to-(t) path in (G-w) has its first entry in that unique component. Its prefix (\Gamma:h\leadsto r) has all internal vertices outside (S). The entering edge shows (d_S(r)\le2), so (r) is a receiver. By the hypothesis, choose an internal path (Q_0:r\leadsto t) in the relevant component of (S-w) and append (tw). The connector and this channel meet only at (r), so (\Gamma\circ Q_0\circ tw) is a simple receiver-entry return avoiding (wh). Replacing (Q_0\circ tw) by the first scheduled channel with the same terminal trace edge preserves these properties and satisfies the second clause of VisibleFor. Thus (u) is visible.

If (d_S(w)=1), deleting the leaf (w) leaves (S-w) connected. The second case of (16.1) states the same connectivity explicitly. (\square)

Failed Claim 16.3 (open-owner split)

This claim is not available on node [181]. Its first inference invokes Failed Claim 15.2 to turn an arbitrary open owner into a silent-excess owner. The incoming ledger does not do that. The boundary identities below are retained because they are correct for an actual split; they do not produce the split.

Let an open unit of (\mathscr L_S) have owner (\xi=(S,w,u,B_u)). Then

[ d_S(w)=2, \qquad S-w=K\mathbin{\dot\cup}H \tag{16.2} ]

for exactly two nonempty connected components (K,H). Both are proper derived shores and

[ \begin{aligned} |S|&=|K|+|H|+1,\ b(K)+b(H)&=b(S)+1,\ b(K)&\ge2,\qquad b(H)\ge2. \tag{16.3} \end{aligned} ]

Audit of the failed proof

The first sentence of the draft, “by Lemma 15.2 the owner is a silent excess load,” is unsupported. The argument after that sentence studies a silent owner and correctly derives the following local consequences, but it does not apply to every open owner of the incoming unified family. The case (d_S(w)=0) is impossible: connectivity would give (S={w}), which has no internal-degree-three vertex and hence no routed load. If (d_S(w)=1), Lemma 16.2 makes every routed load visible through both ports; saturation gives at least eight loads, so a port carries four. If (d_S(w)=2) and (S-w) is connected, the same lemma makes every load visible through the unique port; saturation gives at least four. Either conclusion contradicts that (u) is in the silent-excess family.

Therefore (d_S(w)=2) and (S-w) is disconnected. Since (S) is connected and (w) has exactly two neighbours in (S), deletion of (w) has exactly two components, one containing each neighbour. This proves (16.2) and the order identity.

Let (b_K^0) and (b_H^0) count the original edges of (\delta_G(S)) whose endpoint in (S) lies in (K) and (H), respectively. The third edge at (w) is the unique edge of (\delta_G(S)) incident with (w), so

[ b(S)=1+b_K^0+b_H^0. \tag{16.4} ]

There is no edge between (K) and (H), and each has exactly one edge to (w). Hence

[ b(K)=1+b_K^0,\qquad b(H)=1+b_H^0. \tag{16.5} ]

Adding (16.5) and using (16.4) gives (b(K)+b(H)=b(S)+1). Finally a cut of size one in connected (G) is a bridge, so Lemma 14.2(d) gives (b(K),b(H)\ge2). This verifies the displayed boundary identities for the split described in (16.2); it does not prove that node [181] supplies such a split. (\square)

Exact accounting after an actual split

Replacing (S) by (K,H) changes the active vertex measure by

[ M_{\rm after}-M_{\rm before} =|K|+|H|-|S|=-1. \tag{16.6} ]

Equations (16.2)--(16.5) make every child a proper subset of (S). The separator (w) is accounted once by the (+1) in the first line of (16.3), and the new interface cost is accounted once by the (+1) in its second line. Thus (16.6) is the correct decrease certificate for an actual split. Failed Claim 16.3 produces no such split from the incoming residual, so (16.6) cannot be registered as progress below [181].


17. The independent boundary-two lemma and its invalid draft use

The numerical comparison

[ \frac{13}{3}b(S)\le7b(S)-8 \quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad b(S)\ge3. \tag{17.1} ]

is correct. The input (15.9), however, is Invalid Draft Consequence 15.3 and is not available on node [181]. The following elementary lemma is independent of that failure and is retained; no finite search is used.

Lemma 17.1 (small two-boundary shore contains (C_4) or (C_8))

Let (S) be a connected induced ambient-cubic shore in a bridgeless simple graph. If (b(S)=2) and (|S|\le8), then (G[S]) contains a cycle of length four or eight.

Proof

Because

[ 2=b(S)=\sum_{v\in S}(3-d_S(v)), \tag{17.2} ]

the degree deficit is either two degree-two vertices or one degree-one vertex. The latter is impossible. Indeed both boundary edges would then be incident with the degree-one vertex (x); its unique internal edge would be the only edge joining (S-{x}) to (x) and the outside, hence a bridge of (G). Thus (G[S]) has exactly two vertices of degree two and every other vertex has degree three. The degree sum is (3|S|-2), so (|S|) is even. The case (|S|=2) is incompatible with (17.2). It remains to treat orders four, six and eight.

If (|S|=4), the graph has five edges and is (K_4) with one edge deleted; it contains a (4)-cycle.

Let (|S|=6). If the graph is triangle-free, take a cubic vertex (v). Its three neighbours are independent. Each needs a further neighbour among the remaining two vertices, and two of them therefore share such a neighbour; together with (v) they form a (4)-cycle. Now suppose (abc) is a triangle, and let (k) of its vertices be the two degree-two terminals. A cubic triangle vertex has one spoke to the remaining three vertices. In the absence of a (4)-cycle, spoke endpoints of distinct triangle vertices are distinct and nonadjacent. The graph has eight edges, so the graph induced by the three outside vertices has (2+k) edges. If (k=0), the three spoke endpoints would have to support two edges, contrary to their required nonadjacency. If (k=1), the outside graph has three edges and is a triangle, again joining the two spoke endpoints. If (k=2), it would have four edges on three vertices. All cases are impossible without a (4)-cycle.

Let (|S|=8). First suppose the graph is triangle-free. For a cubic vertex (v), let (A) be its three independent neighbours and let (B) be the other four vertices. A vertex of (B) has at most one neighbour in (A), otherwise it and (v) give a (4)-cycle. If (t) terminals lie in (A), the vertices of (A) require (6-t) edges to (B). Hence (6-t\le4), so (t=2) and equality holds. Every vertex of (B) then has one neighbour in (A); all terminals have already been used, so every vertex of (B) has two neighbours in (B). The induced graph on four vertices is therefore a (4)-cycle.

It remains that (abc) is a triangle. Let (F=S-{a,b,c}) and let (k) terminals lie on the triangle. There are (3-k) spokes and, since the whole graph has eleven edges,

[ |E(F)|=5+k. \tag{17.3} ]

In the absence of a (4)-cycle, distinct spoke endpoints are distinct and nonadjacent.

  • If (k=2), the degree sequence in (F) is ((3,3,3,3,2)). Its complement has degree sequence ((2,1,1,1,1)), hence is a three-vertex path plus a disjoint edge. If its edges are (xa,xb,cd), then (a-c-b-d-a) is a (4)-cycle in (F).
  • If (k=1) and the outside terminal is a spoke endpoint, (F) has degree sequence ((3,3,3,2,1)). Deleting its degree-one vertex leaves five edges on four vertices, a (K_4) minus one edge, and hence a (4)-cycle. If the outside terminal is not a spoke endpoint, the degree sequence is ((3,3,2,2,2)). Call the degree-three vertices (p,q). If they are nonadjacent they share the three remaining vertices and give a (4)-cycle. If they are adjacent, each has two neighbours among the remaining three. Their two neighbour sets meet in exactly one vertex; the two noncommon vertices must be adjacent to complete their degree two, and these four vertices with (pq) give a (4)-cycle.
  • If (k=0), let (d,e,f) be the three independent spoke endpoints and let (g,h) be the other vertices of (F). If (gh\notin E(F)), all five edges of (F) lie in (K_{3,2}); two of (d,e,f) then meet both (g,h), giving a (4)-cycle. Hence (gh\in E(F)). The other four edges have degree pattern ((2,1,1)) on (d,e,f): each spoke endpoint needs at least one edge in (F). They have pattern ((2,2)) on (g,h), since each already uses (gh), has degree at most three, and the four cross edges must all be counted. Relabel so the cross edges are (dg,dh,eg,fh), and relabel the triangle so its spokes are (ad,be,cf). Then [ a-b-e-g-d-h-f-c-a ] is an (8)-cycle.

Thus every case contains (C_4) or (C_8). (\square)

Invalid draft consequence 17.2 (the (b=2) no-open arm)

If (o(S)=0) and (b(S)=2), Corollary 15.3 gives (|S|\le26/3), hence (|S|\le8). Lemma 17.1 gives a cycle of length four or eight, contradicting C-1. The finite implication is correct, but its premise (|S|\le26/3) comes only from Invalid Draft Consequence 15.3. Therefore it closes no arm of the incoming node-[181] residual.

Notice also that an open-owner split cannot start at (b(S)=2): (16.3) would give (b(K)+b(H)=3) while each summand is at least two. This is an independent exact check on the terminal.


18. Failed seven-deficit claim and retained tree arithmetic

Failed Claim 18.1 (sharp shore estimate)

The retired draft asserted that every surviving derived shore satisfies

[ |S|\le7b(S)-8. \tag{18.1} ]

In particular, every original support (X\in\widetilde{\mathcal X}) satisfies

[ |X|\le7\defp(X)-8. \tag{18.2} ]

Audit of the failed induction

This is not an induction on the node-[181] residual: its zero-open case uses Invalid Draft Consequence 15.3 and its positive-open case uses Failed Claim 16.3. The algebra the draft wrote was as follows.

If (o(S)=0), Corollary 15.3 gives (|S|\le13b(S)/3). When (b(S)\ge3), (17.1) gives (18.1). When (b(S)=2), Corollary 17.2 closes the branch; hence no target-free counterexample shore remains in this case.

On its (o(S)>0) line, the draft invoked Failed Claim 16.3 to obtain two proper children (K,H), then invoked Failed Claims 14.3--15.2 to apply the induction statement to each. Its arithmetic using (16.3) was

[ \begin{aligned} |S| &=|K|+|H|+1\ &\le (7b(K)-8)+(7b(H)-8)+1\ &=7(b(S)+1)-15\ &=7b(S)-8. \end{aligned} \tag{18.3} ]

The calculation (18.3) correctly propagates a (7b-8) estimate across an actual split satisfying (16.3). The incoming residual supplies neither the leaf estimate nor the split, so it proves neither (18.1) nor (18.2). (\square)

18.2 Exact arithmetic of an already produced decomposition tree

This subsection is a standalone bookkeeping identity, not a construction. For any already constructed full binary shore-exhaustion tree, let (\ell) be its number of leaves and (t) its number of split vertices. It is a full binary tree, so (t=\ell-1). Repeated use of (16.3) gives the literal identities

[ |S|=\sum_{L\text{ leaf}}|L|+t, \qquad \sum_{L\text{ leaf}}b(L)=b(S)+t. \tag{18.4} ]

Every surviving leaf has (b(L)\ge3) and satisfies (|L|\le7b(L)-8). Therefore

[ \begin{aligned} |S| &\le\sum_L(7b(L)-8)+t\ &=7(b(S)+t)-8\ell+t\ &=7b(S)+8(\ell-1)-8\ell\ &=7b(S)-8. \end{aligned} \tag{18.5} ]

Thus each separator is paid exactly once; the (+1) boundary increment is neither lost nor charged twice. At the transition level, (16.6) says the active residual loses exactly one vertex per split. At the completed-tree level, (18.4)--(18.5) account for every original vertex and every newly exposed boundary incidence. No such tree is produced from node [181], so these identities do not reduce its residual.


19. Retired global summation; no node-[181] contradiction

The global account below is retained because its summation and numerical comparison are useful checks. It is not a proof chain: equation (19.4) invokes Failed Claim 18.1, so the first unsupported line is visible before the global sum is formed.

Put

[ Q(Y):=\defp(Y)-\sigma(Y). \tag{19.1} ]

Let (\mathcal E_B) be the Type B bridge/envelope residual family. The incoming Type B ledger gives

[ M_B:=\sum_{Y\in\mathcal E_B}|Y|=o(|R|), \qquad \sigma(G)=o(|R|). \tag{19.2} ]

Every canonical support outside (\mathcal E_B) is accounted as follows.

  • If (\No(Y)\ge0), then [ |Y|\le4Q(Y)\le7Q(Y). \tag{19.3} ]
  • The draft claimed that if (\No(Y)<0) and it is Type A with no handoff, then (\sigma(Y)=0) and Failed Claim 18.1 gives [ |Y|\le7\defp(Y)-8<7Q(Y). \tag{19.4} ]
  • Every other negative support has already routed through the Type B handoff/bridge ledger; its only surviving mass is included in (\mathcal E_B).

The canonical supports partition (R), and their deficits and assigned surpluses add. Moreover

[ \left|\sum_{Y\in\mathcal E_B}Q(Y)\right| \le3M_B+\sigma(G)=o(|R|), \tag{19.5} ]

because positive deficiency is at most three per vertex and all assigned surplus is bounded by the global surplus. Summing (19.3)--(19.4), using (19.2)--(19.5), gives

[ \begin{aligned} |R|-M_B &\le7\sum_{Y\notin\mathcal E_B}Q(Y)\ &=7Q(R)-7\sum_{Y\in\mathcal E_B}Q(Y), \end{aligned} ]

The draft therefore wrote

[ |R|\le7(\defp(R)-\sigma(R))+o(|R|). \tag{19.6} ]

It remains to compare (19.6) with the retained cap. Theorem 1.5 gives

[ \frac{\defp(R)-\sigma(R)}{|R|}\le\tau^\ast+o(1), \qquad \theta^\ast=\frac{3}{4c_{13}-99}, \qquad \tau^\ast=\frac{45}{4c_{13}-138}. \tag{19.7} ]

The registered finite constant satisfies (c_{13}=118.108581006\ldots>453/4). Therefore

[ 7\tau^\ast<1, \qquad 1-7\tau^\ast =\frac{4c_{13}-453}{4c_{13}-138} =0.0581\ldots>0. \tag{19.8} ]

Divide (19.6) by (|R|) and use (19.7):

[ 1\le7\tau^\ast+o(1). \tag{19.9} ]

The numerical margin in (19.8) is strict. But (19.6) is not a branch fact, because its Type A summand uses the unproved estimate (19.4). Therefore (19.9) is not obtained and §§13–20 do not close node [181].

For completeness, the cap used here is itself an accumulated upstream fact, not a new assumption. On the hot arm, the realized window state supplies ((c_{13}-o(1))p_{13}\log_2n) bits. The relabelling-orbit inequality of keys 501--502 and the (\tfrac32n\log_2n+O(n)) skeleton budget give

[ c_{13}\theta+\frac34(1-13\theta)-15\theta \le\frac32+o(1), ]

so ((c_{13}-99/4)\theta\le3/4+o(1)), which is the first formula in (19.7). The stub identity then gives the second. This confirms that the numerical cap is retained upstream; it does not supply the missing local estimate (19.4).


20. Audit of the retired block--cut draft

20.1 Transition audit against the incoming residual

Draft step Claimed output Exact audit verdict Residual decrease
Shore-interface transport, §§14–15 a new silent-only ledger on every shore invalid: it is not the original unified census and drops unpaid visible-first entries none
Open-unit test (o(S)=0) or (o(S)>0) on that new ledger invalid: (o(S)) is not an incoming-ledger quantity none
Block--cut move two components of (S-w) invalid as a transition: the silent-owner premise is not produced; (16.3) is only the exact arithmetic of a split already in hand none
Boundary-two terminal a (C_4) or (C_8) Lemma 17.1 is valid, but the draft never produces the required no-open (b=2,\ S
Shore induction ( S \le7b(S)-8)
Global sum (19.6) invalid: the negative Type A summand (19.4) cites Failed Claim 18.1 none
Density collision numerical contradiction the retained cap and arithmetic margin are valid, but their local premise (19.6) is absent none

No block--cut operation is admitted below [181]. Equation (16.6) verifies the size change of a split but does not produce one, so it cannot serve as the progress certificate of a descendant. The complete upstream ledger remains unchanged. The implemented chain is the maximal-ledger augmentation at [181] followed by the shortest-trace boundary-support reduction at [183] and the visible-first prefix exhaustion at [184]; it ends at the exact actual-overload residual [185], not at a claimed contradiction.

20.2 What remains correct

  • The elementary shore identities in Lemma 14.2, the cubic cut-vertex lemma 16.1, the local visibility implication 16.2, the boundary arithmetic (16.3)--(16.6), and the finite boundary-two Lemma 17.1 remain available as independently stated mathematics.
  • The draft did not construct a descendant state, a transported absorber ledger, or a decomposition tree. Claims that these objects retained every parent fact are removed from the proof record.
  • Type B exceptional mass is retained explicitly as (M_B), and both its vertex mass and its possible (Q)-contribution are absorbed only into the displayed (o(|R|)) term in (19.2), (19.5).
  • The sharpened cap is derived from the registered orbit inequalities; it is an incoming fact, not a new assumption. It has no valid local (7b-8) estimate to consume in this draft.

20.3 Rejected Lean implementation sketch

The retired draft proposed the following interface names. None is a legal row below route8PeeledDemandResidual, and none is implemented:

  1. route8ShoreLedgerTransport is rejected because (15.2) and (15.4) are not transported facts of the incoming unified census.
  2. route8OpenOwnerBlockCut is rejected because an open owner is not proved silent.
  3. route8BoundaryTwoTerminal is rejected because the required no-open boundary-two child is not produced.
  4. route8SevenDeficit is rejected because its base and recursive steps are Failed Claims 15.3 and 16.3.
  5. route8Node181Closure is rejected because (19.6) has no producer.

Adding any of these names would re-encode the same residual without reducing it. They are audit history, not pending implementation obligations.

The original LaTeX paper records Theorems 0.1–0.2 as thm:typeA-unpaid-exit4-reduction; its [183] continuation records Theorem 0.3 as lem:typeA-unified-visible-ownership, and its [184] continuation records Theorem 0.4 as lem:typeA-unified-visible-overload. Theorem 0.5 is recorded as lem:typeA-unified-joint-balance; its route8JointBalanceRow appends key 506 and moves the unchanged ledger from [185] to [186].