# Evidence-platform prototype report

Source revision `fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb`. This concrete offline report joins source fingerprints, static checker metadata, explicit withdrawal dependencies and one illustrative operational claim. It is not an independently checked proof or a completed ten-claim buyer pilot.

## Source and checker evidence

- 372 families and 719 unique manuscripts inventoried.
- 242 selected family-scope documents located; existence is not proof verification.
- 2933 source files fingerprinted in [manifest.json](manifest.json).
- 416 checker configurations scanned in the preserved preflight; no trusted checker executed.
- 2 configurations enable an external kernel: lean/ComparatorChallenges/ArtinParabolicIntersections.json, lean/ComparatorChallenges/TraceIdealTransportSupport.json.
- Independent proof verification: **not run**.

## Explicit corrections and dependencies

The preserved withdrawal scan found 3 proof-withdrawal notices and 2 explicitly named dependency edges. A withdrawn proof does not establish that its mathematical statement is false. Notice dates and the repository history heading differ and must remain separate.

- [Algebraicity of Kuga-Satake Correspondences for K3 Surfaces](https://github.com/openai/math/blob/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb/preprints/Algebraicity-of-Kuga-Satake-Correspondences-for-K3-Surfaces-October-3-2026/README.md): notice says October 6, 2026; proof withdrawn.
- [Algebraicity of Weil classes on split abelian eightfolds](https://github.com/openai/math/blob/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb/preprints/Algebraicity-of-Weil-classes-on-split-abelian-eightfolds-September-18-2026/README.md): notice says October 6, 2026; proof withdrawn.
- [The rational Hodge conjecture for products of K3 surfaces](https://github.com/openai/math/blob/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb/preprints/The-rational-Hodge-conjecture-for-products-of-K3-surfaces-October-4-2026/README.md): notice says October 6, 2026; proof withdrawn.

## Illustrative software claim

Claim `documentary-example` uses contract `365-joint-same-patch`. The linter reports 2 documentary gaps. [Full claim audit](claim-audit.json). Supplied references and statuses are unverified.

- **FORMAL_SCOPE_MISMATCH**: The reviewed family-level formal scope does not cover this exact claim.
- **MODEL_SCOPE_MISMATCH**: The declared measurement_model differs from the reviewed theorem model; a separate bridge is needed.

The registry currently has 9 curated source/model contracts. Complete documentation is not mathematical applicability certification. The next implementation work is source-location enrichment and an independently executed proof-run adapter; the next business test is a measured expert workflow comparison.