Claims & Evidence Registrar › H04

LIB2-071 · CKM unitarity holds by construction in the chosen parametrisation

class CLAIMmath status (as printed) NOT_PRINTEDattachment (as printed) NOT_PRINTEDscorecard tier word (as printed) none printedhouse tier not yet assignedreview state PUBLISHEDentry version 7

Label sentence at the locator (PDF p.48 (bytes of record)):

Because the matrix is built from the standard unitary parameterisation, all six unitarity relations hold identically.

Statement

The CKM assembly satisfies all six unitarity relations identically because it uses the standard unitary parametrisation.

Scope

carrierThe standard-form CKM assembly
domainAlgebraic unitarity of the assembly, not validation of the chosen entries.
hypothesesInsert the retained entries into the standard unitary parametrisation.
physical targetCKM matrix unitarity
quantifierThe registered readout and its stated premises.
What this does not show. Unitarity by construction is not an independent success and does not resolve the source’s CKM-angle inconsistency.

Scientific status: UNDER REVIEW — the house has not adjudicated CURRENT / CONTESTED for this record (charter §10.3); a drafted claim is a claim under review, not a result.

Sources in the suite of record

Key — use ≠ record. A review state printed on a source use below names that use — one citation of the suite, read by the lane named in its warrant — not this record. The record's own review state is the one in the table above and is unchanged by any use-level state; a use may be LANE_PROPOSED or REVIEWED while the record it sits on remains IN_REVIEW (R45, R49).

Quotes are verbatim from the sha-pinned text extraction of the Rev33.1 PDF (A1584 §2.2, S309): mathematical typography — radicals, exponents, ≅ — can appear displaced in the extracted line. The PDF page is authoritative; the quote is what the machine gate matched.

Paper 3, §2.1, Unitarity of the standard parametrisation — PDF p.50 (bytes of record)
review state: REVIEWED · role SUPPORTS · warrant: gemini read SUITE_TEXT_EXTRACT → SUPPORTS · grok read THE_RECORD → SUPPORTS

Because the matrix is built from the standard unitary parameterisation, all six unitarity relations hold identically.

Paper 3, §2.1, Assembly rather than independent success — PDF p.49 (bytes of record)
review state: REVIEWED · role SUPPORTS · warrant: gemini read SUITE_TEXT_EXTRACT → CONTEXT · grok read THE_RECORD → SUPPORTS · the lanes disagreed; resolved by PI ruling R84 as SUPPORTS — a ruling whose gloss the house owes; a use resolved by ruling never anchors PUBLISHED

this section inserts the framework’s four independent entries into the standard unitary parameterisation and checks consistency — so unitarity holds by construction, not as an independent success.

Evidence (availability is not outcome)

kindreferenceline / keyavailabilitynote
analyticPaper 3 §2.1, Eqs. (5)–(7), pp.47–48—shippedThe suite states the exact unitarity property of the chosen parametrisation; no matrix verification is run here.

Typed links

typetargetlicensed by
related_to (never evidential)LIB2-068 The retained CKM-phase construction remains coincidence-class—

Why this record is PUBLISHED (R67, condition T-B)

states a predicateyes
uses on the record · unblocked2 · 2
uses any lane has read2 of 2
REVIEWED SUPPORTS use on the predicate, read by two non-drafting lanesyes (2)
a SUPPORTS use on the predicate is DISPUTEDno
machine certificate currentyes

Machine certificate (R68)

stateMACHINE_CHECKS_PASSED
policysgtoe-clearance-policy-1.0-RATIFIED · sha16 ef7d6e7690514311
bound to masteraad7a3ec6ce3b510 (the master the checks ran on; issued 2026-09-26T05:06Z)
checks
checkresultreason
schema_validPASSexercised
basis_currentPASSexercised
quote_locatedPASSexercised
labels_literalPASSexercised
edges_resolvedPASSexercised
bindings_validPASSexercised

A certificate says the record is well-formed, current, quote-on-page, label-literal, edge-resolved and binding-consistent on the bytes it was issued on. It is not a review, and it goes STALE the moment the master moves under it (R68). It is one conjunct of the PUBLISHED condition (R67), never the whole of it.

History

March library (v1) antecedentsno legacy antecedent identified
Track-2 claim idsD-MIX-H — cross-reference; the Track 1 / Track 2 join sets each one against what the sealed suite prints for this record. Where they differ, the suite is the record.
candidate ids (frozen list S304)C2-066

Drafting-lane note

C2-066 was routed as an overview, not an atomic claim. This record extracts only the explicit construction statement on pp.47–48; the overview itself is not promoted. No tier is inferred from the first-row physical status.

Receipt

round D1253 · parsed 2026-09-06T00:06Z · machine gates passed: CONTRACT, G1-quote-on-page, G2-numerals-declared, G4-ids-resolve, DAG-acyclic · content sha256 666c94befec1d6b4da6a5980e87c9ff064bffa56e18c6012c7b87d018d167687

Review this entry

Reviewer verdict line (one per entry, as text): LIB2-071 | PASS or FAIL(G1–G8) or NOT RUN | quote | PDF page | one sentence. G1 source supports the exact scoped assertion · G2 evidence class fits (numbers ≡ digit source) · G3 labels as printed, not converted · G4 comparison typed · G6 public scope · G7 history real · G8 caution present and true. Machine surfaces: index.json · capsule.md.

Generated from library_v2.jsonl. Declared volatile fields (R36): BUILD_STAMP.
BUILD_STAMP S371a · 2026-09-26T22:53Z · master 01d1a5873ede42f5 · cut 9dcc6ce9a8ee3e02