IN_REVIEW — NOT CITABLE. Under coalition review; not house-adjudicated. This page was generated (build S371a) from a drafting-lane record. Clearance here is a MACHINE CERTIFICATE under the ruled policy (v1.0 RATIFIED, R68), not a review: it is MACHINE_CHECKS_PASSED — contract · quote-on-page · declared numerals: N/A — this record declares no suite labels to check · id resolution · acyclic graph · basis current — and that is a statement about the intake gates, not scientific clearance. It is NOT HOUSE_ADJUDICATED: no person has signed off on this record, and 0 of 357 records have been. No tier has been assigned by the house; every label shown is the label as printed in the suite of record (Rev33.1_S369 (PDF sha256 b64ddcd9e16a6dcd…)). Adversarial review by a lane that did not draft it is also still owed. Nothing on this page may be cited as a result of the programme until its state reads PUBLISHED — a state written only by the R67 transition producer when a REVIEWED SUPPORTS use, read by two non-drafting lanes, stands on the record's predicate.

LIB2-304 · Derive the configuration-dependent charge-magnitude mechanism

class OPENmath status (as printed) —attachment (as printed) —scorecard tier word (as printed) none printedhouse tier not yet assignedreview state IN_REVIEWentry version 7

Statement

Can configuration-dependent coherence and screening supply the missing nuclear charge magnitudes under the banked separation-energy baseline?

Scope

carrier	The nuclear charge sector and refined parent/daughter ledger
domain	The unresolved charge-magnitude mechanism, distinct from the sign/count record and binding-energy pass tally.

What this does not show. The strong sign/count record does not establish the magnitude law or license a more favourable baseline.

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 9, §9, Coherence mechanism is not yet a solution — PDF p.137 (bytes of record)
review state: REVIEWED · role CONTEXT · warrant: gemini read SUITE_TEXT_EXTRACT → CONTEXT · grok read THE_RECORD → CONTEXT

The banked candidate mechanism — coherence factors are configuration-dependent (“coherence multiplies by φ”) — names the problem without solving it.

Paper 9, §9, Screening remains unregistered — PDF p.137 (bytes of record)
review state: REVIEWED · role CONTEXT · warrant: gemini read SUITE_TEXT_EXTRACT → CONTEXT · grok read THE_RECORD → CONTEXT

the N = Z line’s deficit is steepest, is two walls at once — radius and charge magnitude, with an unregistered screening factor 0.47 (s1114, Rev32.2).

Paper 9, §7, Banked separation-energy baseline — PDF p.134 (bytes of record)
review state: LANE_PROPOSED · role CONTEXT · warrant: grok read THE_RECORD → CONTEXT · gemini read SUITE_TEXT_EXTRACT → CONTEXT · grok read THE_RECORD → CONTEXT · grok read THE_RECORD → CONTEXT · gemini read SUITE_TEXT_EXTRACT → CONTEXT

Sx (P → D + x) = B(P ) − B(Dledger ) − B(x) with the refined daughter always, where B(x) = 0 for a single emitted nucleon (the case the ruling was banked for) and the bound-fragment term is required otherwise (8 Be→ αα gives 0 at leading order only with it; Rev32.9, A1674 F01; Rev32.10, A1714-F01 — this does not license the open A = 8 alternative baseline)

Evidence (availability is not outcome)

kind	reference	line / key	availability	note
registry	Paper 9 §§7,9, pp.130,132–133	—	shipped	The supplied source names the unfinished coherence/screening mechanism and fixes the baseline. No charge-sector calculation is run.

Open problem

charter ref	Rev32.7 Paper 9 §7, baseline ruling, p.130; §9, charge-magnitude sector, pp.132–133
failure or reopen condition	A named coherence effect or an unregistered screening factor alone does not complete the mechanism; the baseline remains the banked one.
obstruction	The source records exposed separation-energy magnitude defects; its coherence description names the problem, and the screening factor is unregistered.
question	Can the coherence and screening mechanism needed for charge magnitudes be derived?
success condition	Supply the configuration-dependent coherence/screening mechanism needed to determine the charge magnitudes using the banked refined-daughter baseline.

Typed links

type	target	licensed by
`related_to` (never evidential)	LIB2-155 The charge-magnitude ledger retains two exposed proton-separation defects	—
`related_to` (never evidential)	LIB2-163 The separation-energy rule uses the refined daughter ledger	—

Why this record is not PUBLISHED (R67, condition T-B)

states a predicate	yes
uses on the record · unblocked	3 · 3
uses any lane has read	3 of 3
REVIEWED SUPPORTS use on the predicate, read by two non-drafting lanes	no (0)
a SUPPORTS use on the predicate is DISPUTED	no
machine certificate current	yes

Not PUBLISHED because no use on it has been read as SUPPORTS by two non-drafting lanes on different objects. The transition is written only by the R67 producer and recomputed by a gate on every build; no person promotes a record by hand.

Machine certificate (R68)

state MACHINE_CHECKS_PASSED

policy sgtoe-clearance-policy-1.0-RATIFIED · sha16 ef7d6e7690514311

bound to master aad7a3ec6ce3b510 (the master the checks ran on; issued 2026-09-26T05:06Z)

checks

check	result	reason
`schema_valid`	PASS	exercised
`basis_current`	PASS	exercised
`quote_located`	PASS	exercised
`labels_literal`	N/A	class OPEN not governed by the source_labels rule
`edges_resolved`	PASS	exercised
`bindings_valid`	PASS	exercised

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) antecedents	no legacy antecedent identified
Track-2 claim ids	E-CHG-01 — 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.
serials	A1357 s1114
candidate ids (frozen list S304)	C2-072

Drafting-lane note

C2-072 has a distinct OPEN magnitude task in addition to G-159’s reported defects and G-167’s baseline rule. No new tolerance, screening factor or charge-energy value is assigned.

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 d0008a372988b5a4a7126c350150a03a45fdde05960122a369989952a7549331

Review this entry

Reviewer verdict line (one per entry, as text): LIB2-304 | 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