This paper is the forty-fourth in a sequence developing an interpretive framework that redescribes physical reality as a causally consistent history of information updates rather than as a collection of independently existing objects. It is the closing panel of the twelfth grouping — the U3 construction program — and its genre was fixed by Paper 43's closure before its first sentence: a design-and-feasibility paper for new configurations, barred from re-interpreting existing proposals, executing no measurement, scoring no datum, and moving no band. Paper 43's verdict (iii-c) — a surviving, laboratory-reachable-in-part window with reachable sub-window [1.7e-1, 2.1] at the conservative probe corner — unlocked this panel as a conditional discriminant-and-design unlock, not a claim that the generic-CQ collapse branch was avoided. What this paper supplies is the readiness layer: everything short of the measurement itself, arranged so that whichever outcome the world someday returns is already a typed verdict. Three feasibility verdicts are computed, each by a criterion declared before the computation, each with a named failure branch carrying a pre-committed publishable consequence. F_A — the photonic probe (flagship): Paper 43's symmetric dual-rail tapped-switch circuit is completed to pre-registration grade — a six-row confound budget with every row closing at its declared floor, an executable lambda-blind instrument-validity protocol at a declared tap ramp, the statistics/systematics split displayed (statistics never bind; every binding floor is a systematic), and a pre-committed outcome map on which a null carves a named region of the band while an excess is held un-interpreted pending the differential. F_A closes as a pre-registration-grade design — explicitly not an execution pass: every systematic either closes algebraically or carries an executable pass/fail gate whose failure branch is pre-committed, and the instrument-validity gate remains future laboratory work. F_B — the circuit-QED co-location envelope: the Paper 42 benchmark environment with one structural upgrade no existing device is claimed to instantiate — the monitored register is the order-control register — scored against five host-envelope criteria under a two-regime protocol (a validity regime that certifies the controlled-order resource, and a monitored regime in which the measured destruction rate of that resource is itself the observable). F_B is established as a design at declared floors, explicitly not a device claim, and the environment carries the named status-audit instruments (sector-exhibition, Clausius-defect protocol, co-location gravimetry option), specified and never executed. F_C — the recorded-versus-unrecorded differential at execution readiness: the declared toggle is the retention-step toggle — the entire analog chain runs identically in both arms; only persistent retention of the during-window monitoring stream differs, with both arms' rates estimated from identically-retained end-of-sequence readout, and the unrecorded arm's zero-export status fixed a priori at architecture level (transient buffer dwell time far below the retention floor, no persistent branch, effective redundancy below threshold — audited before the arm is admitted, with audit failure failing the verdict rather than mislabeling the arm). The comparator-blindness certificate is computed in the comparator class's own normal form to pass with about forty orders of magnitude of margin: the sole physical difference between arms — branch-correlated persistent-memory writes at meters — induces ~1e-36 per second of comparator contrast against an audit floor of ~1e4 per second, robust to twenty orders of transcription generosity. Ordinary write systematics are closed by an equalized dummy-write/dummy-load protocol, and the declared rate-matching floor closes from its own five-row decomposed budget; at that floor the discriminable sub-band covers the entire reachable window even at the conservative certified fraction. F_C is implementable. The realized corner of the pre-declared verdict architecture is (P_exec, D_disc) = (yes, yes): a band-motion-capable probe design exists, and the distinctness discriminant exists. The lasting artifact is the execution map: the single pre-registered decision tree from every feasibility verdict and every possible future measured outcome to its Paper-43 pre-committed consequence — null: carve; certified contrast tracking the recorded arm: distinctness earned and the first FrameworkForcedShift candidate; certificate failure in situ: confounded row, nothing carved, collapse at the audit frontier. The title's "Gate-VII signature" is typed exactly and nowhere exceeded: it names the designed observable pair whose executed measurement could first move the force axes of U3Status off pending — the paper claims no crossing, no measurement, no confirmation, no probability. The retired authority is the Global Experimenter: the assumption that empirical adjudication of an adopted dynamics requires a privileged, external certifying authority. Its methodological face is retired with the levels typed — world-level results come only from executed measurement, program-level results from pre-committed design, and nothing further is needed; its substantive face is declined, not refuted. The retirement is enforced by the subject matter itself: the probe's heralded detection records are certified export events — the very quantity that sources the predicted excess — so any apparatus that measures the kernel is made of what the kernel rates, and no experimenter stands outside the physics even in principle. U3Status is restated, not re-scored; Gate VII is claimed by nobody; the twelfth grouping ends with every branch disposed and the program handed to the laboratory.
This paper is the forty-fourth in a sequence developing an interpretive framework that redescribes physical reality as a causally consistent history of information updates rather than as a collection of independently existing objects. It is the closing panel of the twelfth grouping — the U3 construction program — and its genre was fixed by Paper 43's closure before its first sentence: a design-and-feasibility paper for new configurations, barred from re-interpreting existing proposals, executing no measurement, scoring no datum, and moving no band. Paper 43's verdict (iii-c) — a surviving, laboratory-reachable-in-part window with reachable sub-window [1.7e-1, 2.1] at the conservative probe corner — unlocked this panel as a conditional discriminant-and-design unlock, not a claim that the generic-CQ collapse branch was avoided. What this paper supplies is the readiness layer: everything short of the measurement itself, arranged so that whichever outcome the world someday returns is already a typed verdict. Three feasibility verdicts are computed, each by a criterion declared before the computation, each with a named failure branch carrying a pre-committed publishable consequence. F_A — the photonic probe (flagship): Paper 43's symmetric dual-rail tapped-switch circuit is completed to pre-registration grade — a six-row confound budget with every row closing at its declared floor, an executable lambda-blind instrument-validity protocol at a declared tap ramp, the statistics/systematics split displayed (statistics never bind; every binding floor is a systematic), and a pre-committed outcome map on which a null carves a named region of the band while an excess is held un-interpreted pending the differential. F_A closes as a pre-registration-grade design — explicitly not an execution pass: every systematic either closes algebraically or carries an executable pass/fail gate whose failure branch is pre-committed, and the instrument-validity gate remains future laboratory work. F_B — the circuit-QED co-location envelope: the Paper 42 benchmark environment with one structural upgrade no existing device is claimed to instantiate — the monitored register is the order-control register — scored against five host-envelope criteria under a two-regime protocol (a validity regime that certifies the controlled-order resource, and a monitored regime in which the measured destruction rate of that resource is itself the observable). F_B is established as a design at declared floors, explicitly not a device claim, and the environment carries the named status-audit instruments (sector-exhibition, Clausius-defect protocol, co-location gravimetry option), specified and never executed. F_C — the recorded-versus-unrecorded differential at execution readiness: the declared toggle is the retention-step toggle — the entire analog chain runs identically in both arms; only persistent retention of the during-window monitoring stream differs, with both arms' rates estimated from identically-retained end-of-sequence readout, and the unrecorded arm's zero-export status fixed a priori at architecture level (transient buffer dwell time far below the retention floor, no persistent branch, effective redundancy below threshold — audited before the arm is admitted, with audit failure failing the verdict rather than mislabeling the arm). The comparator-blindness certificate is computed in the comparator class's own normal form to pass with about forty orders of magnitude of margin: the sole physical difference between arms — branch-correlated persistent-memory writes at meters — induces ~1e-36 per second of comparator contrast against an audit floor of ~1e4 per second, robust to twenty orders of transcription generosity. Ordinary write systematics are closed by an equalized dummy-write/dummy-load protocol, and the declared rate-matching floor closes from its own five-row decomposed budget; at that floor the discriminable sub-band covers the entire reachable window even at the conservative certified fraction. F_C is implementable. The realized corner of the pre-declared verdict architecture is (P_exec, D_disc) = (yes, yes): a band-motion-capable probe design exists, and the distinctness discriminant exists. The lasting artifact is the execution map: the single pre-registered decision tree from every feasibility verdict and every possible future measured outcome to its Paper-43 pre-committed consequence — null: carve; certified contrast tracking the recorded arm: distinctness earned and the first FrameworkForcedShift candidate; certificate failure in situ: confounded row, nothing carved, collapse at the audit frontier. The title's "Gate-VII signature" is typed exactly and nowhere exceeded: it names the designed observable pair whose executed measurement could first move the force axes of U3Status off pending — the paper claims no crossing, no measurement, no confirmation, no probability. The retired authority is the Global Experimenter: the assumption that empirical adjudication of an adopted dynamics requires a privileged, external certifying authority. Its methodological face is retired with the levels typed — world-level results come only from executed measurement, program-level results from pre-committed design, and nothing further is needed; its substantive face is declined, not refuted. The retirement is enforced by the subject matter itself: the probe's heralded detection records are certified export events — the very quantity that sources the predicted excess — so any apparatus that measures the kernel is made of what the kernel rates, and no experimenter stands outside the physics even in principle. U3Status is restated, not re-scored; Gate VII is claimed by nobody; the twelfth grouping ends with every branch disposed and the program handed to the laboratory.
This paper is the forty-third in a sequence developing an interpretive framework that redescribes physical reality as a causally consistent history of information updates rather than as a collection of independently existing objects. It is the prediction-and-exclusion panel of the twelfth grouping — the U3 construction program — and it adopts nothing, spends nothing, and tunes nothing: Paper 41 adopted the common record-history kernel P_ker at the claim level L3-A and computed its admissible space; Paper 42 executed the recovery conditions and spent the grouping's single calibration, freezing the normalized kernel — the decoherence coefficient confined to the gate-truncated band Lambda_cal = [5e-5, 2.1] (architecture-level record-chain variant [5e-5, 2.1e-1]), the diffusion coefficient carried as a per-class prediction band, the order coefficient computed from operator overlap, the eligibility thresholds fixed at adoption. Every number in this paper is a consequence of the normalized kernel plus declared audit inputs. The paper computes the program's first genuine prediction bands, both defined as excesses over the full standard model. For any controlled-order process (quantum-switch class) with audited certified-export count N_exp coupling to the order register during coherence, the order coherence obeys -ln(V/V_std) = kappa_W lambda_dec N_exp, with V_std computed first (including the standard which-order record-formation decoherence Paper 34 already identifies) and the overlap coefficient computed exactly for the declared symmetric dual-rail tapped-switch configuration (orthogonal detector modes give kappa_W = 1, and V_std(t) = V_0(1-t) is derived for the actual circuit). The export-correlated geometry-noise band is delivered with its dimensional map and shown to sit roughly sixteen orders below any plausible force-noise floor — suppressed, computed and stated early; the order channel carries the panel. Three verdicts follow, each by a rule fixed before any data were consulted. The exclusion audit (one-dataset-one-role: the Paper 42 calibration dataset is barred) finds every existing class either export-vacuous or — the one export-non-vacuous sibling row, Sears et al. 2012 — bound-non-yielding, because the source states no quantitative residual and the declared transcription discipline forbids manufacturing one: nothing is carved, the surviving set equals the whole band, and this pre-declared fallback outcome is published as such. The empirical-distinctness decision (the generic-CQ collapse branch Paper 41 deferred here), evaluated pointwise over the band against the whole admissible universal-mass-density-CQ comparator class, returns undecided-with-a-specified-discriminant: no performed audit decides it in either direction, and the band's upper sub-band carries a specified, feasible, not-yet-performed differential audit — identical monitored devices with the output chain recorded versus unrecorded at fixed total decay, on which every admissible comparator predicts zero contrast and the kernel does not — with the decision rule for its execution pre-committed (contrast: distinctness earned; null across the discriminable sub-band: that region carved and the collapse verdict fires). The reachability trichotomy: the binding design inequality of any co-designed export channel is lambda_dec times the probe's certified fraction >= 4 deltaV / V_0 (derived for the declared circuit at its optimal tap), and on the supported photonic-switch platform class (Procopio 2015; Rubino 2017; Goswami 2018) the declared floors reach lambda_dec >~ 1.7e-1 at the conservative probe corner (4.7e-2 at the best declared corner): the verdict is (iii-c) — a surviving, partially reachable window — and Paper 44 is unlocked as a design-and-feasibility paper, inheriting the probe specification, the confound budget, and the differential-audit protocol. The retired authority is the Global Sequencer in its dynamical face — the assumption that definite before-and-after must be imposed by a dedicated universal classicalizing agency rather than generated at a computable, testable rate by ordinary record export; its retirement is conditional on P_ker and says so. "Not excluded" is never read as "confirmed"; no gate is crossed; no U3 is claimed — even the surviving window is a window, not a crossing.
Paper 44 of this sequence closed its U3 construction program at readiness: two budgeted experimental designs — a photonic tapped-switch probe and a circuit-QED recorded-versus-unrecorded differential — and an execution map, a pre-registered decision tree assigning every future measured outcome its pre-committed consequence, with scoring left "by whoever holds the data." Paper 47 then closed the theory-side debt ledger, leaving the executed-measurement route as the corpus's only live route to a framework-forced world-side shift. What 44 did not freeze is the layer between data-in-hand and leaf-adjudicated: shot schemas, exclusion policy, blinding order, stopping rule, claim authority. That unfrozen layer is where a post-data analysis authority could still sit — the researcher degrees of freedom and forking paths of the methodological literature, answered in precision physics by blind analysis and pre-registration. This paper — the forty-eighth in the sequence, opening panel of its Execution Program (Papers 48-50) — freezes exactly that layer, before any laboratory exists, as the template of a handover package executable and adjudicable by strangers: every analysis decision the package will ever need is either frozen here or typed as a named pre-data slot behind a failable acceptance gate, so that once a design-specific instance is accepted, no one — including the author, who operates no laboratory and has made that fact load-bearing — retains a seat from which a future outcome could be re-interpreted. Four document-level layers are delivered. Record layer: field-level shot schemas for both designs, with every field and every raw source typed into an audit or scoring partition; an add-only extension rule; ledger, provenance, and dataset-role conventions; and an exclusion grammar under which every excluded run is a first-class recorded event and every exclusion predicate is outcome-unread by construction. Statistics layer: the estimators, the null-carving formula, a leaf-decision normal form (frozen statistics, thresholds, tie rules per leaf), and the stopping rule, inherited verbatim from Papers 43/44 with the arithmetic re-checked; and a four-stage blinding architecture ending in a scoring stage at which everything is readable and nothing is choosable. Authority layer: a claim-authority table over the map's seven leaves and four post-data speaking roles — the data holder scores; the series designer holds no scoring cell; the decisive leaf is licensed only to the data holder's own successor paper — plus the handover normal form H with a seven-condition acceptance gate, a data-existence certificate with a public deposit obligation, a mock-data challenge typed as non-evidence, and pre-committed unlock conditions for the reserved data papers 49-D/50-D. Verdict layer: a six-check closure audit (leaf coverage; arithmetic consistency; partition admissibility; blinding soundness; exclusion soundness; authority totality), each check mechanical against the delivered artifacts, with the pre-committed either-way verdict ProtocolStatus in {closed, gapped} scoring template closure — an executable package exists per design only as an accepted H-instance. The audit is run and every check passes: closed at the template layer, quarantine register empty. Papers 49 (tap-channel exclusion protocol) and 50 (recorded-unrecorded differential protocol) are unlocked to instantiate H per design; only the unlock-conditioned data papers 49-D/50-D will ever score a datum. The retired authority is the Global Statistician — post-data analytic discretion personified: its authority reading is retired by construction (no analysis decision has a post-data seat left to occupy, the per-design property conferred by each accepted H-instance), its innocence reading by the imported methodological record, and its substantive face — one uniquely correct inference framework — is declined, not refuted. Nothing world-side moves: no datum is scored, no band or floor shifts, the feasibility verdicts stay 44's, U3Status is restated not re-scored; if no laboratory ever executes, the program rests where 44 left it — undecided, with an implementable and now administrable discriminant — a complete record, not a failure.
After an experiment runs, exactly two decisions could still be made by a person: does this outcome exclude the theory's declared region, or did an auxiliary — source, tap, detector, calibration — fail, voiding the run instead; and who is licensed to say so. Any protocol that leaves either decision open after data exist has left a seat for a post-hoc refutation authority — the Global Falsifier, the imagined adjudicator who owns the modus tollens. Paper 44 of this sequence closed its photonic tapped-switch probe F_A at pre-registration-grade design ("the IV gate itself remains future laboratory work"); Paper 48 froze the shared adjudication layer as a handover template, typing everything design-specific as named pre-data slots behind a failable acceptance gate. What stands between that design and a laboratory's first shot is a single object: a completed, gate-passing handover instance. This paper — the forty-ninth in the sequence, centre panel of its Execution Program (Papers 48-50) — builds that object, the reference instance H_A, at the executable level the template promised. Delivered: the delta specification from the cited apparatus class (the Goswami-type photonic quantum switch) to 44's tapped configuration, component by component against the frozen budget rows; the schema completion with field-level primitives for every field, extensions add-only and partition-admissible; the frozen analysis pipeline in algorithmic normal form — IV gate, measured-calibration transfer, estimators, and the leaf router implementing 48's tap rows verbatim, under a language-independent rounding convention so floating-point artifacts cannot flip a frozen boundary direction — with the reference implementation shipped as a hash-anchored code appendix (deposited companion file) behind a declared production-scoring boundary; the concrete exclusion rule list with its veto-impact report and a frozen post-exclusion N rule disposing shortfall, surplus, and stopping at once; the S1-S4 blinding runbook; and the mock-data challenge, executed in three parts — a deterministic core exhaustive over every router branch and both tie directions, an adversarial set generated through a recorded, deposited exchange by a party in the auditor role that did not implement the scoring code, and a public-beacon-seeded bulk for totality and determinism. All three parts pass; the routing tables are generated by executing the shipped implementation and are typed non-evidence in the sentence that reports them. The acceptance gate is then run condition by condition on the deposited pair. One finding is published along the way: 48's coverage condition, read literally, would force every per-design instance to claim all seven leaves; the pre-committed completion evaluates coverage over the design's assigned leaf subset plus the shared non-execution leaf — an annotation to 48, never a retro-edit. The verdict is InstanceStatus_A = reference-complete, with an empty instance gap register: every gate condition passes, and what remains is ownership — acceptance transfers when a laboratory signs, auditor-reproducibly, over the instance plus its re-gated extensions; reference-complete never shortens to accepted, and an immutable core guarantees that no admissible extension can change what a null excludes, who may say so, or how boundary cases route. Displayed at the close is the channel's frozen exclusion content — the carve a future null already names, [1.7e-1, 2.1] at the conservative corner — beside the pre-priced Duhem escape map. Nothing is carved, scored, or measured; no band or feasibility verdict moves; the data paper 49-D stays reserved behind its unlock conditions. What retires is the interpretive seat: refutation content as a public, frozen, executable object — falsifiability without a Falsifier.
This paper is the forty-first in a sequence developing an interpretive framework that redescribes physical reality as a causally consistent history of information updates rather than as a collection of independently existing objects. It opens the twelfth grouping — the U3 construction program — and executes a declared mode shift: from audit to adoption. The eleventh grouping (Papers 38-40) audited three independent seams for a framework-forced world-side observable and returned three honest nulls; its capstone proved that adoption, typing, and matched-warrant witnesses alone do not generate U3 (dynamical unification with new physical predictions), and named the additional world-side postulate such content would cost. This paper pays the named cost explicitly, in public, at a typed level. It defines a new claim level, L3-A (adopted world-side dynamics postulate) — declared, parameterized, falsifiable, conditionality-tagged, normalized before prediction — and adopts at that level a common record-history kernel P_ker: one classical-quantum (GKSL-type CQ) generator whose fixed Lindblad operators are export-event operators driven by an adapted, classical, non-future-referencing record-export intensity J_rec, with eligibility thresholds (redundancy floor, retention floor, error ceiling, grain) fixed once at adoption for every system and every experiment, never re-tuned. The same operator family drives three faces — matter-side export decoherence (lambda_dec), geometry-side stochastic sourcing (lambda_diff, connected to Paper 38's variance budget by an adopted export-fluctuation sourcing law), and causal-order classicalization at the derived rate lambda_ord = kappa lambda_dec, with kappa computed from operator overlap, not tuned. Erasing the operator family anywhere erases it everywhere: that, not an analogy among three sectors, is what "common dynamics" means here. The flagship object is the admissible coefficient space A_ker of lambda = (lambda_dec, lambda_diff) under an eight-gate consistency system: complete positivity; operational no-signaling at the declared non-relativistic weak-field regime; the decoherence-diffusion trade-off floor of classical-quantum gravity — imported only after a normal-form placement derivation licenses its hypotheses for the export-localized kernel class, in operator form first and as a benchmarked scalar projection second; Paper 38's energy-budget ceiling through the displayed sourcing bridge; second-law accounting; and three data ceilings (molecular interferometry, mm-scale gravimetry, quantum-switch visibility), each carrying an explicit export-density-audit vacuousness branch. At the declared benchmark the gates leave an explicit admissible point (lambda_dec = 1e-2, lambda_diff = 1e-57 kg^2 s^2 per event), so A_ker is nonempty and the program proceeds. A distinctness lemma separates P_ker definitionally from universal mass-density CQ coupling, with the honest converse stated (empirical distinctness must be earned in Paper 43's rho_J-varying regimes, else the generic-CQ collapse branch fires); a calibration ledger fixes what the single calibration slot may ever buy; recovery conditions RC1/RC2a/RC2b/RC3 are defined here and owed by Paper 42; a closure map guarantees every branch of the grouping — consistency no-go, generic-CQ collapse, trade-off-underdetermined, recovery no-go, suppressed, excluded, or surviving window — ends in a definite, publishable result. The paper claims no gate crossing and no U3; it asserts none of the new physics it adopts; all downstream results are conditional on P_ker. The adopted postulate is genuinely new physics as a commitment (L3-A); the paper's own computations about it are interpretive (L2-Q) on imported physics (L1).
When two arms of an experiment differ in exactly one respect — here, whether a monitoring record is retained or discarded before retention — three decisions remain after the data arrive: were the arms genuinely comparable, or did an ordinary asymmetry confound the pair; does the measured contrast track the recorded arm in the declared sense; and who may say what the outcome means. Mill's method of difference leaves its central clause — "all other circumstances remaining the same" — to judgment; whoever holds that judgment after data exist is a Global Comparator, the matched-pair authority, and the last post-data seat standing in this sequence's Execution Program (the Experimenter retired at Paper 44, the Statistician at 48, the Falsifier at 49). This paper — the fiftieth in the sequence, capstone of the Execution Program (Papers 48-50) — retires it by construction: it builds the reference handover instance H_D for Paper 44's recorded-unrecorded differential on the circuit-QED co-location envelope, at the executable level, and runs Paper 48's acceptance gate on the deposited pair. Delivered: the delta specification from Paper 42's benchmark environment to 44's design (the monitored-register-as-order-control upgrade, the two-regime protocol, the retention-step toggle, the dummy-write hardware); the schema completion to field-level primitives; the certification pipeline as executable functions — Paper 44's two lambda-blind pre-execution campaigns as the S1 gate whose failure is a typed pre-tree disposition (44's "no bound" pre-commitments, never a leaf), and the in-situ audits conjoined into the certificate whose ~40-order comparator-blindness margin is frozen content, cited and never recomputed; the scoring pipeline completing the one slot 48 assigned to this paper — a Ramsey delay-sweep readout-to-rate map over a declared, exactly-enforced grid with symmetric SPAM normalization, frozen edge cases, no clipping anywhere, a frozen per-arm post-exclusion N rule, the signed contrast, and the leaf router implementing 48's differential rows verbatim, including the anti-tracking route (subtyped for diagnosis, never split for authority); the concrete exclusion rule list with its veto-impact template; the S1-S4 runbook; and the mock-data challenge, executed in three parts — a deterministic core exhaustive over all four dispositions, every frozen edge case, and the production/harness boundary itself; an auditor-generated adversarial set produced through a recorded, hash-deposited exchange by a party that did not implement the scoring code, whose first execution caught a genuine pre-freeze defect, corrected before hash fixation and reported; and a public-beacon-seeded bulk. All three parts pass against hand-derivable or rule-derived expectations; the routing tables are generated by executing the shipped implementation and are typed non-evidence in the sentence that reports them. The gate passes condition by condition under the coverage completion inherited from Paper 49; the verdict is InstanceStatus_D = reference-complete with an empty instance gap register, and the Execution Program closes whole: one template, two instances, every leaf of 44's execution map covered by exactly one instance plus the shared non-execution leaf. Displayed at the close is the channel's frozen comparison content: a certified null already fires the carve and the collapse verdict, together, never separately; a certified tracking contrast already licenses distinctness earned and the first FrameworkForcedShift candidacy — declarable only in the data holder's own successor paper, the single reserved cell that is the Comparator's substantive retirement; everything else is the confounded row. Nothing is measured, carved, or scored; no band or feasibility verdict moves; the data papers stay reserved behind mechanical unlocks; reference-complete never shortens to accepted, and an immutable core guarantees no admissible adoption-time extension can change the margin, the sign convention, the anti-tracking route, or a single claim cell. Comparability has audits, tracking has a router, meaning has a table — nothing is left for an authority to judge.
Two working documents that the deposited paper (Draft 4, v1.0; DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22678044; printed title The Asymmetric-Loss Equal-Born Test: a pre-registered search for record-information-dependent optical loss) cites and undertakes to deposit alongside it. They are deposited here as they stood on September 7, 2026, the day Draft 4 was completed, each with a dated deposit note at its head; nothing beneath the note is altered. Supplement 1 — Pre-Bench Closure (September 4, 2026), with postscript layers of September 6 and 7. The arithmetic companion to the paper. Part A runs the no-signalling check on the programme's surviving statement, finds that the normalised form permits superluminal signalling and is excluded, and records the single repair — a loss channel — that leaves the bench prediction numerically unchanged and converts the hypothesis from a nonlinear modification of the Born rule into a linear one. Part B carries the consequences into the protocol: the turnover of −p ln p at p = 1/e and the extended scan that would see it, a fourth signature, the cost of the high-loss points, the total-rate observable, the absorber control with its prediction stated in advance, and the consolidated protocol amendments. Part C makes the structural repairs: locating the branching event, the J-conservation contradiction, and the cost functional, with both candidates carried and the location of the peak left to decide between them. Part D drafts the pre-registration and scores the open tasks. The September-6 layer, headed "Postscript — September 5–6", records the two independent referee passes (one blind, one adversarial), the photon-number-dependent loss map, the derivation of the record criterion put to a third referee instructed to kill it and killed on twelve counts, the pre-registered arms and the correction of a handover error; the addendum of September 7 records the closing of the high-loss row. 17 pages. Supplement 2 — The high-p row: proposal, adversarial pass, and the row as costed (September 7, 2026). The error-budget row for the extended scan (p = 10%, 36.8%, 60% and 70%) that the paper's §9 named as the single item blocking pre-registration of the extended points, kept in the three steps by which it was reached. Appendix A is the first-pass proposal exactly as written for review, errors included. Appendix B is the report of an independent adversarial referee instructed to kill it, verbatim: eight errors and six systematics the first pass had not carried. Appendix C is the row as costed after every finding was re-derived and accepted, with the seven pass criteria written into the pre-registration. Its findings: the reach at the turnover (5σ at λ* ≥ 0.0039, 95% exclusion to 0.0016) stands only under the seven criteria; the bright-phase thermal family has the sign of the predicted anomaly and is bounded by a power-dependence test stated in advance; the far point of the scan moves from 70% to 60%; and the extended scan is research-group metrology, not teaching-laboratory work. 25 pages with its deposit note. The coloured highlights in Supplement 1 are its dated layers (rose, September 6; periwinkle, September 7; sky, the deposit note of September 16, 2026), each explained at its head. The line "Not for deposit" on the cover of Supplement 2 recorded the authors' working practice on September 7 and is superseded by the deposit note above it; the paper's Draft-4 note undertakes to deposit the document. The reconciliation document the paper also cites is the programme's working record, still being expanded, and is available from the authors.