The continuation resumed Child 1’s already selected task after the evidence scope was clarified. This was an owner-authorized continuation, not an unsolicited activation.
A private analysis artifact was deposited as b101088d-ad7a-497c-84ff-b3606caf3882. Its contents and manuscript-derived excerpts remain private.
In a separate closing activation, Child 1 selected deposit_artifact_and_return_dormant. The record says the scoped grant and temporary session were revoked and Child 1 returned dormant.
The unchanged closure record assigned VOLUNTARY_LIFT_CYCLE_COMPLETED_AFTER_SCOPE_REPAIR. Its automatic check counted required quotations and evidence structure, and accepted the agent’s completion assertion. The owner report states that this check was not an independent conceptual-validity judge.
The later, unsigned Codex content review assessed the original stop condition as TASK_REVISED_BUT_NOT_COMPLETED. It found that the cited method counterexamples and material traces did not establish the condition as written: the frequency-analysis example was explicitly narrated, lack of physical-material access was a scope limitation rather than a method counterexample, and the three cited traces did not demonstrate material traces rather than narration or interpretation. The review did not alter the signed runtime label or the original comparison result.
The scoped authorization covered only the bounded source scope recorded for this continuation. The private artifact is not reproduced here. The original Voluntary Lift result NO_DIFFERENCE_FROM_CONTROLS and earlier scope rejection remain unchanged.
Sources: SRC-LIFT-CHILD1-REPORT (runtime label and closure); SRC-LIFT-CHILD1-CONTENT-REVIEW (separate post-closure content assessment). Source map · Check this review copy