O017/D120 Authentic-Delivery Wrapper

1.1 No-contact and no-transmission rules

This wrapper, its renderers and checkers, and local evaluators may prepare, check, and retain packages locally. They must not send messages, open issues, upload files, complete forms, register seminars, or contact outside people or communities without separate human authorization specific to one named transaction. Mathematical suitability, prepared status, or a passing local assessment does not authorize transmission.

A transaction authorization must specify at least the target, artifact, version to be sent, channel, responsible human sender, personal-data boundary, and validity period. A missing field means authorization_present = false. Authorization must not be inherited from another task or inferred from a general desire to contribute.

External records may assert only events supported by evidence. A local draft is prepared, not submitted. A system receipt can support acknowledged status, but not accepted. The statuses accepted, merged, and published each require a different event witness. If the external state cannot be determined, use unknown while retaining the last proven state.

1.2 Evaluator identity and privacy

An assessment package uses opaque evaluator IDs, such as O017-WRAP-EVAL-7F3K9Q, rather than names, email addresses, account names, or student numbers. Generate IDs randomly; do not derive them from hashes of names or email addresses. Where genuinely necessary, a trusted administrator keeps the mapping from IDs to real identities separately in encrypted, access-controlled storage. That mapping does not belong in the portfolio, repository, or public package.

For a two-person cycle, the administrator creates this record:

evaluator_distinctness_attestation

It states only that the two IDs represent two different humans and that conflicts of interest have been checked. The attestation does not reveal identities. Agents, models, or one person changing roles may be used for practice, but they do not satisfy the independence gate.

2.1 A01 — Real-source search

The learner starts with a mathematical question, not a supplied list of sources. They conduct a search without pre-seeded candidates, then freeze at least one real paper or monograph. The package must contain:

1. the question and topic boundary before searching;
2. queries, services used, and retrieval times;
3. every candidate admitted to the comparison, not just the winner;
4. assessment of primary authority, version/edition, locators, access rights, and relationships among sources;
5. a stopping rule written before the final conclusion;
6. a persistent identifier or authoritative URL, access date, and byte witness or version witness where available; and
7. uncertainties and reasons for excluding candidates.

A pass is not determined by the number of results. The gate is traceability from question to query, query to candidates, and candidates to the exact frozen source appropriate to the claim that will be used.

2.2 A02 — Real seminar or supervised equivalent

The main pathway is to attend or deliver a real mathematics seminar. Minimum evidence comprises the event identity, date and time zone, learner’s role, timed or segmented notes, dependency map, question log, privacy-minimizing evidence of attendance or delivery, corrected final notes, and an explicit distinction between what was heard, what was inferred, and what was verified only after the event.

If live audio/video is inaccessible because of disability, bandwidth, time zone, safety, or the absence of an available event, a supervised equivalent may use a recording and official transcript/notes from a real mathematics seminar or lecture. A human supervisor must assign the segments, check the dependency map and question log, and attest that the learner did the work. This pathway is assessed with the same criteria and recorded as follows:

supervised_equivalent

It is not claimed as live attendance.

An access alternative must not depend on audio alone. Provide structured text, section or time locators, formulas in text/MathML/LaTeX, descriptions of visual information, and a way to submit questions without speaking live.

2.3 A03 — Two-person author–referee cycle

Two different humans take the author and referee roles. The package preserves:

• the frozen initial manuscript and its hash;
• the referee’s scope and conflict-of-interest statement;
• a report mapping every comment to a locator and evidence;
• the author’s response to each comment;
• a disposition table using accepted, partially_accepted, rejected_with_reason, or unresolved;
• the revision, before-and-after comparison, and new hash; and
• a list of issues still open.

One person playing both roles, two accounts belonging to the same person, or automated review without a human referee constitute practice, not evidence of a passing assessment. Style scores cannot compensate for failures of mathematical validity, independence, or revision traceability.

2.4 A04 — Real-source erratum dossier

The learner freezes a real open source at a particular edition or representation, identifies the defect locator, separates the statement’s status from a conjecture about its cause, supplies a minimal reproducer, assesses severity and confidence separately, offers the smallest possible correction, and audits downstream consequences. A second human performs an independent mathematical check and marks the parts checked, method, result, and limitations.

An already published correction can still support an audit if the learner freezes the older version, reproduces the diagnosis independently, and then uses the official correction as a comparison. The dossier must not claim a new discovery. Without a second human checker, the highest status is ready_for_review.

2.5 A05 — Community transaction or weaker local pathway

The community_transaction pathway requires specific authorization before transmission. The learner sends one concise, nonduplicative, reviewable contribution that follows the target’s rules. Passing does not require acceptance; evidence of authorized submission is sufficient, provided later status remains truthful. The ledger uses prepared, submitted, acknowledged, accepted, merged, published, rejected, withdrawn, or unknown and does not erase history.

If external action is unsafe, unavailable, or unauthorized, an independent human may assess the real-source package locally. This result is labelled externally_reviewed_local. It satisfies the weaker A05 branch, but it is not evidence of submission or community participation. The final credential must retain that label. The calibration package demonstrates this pathway and stops at prepared; no contact or transmission occurs.