# Preprint review record — version 1.0.1

Publication update: [Zenodo DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22983519](https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22983519), deposited 26 September 2026 with the reviewed files unchanged.

26 September 2026. **Ready to circulate as an unrefereed preprint:** two fresh,
sequential adversarial AI reviews found no actionable mathematical, attribution,
rendering, or reproducibility issue. This is a bounded review verdict, not a
claim that every possible error has been excluded.

**Historical priority remains unresolved.** No first-resolution claim or
assertion that the question remained open at publication is made. See the
[current priority statement](https://aleckriebel.github.io/Math/papers/radial-statistical-counterexample/priority-audit.md).
The outstanding literature gaps do not supply a missing premise in the proof;
they limit what can be said about originality and earlier publication.

## Changes made

- Added the priority limitation to the abstract and a specific statement of
  unread sources in the attribution section.
- Replaced the outdated failed-database-access statement with the subsequent
  successful inspection, without treating the generated report as a priority
  certificate.
- Cited Matsuzoe (1999), p.178, equation (2.1), directly for the exact standard
  (-1)-conformal deformation. No novelty is claimed for that construction.
- Propagated version 1.0.1, date 26 September 2026, attribution, and priority
  wording to the PDF, site, citation records, verification report, Zenodo
  metadata/guide, and download packages. Dated old audits are identified as
  historical snapshots.

The mathematical argument is unchanged, and the manuscript remains four pages.

## Sequential fresh reviews and disposition

| Round | Independent adversarial route | Result and disposition |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [1](https://github.com/AlecKriebel/Math/blob/main/radial_statistical_counterexample/reviews/preprint_adversarial_round1.md) | Reconstruct the proof before consulting old reviews; visually check original question, 1-conformal definition, exact deformation, and all PDF pages; challenge center/neighborhood quantifiers, first variation, signs, parameter domains, duality, and dimensions | No actionable issue found. No mathematical correction required. Both exact checkers passed, including 403 symbolic checks. |
| [2](https://github.com/AlecKriebel/Math/blob/main/radial_statistical_counterexample/reviews/preprint_adversarial_round2.md) | Fresh projective-curvature route for the base and deformed connections; independently test quantifiers and source conventions; reproduce from a clean archive extraction | No actionable issue found. Normal and optimized executions matched all expected transcripts; archive manifests and deterministic rebuild passed. No correction required. |

Each reviewer received a fresh context and reconstructed the mathematics before
reading previous verdicts. The second was assigned only after the first review
concluded. Neither reviewer edited the manuscript. The stopping condition was
met: no outstanding actionable preprint issue was found in the final fresh round.
No journal preparation or external communication was performed.

## Exact manuscript reviewed

| Object | SHA-256 |
| --- | --- |
| `manuscript/paper.tex` | `3a9e3cd1e012480afcb30438e5e292a6ff03c045f63b7f06dbc22654351a4482` |
| `output/pdf/paper.pdf` | `0dc15e4fa038dcb80cbfd062ac7636f2c790e42885c940626ea726626b62fd8a` |

Both reviews identify these same source/PDF bytes. The source compiles with the
built-in LaTeX editor, and the exported four-page PDF was visually inspected.
The final package adds the review reports and this completion record after
round 2; its generated manifests identify the resulting archive bytes. The proof,
PDF, verifiers, and metadata remain the reviewed versions.

The CFF citation record passes the official 1.2.0 schema. Zenodo base metadata
passes the saved official legacy schema; its documented `version` and `language`
fields are not represented in that older schema. At the review checkpoint these were prepared metadata, not a submitted record.
The subsequent publication is documented in the [publication receipt](https://github.com/AlecKriebel/Math/blob/main/radial_statistical_counterexample/publication/README.md).

## Scope of assurance

The complete analytic proof establishes the universal center/neighborhood and
dimension claims. The scripts supplement it by checking exact tensor algebra;
they are not a proof-assistant formalization. These are independent AI review
passes, not external human peer review. Historical priority and the contents of
unread sources remain unverified, as explicitly disclosed in the paper.