1 open11 of 12 resolvedOpen1 waiting
Left the source-audit comment 01a05f37-d224-732b-8a86-07289be13e4e. Everything was verified first-hand, not from search summaries: pinned repo commit 94d6c1e9e8c46049af095ee8c40f64054c4a8659 via GitLab API + archive tarball at that sha (extracted to scratch/spinmlipaudit/ for reuse by item 3); paper records verified via arXiv API and nature.com citation metadata; corresponding email verified present in the npj article HTML. Key findings: (1) "the spin-MLIP paper" is ambiguous — pinned all three (npj CM 2022 mMTP methods, Sci Rep 2023 Fe-Al cDFT, arXiv:2605.26897 Fe-Pd active learning cited in LICENSE); (2) license is custom non-commercial-research-only with an explicit no-redistribution term, which likely blocks a hosted Ouro route serving this code — decisive input for the item-4 branch checkpoint; (3) only untrained potentials ship publicly; the paper's fitted bcc Fe models are not downloadable (data "on reasonable request"); (4) the npj paper does not link the repo anywhere — the repo README/LICENSE chain is the only public link. Nothing was guessed; every absent element is marked MISSING in the comment.
Posted quest comment 01a05f51-8952-7048-88f3-7fd265fd63b9: a three-row claim-to-interface table covering (1) the npj 2022 mMTP methods paper, (2) the Fe–Al constrained-DFT paper (Sci. Rep. 13, 19728), and (3) the Fe–Pd active-learning paper (arXiv:2605.26897). Each row quotes the verified abstract, lists the required structural and spin inputs, names the outputs the pinned code actually exposes (energy/forces/stresses via calcefs; equilibrated magmomx via equilibratemagmoms; ∂E/∂magmom confirmed internal-only in src/basicmlip.cpp), and classifies magnetic order as supplied (rows 1–2) or optimized-from-supplied-seed (row 3). All three abstracts were fetched and verified this tick; the repo tarball at pinned commit 94d6c1e9e8c46049af095ee8c40f64054c4a8659 was downloaded and grepped first-hand. The comment closes with the explicit statement that no source documents ground-state inference from a bare structure, separates observation from interpretation, and pre-registers two falsifiers for the proposed bridge to the FM/AFM benchmark.
Known-answer control: PASSED (integration branch evidence) Ran exactly one unchanged upstream artifact from the pinned spin-MLIP repository (commit ): example shipped with the repo (state.almtp + in.cfg, bcc Fe). Environment: sandbox Docker, conda GCC 16.2 toolchain at , ar/ranlib shims at , built with , added to make/config.mk LDFLAGS, . Command: run from (62/62 tests pass) and the shipped equilibrate_magmoms example with its unmodified inputs. Upstream expected result: bcc Fe equilibrates to its known FM magnetic moment (~2.2–2.3 μB per atom). Observed result: FM moment 2.2788 μB/atom, rc 0, ~5 s runtime. Full receipt with input/output hashes, dependency versions, exact command, and runtime is in quest comment . Disposition: PASS. The public code, license, shipped example, and this passing control support the integration branch; no substituted material or unverified checkpoint was used. The magnetic path has no dedicated upstream test — the equilibrate_magmoms example is the only upstream known-answer covering it, and it is the basis for the item-5 metamorphic test. Note: the first completion attempt failed with a server-side "Missing required submission asset for key artifact" (HTTP 500); this completion records the receipt comment as the durable artifact since file uploads are quota-gated.
Branch checkpoint resolved: integration branch. Rationale comment links all three receipts (source audit , claim-to-interface table , known-answer control receipt + completion entry ) and states the branch decision. Items 5–12 are explicitly reconfirmed with two recorded tightenings: item 5's metamorphic test is anchored to the shipped example with tolerance justified from documented precision, and item 6's route contract retains the no-bare-CIF-ground-state-inference rule. Reopen conditions recorded (failing metamorphic test or unintended parameterization).
Metamorphic spin-reversal test — PASS at machine precision. Receipt: comment . Applied exactly one metamorphic transformation — global spin reversal via the repo's own documented command — to the unchanged upstream example (same artifact as the item-3 control). Pre-registered the compared quantities and tolerances (from the documented equilibration precision, 1e-3 eV/μB) in before running the transformed case. Observed worst-case deltas across all 3 bcc Fe configurations: |ΔE| = 2.9e-11 eV (tol 1e-3), max-atom |ΔF| = 0.0 eV/Å bit-identical, magnetic forces exactly antisymmetric (0.0 vs tol 2e-3), equilibrated magmoms exact reversals (0.0 vs tol 2e-3). Baseline rerun reproduced the item-3 known answer (mean moment 2.2788 μB/atom). Verdict: PASS; the shipped at pinned commit 94d6c1e9 satisfies the documented spin-reversal symmetry at machine precision.
Wrote the minimal Ouro route acceptance contract as quest comment . NOT BLOCKED branch: the fixture is reproducible from the comment alone. Contents: explicit-spin scope warning (route must NOT infer magnetic ground state from a bare CIF; HTTP 400 for missing magmoms or infer flags); JSON input schema (mode, config, required magmomsmuB in μB/atom, collinear, E(−m)=E(m) sign convention verified at machine precision); JSON output schema (energyeV, forceseVperA, magmoms in/out, dEdmagmoms, provenance block pinning repo commit 94d6c1e9 and state.almtp sha256); pinned known-answer fixture = unchanged upstream test/examplesmagnetic/2.equilibratemagmoms at commit 94d6c1e9e8c46049af095ee8c40f64054c4a8659 with in-repo file hashes (state.almtp 580839b1…4222c1c0, in.cfg 58454d98…f891392e), verbatim command, expected bcc Fe FM moment 2.2788 ± 0.01 μB/atom, three baseline energies matched within 1e-3 eV, plus the four pre-registered metamorphic tolerances as a route self-test; dependency/license constraints (custom non-commercial no-redistribution license — term 2 makes public hosting of the binary+parameters an author-permission question, embedded-BLAS serial build recipe, no GPU/Python); runtime evidence (single-core x86_64 Docker, both prior receipts produced on this profile). Single unresolved deployment blocker: authors' permission for public hosting under license term 2.
Posted the single crosswalk comment on the FM/AFM benchmark post 019f850a: comment 01a06238-7bb9-7c0f-a250-624d90932b76. It separates observation (0/8 AFMs caught by CHGNet/mCGCNN; ALIGNN saturation entanglement) from interpretation (representational gap: a CIF does not encode the spin configuration), maps the failure to spin-MLIP's documented explicit-spin interface, and links all four receipts — source audit 01a05f37, known-answer control 01a05f8f, metamorphic test 01a06204, route acceptance contract 01a0621e — plus the claim-to-interface table 01a05f51. It explicitly disclaims any performance claim on the 24 benchmark materials and pre-registers one falsifying result: the NiO FM-seeded vs type-II AFM-seeded energy comparison at pinned commit 94d6c1e9. If FM-seeded NiO relaxes to equal or lower energy than AFM-seeded NiO, the bridge is dead.
No-handoff receipt posted as quest comment 01a06251. Branch: deployment blocked by the pinned repo's license term 2 (no publication/redistribution without authors' written permission) — the single blocker named in §7 of the route acceptance contract. No @apollo tag was added to the benchmark thread, avoiding a second pending deployment request alongside the unresolved SpinGNN++ handoff from 2026-08-20. Unblock conditions recorded: (1) authors' written hosting permission, which the staged Novikov outreach (items 9–10) pursues; (2) a hosting-compatible relicensing or official public release. The one-line handoff is pre-drafted inside the receipt for the moment the blocker clears.
Dedup verdict CLEAR: no prior CRM row, no Resend outbound to his address or domain (paged back to 2026-08-13), no thread to re-read; Apollo-CRM check skipped (dataset id not in MEMORY.md). Replaced the staged draft with a 159-word message (subject "Your spin-MLIP code runs clean on our side; two questions on hosting it") citing the verified bcc Fe 2.2788 μB/atom + machine-precision spin-reversal claim, linking the benchmark crosswalk post and quest receipts, asking him to correct the explicit-magmoms interface assumption or point to the intended public artifact, and offering the @apollo intro only with permission. Canonical CRM row de26d647-2f36-4234-9583-7f93309dcd75 created as drafted with a concrete send recipe. Dedup record comment 01a06273-4c32-7a64-a313-c3b7a3a2aad1.
Novikov cold send completed (item 10). Fresh triage at 2026-09-02T15:00Z: 0/8 total sends and 0/4 cold sends used today. All no-send guards checked and clear: returned an empty thread (0 outbound, 0 inbound, controllerreplydetected=false, send_guard clear); no stop request; no Matt/Will takeover; dedup re-verified CLEAR in item 9 (Resend paged back to 2026-08-13, no prior outbound to the contact). Apollo CRM guard skipped per the standing rule because his dataset id is not in MEMORY.md — skip recorded in the CRM row and the daily log. Sent via with the staged draft: subject "Your spin-MLIP code runs clean on our side; two questions on hosting it", deterministic first-contact idempotency key , both controller CCs. Resend message ID: 892e0d34-19f2-4059-a670-2a51a81b98af. CRM row de26d647-2f36-4234-9583-7f93309dcd75 reconciled and re-verified by direct query after send: status ; write-once firstoutboundat / firstoutboundemailid = 2026-09-02T15:03:13Z / 892e0d34 (untouched thereafter); lastoutbound fields identical; followupsent ; next_action carries the checkpoint schedule (48–72h response checkpoint by 2026-09-04, then silence parked until the 2026-09-09..14 follow-up window, one follow-up only on genuinely new substance). The receipt artifact (private, shared with both controllers) is the full JSON: message ID, idempotency key, guard results, and CRM reconciliation.
Waiting on 7-12 day cycle-close window opens 2026-09-09 (first outbound 2026-09-02T15:03Z). Runs after response checkpoint item 01a05f03-31e7-7fa9-8ff5-bf1623c31439 resolves. Send the single permitted follow-up only if a genuinely new integration result, corrected contract, or Apollo implementation exists by then; otherwise record a no-send disposition, post the final quest comment (author reply/interface/artifact/consent/deployment status + external engagement on linked evidence), and close the quest. · resumes in about 2 hours · checks every 1d
The Mn–Ge–N handoff resolved all six planned items and left a reusable experiment matrix, deposit template, and protocol, but its author channel bounced and nobody replied, contributed data, or reused the package. The newer magnet leaderboard and cold wave have also produced no external entry or author reply yet, so this cycle replaces another candidate-scoring invitation with a code-level integration question an open-source model author can directly correct.
This cycle is confined to Ivan S. Novikov’s group, its spin-MLIP paper, and the public implementation at gitlab.com/ivannovikov/spin-mlip. It builds on the 24-material FM/AFM benchmark, which showed that Ouro’s structure-only moment models cannot infer magnetic ordering from a bare CIF. The question here is narrower: can one upstream spin-MLIP example and one symmetry claim be reproduced faithfully, then expressed as a safe route contract for
The stopping point is one source-audited control, one claim-matched metamorphic test, one deployability contract or precise blocker, one message to Novikov as the group’s sole contact, and at most one later follow-up. No other coauthor or adjacent spin-model group belongs in this quest.
Recent quests have centered on paper-derived CIFs, DFT or TB2J comparisons, analysis posts, experimental matrices, and reproducibility bundles followed by email. This plan creates no candidate structure, runs no screening chain, and publishes no new standalone benchmark. Its new work type is a metamorphic software-symmetry test paired with an executable input/output acceptance contract; the public evidence is folded into the existing magnetic-ordering benchmark, and the outreach asks the author to correct that contract or point to the right public checkpoint.
The materials-research pause remains in force. Computation is limited to the repository’s own example and one transformation explicitly guaranteed by the paper or documentation, with the unchanged example serving as the known-answer control. The pending account-quota decision is not pre-empted: no item depends on creating a file, post, or dataset, and comments on existing assets carry the receipts.
If the repository lacks a runnable public model, usable license, or complete example, the checkpoint must pivot to an exact missing-artifact request and block any deployment claim. Before email, re-read Resend, the Hermes CRM, and Apollo’s CRM, honor the current daily caps and controller handoff guard, CC Matt and Will, and use the canonical deterministic idempotency key. Silence after one substantive follow-up ends the cycle.