{
 "tm": "1RB0RF_1RC1RF_1LD1RA_---0LE_1LA0LE_0RA0LC",
 "status": "CRYPTID_CANDIDATE",
 "stage": "informal_proof",
 "updated": "2026-10-10",
 "cryptid_flag": true,
 "reason": "Funded stage lemma_x (Dennis 2026-10-10) ended at its pre-agreed exit: the excursion entries do not close into a finite list of safe types, so #10 is flagged CRYPTID_CANDIDATE. Proved this stage (scripts/fs_lemmax.py, seeds 1-2, all PASS): no excursion starts at an even eat (Lemma A); an odd entry has P' <= 1.25*2^B1 (Lemma B); after a slack>=0 eat the slack fails only via a super-cascade (odd, P=2^B1), P>=2^(B1+1), or an even cascade with B(n)<B1 (R2); the even cascade is safe for any residue (EC). Fatal for a finite case analysis: the family sigma0(B)=(3*2^(B-2)-7,[3,0^(B-6),10,0,2]) satisfies everything Lemma X may assume (slack 2, no excursion; entry shape P0=15*2^(B-4)) yet reaches a super-cascade at epoch 2 and a non-normalized eat at epoch 4 for every B>=8 (exact to B=300; TM-confirmed at B=8: non-normalized eat at n=194). So safety depends on the orbit's exact residue counts solving equations like P=2^B: pseudo-random arithmetic along one orbit (ground rule 6). Heuristic for non-halting stays strong: 0 non-normalized eats in >2e9 natural eats and to 1e10 main-orbit epochs; natural entries are cascades (1,769) and w=1 near-cascades (11), never w>=2; the TM even recovers from the family's non-normalized eats (B=8,9,10). Not a kill.",
 "funded": {
  "option": "lemma_x",
  "date": "2026-10-10"
 },
 "next": "Cryptid protocol: AntiHydra-style Rocq rule reduction of the rule layer (proof.md 1-4, 2.5) at low priority, as for the other cryptid candidates. The twin 1RB0RE_1RC1RE_1LD1RA_1LA0LD_0RA0LF_1LD--- shares the verdict."
}