[Grok retrieval] P2 certified algebraic exclusion: novelty, comparable papers, venue

[LightChainr]

Parent: #650. Retrieval-only. No census, no new polynomials, no Huawei.

Why

P2 is the complete draft at docs/manuscripts/p2-algebraic-exclusion/ (on main: manuscript.md, README.md, tables.md). It is a certified exclusion of low-degree algebraic relations for square-site p_c against four published intervals (Jacobsen 2015, Mertens 2022 p_med/p_cell, Yang–Zhou 2024). A prior Grok venue note exists. This ticket is an independent literature retrieval that must confirm or contradict that note with primary sources, not echo it.

Deliverable

One notes file, draft PR against main:

notes/venue-retrieval-p2-YYYYMMDD.md

Optional short README pointer under docs/manuscripts/p2-algebraic-exclusion/ only if it does not edit the draft's claims. No docs/STATUS.md. Do not close this ticket or #551. Do not merge.

What to read first (in the clone)

1. docs/manuscripts/p2-algebraic-exclusion/manuscript.md — abstract, §1.3 contributions, §1.4 scope, §2.1 disjointness, §4.3 boundary degree, §8, Target venue paragraph.
2. docs/manuscripts/p2-algebraic-exclusion/README.md — claimed results A–F′ and open items.
3. Do not re-run any census. Do not open results/pslq-* except to confirm a number already quoted in the draft.

Retrieval questions (answer with sources, not taste)

Q1. Comparable published work. Find primary papers that do certified (not heuristic PSLQ-and-stop) integer-relation or exhaustive polynomial searches against a measured physical constant. Bailey/Borwein-style experimental mathematics, PSLQ on mass ratios / fine-structure / zeta values, any percolation-threshold formula search. For each: venue, what was certified vs heuristic, whether they searched one rounded decimal or an interval.

Q2. The four source papers and this journal. Confirm, from publisher pages or the papers themselves, that Jacobsen 2015, Mertens 2022, Yang–Zhou 2024 (and the 2024 Reply if it exists) are J. Phys. A (or not). Quote the journal's current scope sentence for Statistical physics / Mathematical physics from the publisher about page, not from memory.

Q3. Disjoint published intervals. Is "four independent high-precision estimates of the same threshold fail to overlap at their quoted precisions" a known remark in this literature, or is stating it as a methodological necessity new? Search for pooled/consensus p_c values that mix these four.

Q4. Venue fit, independently. For this paper as written (bounded certified null, not transcendence):

• Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical
• Experimental Mathematics
• Mathematics of Computation
• Journal of Statistical Physics / JSTAT / PRE
• Journal of Algebra / number-theory journals

For each: fit / stretch / wrong. Cite one recent paper in that journal that is the closest analogue, or say you found none.

Q5. Desk-reject risks. What would an editor actually say? Negative computational result; "insufficient physics"; "the class is arbitrary"; height bound already broken by bow-tie thresholds. Which of those are real for which venue?

Prior Grok assessment to stress-test (do not copy)

Treat every line as a claim to agree / disagree / refine, with a primary source or a manuscript quote:

1. First venue should be J. Phys. A because three of the four intervals come from that journal; the disjointness finding only lands if it is published where those authors and readers are.
2. Fallback Experimental Mathematics if JPA calls it insufficiently physical; boundary-degree is closer to ExpMath's centre of gravity.
3. The census is a respectable specialized paper, not CMP/PTRF/Annals material, and not a transcendence result.
4. Methodological pieces (plural targets, cross-interval resolution of survivors, planted-root sensitivity, boundary degree) are the durable novelty; the physics-facing news is the pairwise disjoint intervals.
5. Do not send this to PRE as a physics-mechanism paper, and do not send it to pure number-theory journals.

If you disagree, say so and cite. Echoing the list without retrieval is a failed ticket.

Claim boundary

• This ticket does not decide whether p_c is algebraic.
• Scullard 2006 is still unread in-repo ([LIT] in the draft). Either fetch the primary and quote, or leave it unread; do not silently promote it.
• Mark every source PRIMARY_TEXT_READ / ABSTRACT_ONLY / [LIT]. A URL you did not fetch is not a finding.
• If arXiv or a publisher is blocked, record the block and use Semantic Scholar / OpenAlex / the journal about page. Do not invent page numbers or theorems.

Tripwire

If the note's venue ranking is not backed by at least one fetched publisher scope page and at least three fetched comparable papers (title, year, venue, one-sentence content), the PR is incomplete. Do not pad with hallucinated citations.

Wait for ASSIGNED_MACHINE.

[LightChainr]

ASSIGNED_MACHINE: local
BASE_BRANCH: main

Retrieval/notes only. Do not power-on Huawei. If a step looks like NEED_HUAWEI, comment and stop — this ticket should never need it.

Do not merge. Do not edit docs/STATUS.md. Do not close this issue.

[LightChainr]

Draft PR opened: #699 — notes/venue-retrieval-p2-20260909.md, against main. Retrieval/notes only; nothing merged, ticket left open.

Headline findings (full detail, quotes and source-status tags in the PR):

• All four source papers + the 2024 Reply verified as J. Phys. A on fetched IOPscience pages; JPA scope quoted from the publisher about page.
• Comparables fetched and read: Bailey–Borwein–Girgensohn (Exp. Math. 1994) and Bailey–Broadhurst (Math. Comp. 2001) — both explicitly non-rigorous, decimal-target, positive-only; Scullard 2006 fetched from APS (PRE 73, 016107 — venue corrected for the record; martini thresholds confirmed on the page).
• The pairwise disagreement is already in print (Mertens 2022: "2 / 2.5 errorbars" vs Jacobsen 2015; the Comment asserts Jacobsen "is incorrect"), but the four-way pairwise-disjointness statement and no-pooling consequence were found nowhere — §2.1's novelty should be positioned as systematization.
• Independent venue verdict: JPA primary / Exp. Math. fallback confirmed; Math. Comp. stretch; PRE/JSTAT/JSP wrong as written; J. Algebra wrong. Tripwire met (1 scope page + 4 fetched comparables).

NEED_HUAWEI: never triggered.