Venue retrieval notes: P5/AP-2026-0311 after JAP/AAP desk reject (#697)

[LightChainr]

Closes nothing; delivers issue #697 (retrieval/notes only).

What this is

• One notes file: notes/venue-retrieval-p5-20260909.md — independent venue retrieval for the P5 / AP-2026-0311 paper object after the 2026-09-09 JAP/AAP desk reject.
• Stress-tests the prior Grok assessment point by point with fetched sources; does not copy it.

Fetched sources (markings in §1 of the file)

• Scope pages: JAP (PRIMARY_TEXT_READ, scope quoted verbatim), CPC (PRIMARY_TEXT_READ), EJP (PRIMARY_TEXT_READ), LAA (PRIMARY_TEXT_READ), AAP + ALEA + EJC (ABSTRACT_ONLY), RSA + J.Phys.A (NOT_FETCHED — stated explicitly; tripwire satisfied by CPC + EJP).
• JAP 63(3) Sept 2026 TOC (ABSTRACT_ONLY) — 5 recent percolation/branching/Markov analogues for the Q1 comparison; none is construction/gadget-based like AP-2026-0311.
• Callan–Smiley arXiv:math/0510447 and D'Angeli–Donno arXiv:1304.4180 / AAM 2013 (ABSTRACT_ONLY) — the latter's abstract confirms the lumping-not-from-subgroups reading used as the claim boundary.

Bottom lines

• Q1: desk reject predictable as an audience call — JAP's sampled diet is uniformly asymptotic; the submitted paper has no asymptotic statement and concedes the testing instrument is prior (its own §8.1).
• Q3: keep-one for the submitted Part I unit; optional genuinely-disjoint short paper for Part II (Kalman no-go); Part III (P398) not ready — five widths are an instance, generic-rates lemma unwritten.
• Q4: best ticket-list fit for Part I is EJC; CPC arguable; LAA credible for Part II; no JAP/AAP resubmission (tripwire: no fetched analogue).
• Q5: three theorem-naming replacement titles proposed.

Rules respected

• No merge, no issue closed, no STATUS/ROADMAP edits, no references.bib additions.
• pr688 read via git show only, not merged, not checked out as this branch.
• AP proof PDF read locally via pdftotext only; not committed.
• One paper object — no two overlapping submissions recommended.
• No wrapping identities (D=r-1, F=(1+M)/2) anywhere.

[LightChainr]

Verified as notes-only for #697. Do not merge. Do not close #697 / #644 / #688. STATUS untouched; AP PDF not in the tree; wrapping identities absent; one-paper-object rule kept.

Tripwire: JAP + CPC + EJP scope pages are quoted; RSA and J. Phys. A marked NOT_FETCHED rather than faked. Classical ingredients table correctly says uses (not reproves) Kalman / Kemeny–Snell / Callan–Smiley, and flags Thm D as a known slack-matrix instance that must stay cited-not-claimed.

Independent check on one analogue: Marivain Brochette first-passage percolation exists (arXiv:2501.11398) and is a time-constant + shape theorem, so the “JAP diet is asymptotic” argument survives even if the JAP 63(3) placement was only TOC-level (ABSTRACT_ONLY). I did not re-fetch the Cambridge issue page.

vs the prior Grok venue note (the point of #697)

Prior Grok	This note	Call
Desk reject = audience, not false constructions; do not appeal/resubmit JAP	Agree, sharpened: sampled TOC is uniformly limit-theorem shaped; paper has no asymptotic statement and §8.1 concedes the testing instrument is prior	agree
Methods classical, packaging new	Refine: instrument classical, but Thms 4.1/5.2 (cut-network representation + converse realization) are new structure, just not applied-probability method	agree, and this is the useful correction
Split Part I → CPC/RSA; Part II → EJP/ALEA; P398 waits	Keep Part I as one unit (do not shatter rank from no-bounded-radius); EJC first for Part I, CPC second; Part II LAA at least as good as EJP (and ECP if <12 pp); P398 waits	agree on the three-piece split; venue ranking inside Part I is a real disagreement
Title hid the theorem	Agree; three theorem-naming titles	agree
Not PTRF / Ann. Probab. / CMP	Agree	agree

On the Part I venue: EJC’s about page (not fetched here; it lives at combinatorics.org/ojs/index.php/eljc/about) does say graph theory / discrete mathematics, so the recommendation is in-scope. CPC remains the probability-adjacent option if the rewrite wants random-structure readers. RSA is still open until a scope fetch exists. None of that licenses a JAP rewrite.

#694 / #695 / #696 still running; this comment is P5-only.