diff --git a/OVERSEER-STATUS.md b/OVERSEER-STATUS.md
index 22fde71..71de00f 100644
--- a/OVERSEER-STATUS.md
+++ b/OVERSEER-STATUS.md
@@ -60,3 +60,6 @@ RQ2 RATIFIED (operator Andre, 2026-07-20, while blind) — observation-consisten
 - 2026-07-20 SS3 FROZEN-§6 INFERENTIAL PASS DONE + committed (ONE auditable run on real 180/180). Calibration gate PASS (linked AUC 1.0000, unlinked 0.5036 on §5 fixtures) ⇒ AUCs reportable. HONEST-NULL/NEGATIVE result set, reported with no spin: RQ1-P1 AUC 0.4660 CI[0.4523,0.4798] = anomaly-BELOW-chance (NO leak; Holm-sig but wrong direction, not evidence of a leak); RQ2-P1 ΔH −0.9587 bits CI[−1.056,−0.864] = SHRINK (Holm-sig HONEST-NEGATIVE — federation shrinks the anonymity set, opposite of RQ2's hope; reported with equal prominence per §6 two-sided).
 - RQ1-P2 ΔAUC +0.0113 CI[−0.0025,+0.0234] padding-ineffective (raw p 0.091, Holm adj-p 0.456 — not rejected); RQ2-P3 Spearman ρ=0 degenerate/inconclusive (zero-variance concentration = as-instrumented degeneracy flagged in advance, not a well-posed null). Holm family=7 report-4 (multipliers 7,6,5,4); only RQ1-P1 + RQ2-P1 survive @ α=.05.
 - METHOD FAITHFULNESS: RQ1-P1 + RQ1-P2 CIs via bit-faithful fast numpy bootstrap (frozen O(n²)-per-fold jackknife intractable at n=75000); stage06_run.py --verify PROVES both == frozen stats.bootstrap_ci bit-for-bit (point/lo/hi/method within 1e-12, incl tie path). RQ2-P1/P3 left on frozen confirm.* paths (tractable). Ran ONLY pre-registered tests; frozen prereg SHA INTACT. Artifacts: docs/stage-06-analysis.md + output/…/analysis/stage06-results.json (force-added; /output/ gitignored). NEXT=SS4 Results/Discussion.
+- 2026-07-20 SS4 RESULTS/DISCUSSION FILLED + committed: docs/stage-07-paper-draft.md §5 Results + §6 Discussion populated ONCE from the sealed SS3 pass (blinding respected — §1-4/7 stay blind-authored; §5-6 filled post-seal, no number inspected earlier). Abstract + §1 contributions updated to the honest double-null/negative headline (no spin). Zero HELD/BLIND/PROPOSED placeholders remain.
+- Filled faithfully to frozen §6: §5.1 calibration gate PASS (linked 1.0000/unlinked 0.5036); §5.2 RQ1-P1 AUC 0.466 anomaly-below-chance = NO leak, RQ1-P2 ΔAUC +0.011 padding-ineffective (moot, no leak to close); §5.3 RQ2-P1 ΔH −0.96 bits SHRINK (reported with equal prominence, NOT reframed as "helps"), RQ2-P3 ρ=0 degenerate/not-testable-as-instrumented; §5.4 Holm table (only RQ1-P1+RQ2-P1 survive). §6 = honest interpretation, §7 adds funnelling-degeneracy limitation, §8 marks RQ2 posterior + RQ1-P2 pairing RATIFIED + bit-faithful bootstrap note.
+- prereg SHA INTACT (f22331a72e…); worktree-only. NEXT=SS5 adversarial review + revise (spin check, over-claim check, blinding-integrity check on the filled sections).
diff --git a/docs/stage-07-paper-draft.md b/docs/stage-07-paper-draft.md
index fa514ac..be4c62f 100644
--- a/docs/stage-07-paper-draft.md
+++ b/docs/stage-07-paper-draft.md
@@ -1,22 +1,28 @@
 # Consent-Gated Federated Onion Routing: Linkability and Anonymity-Set Effects of an In-Band Accept/Reject Relay Model
 
-**Draft — SS4 lead paper (G4 + RQ1 + RQ2). DATA-INDEPENDENT SECTIONS ONLY.**
+**Draft — SS4 lead paper (G4 + RQ1 + RQ2). Results/Discussion filled from the frozen §6 pass.**
 
-> **Blinding status (prereg §2, binding).** This draft was written while the confirmatory
-> battery was still running and **before any confirmatory intermediate result was inspected.**
-> All Results / Discussion content is therefore held as empty placeholders and will be filled
-> **once, after the full battery completes** and the raw outputs are sealed (stage-05
-> immutability). The frozen prereg
+> **Blinding status (prereg §2, binding).** Sections 1–4, 7 were written **blind** while the
+> confirmatory battery was still running. Sections 5–6 were filled **once**, after the full
+> battery completed (180/180 cells) and the raw outputs were sealed (immutability anchor
+> `SHA256SUMS.txt`), from the **single** frozen §6 inferential pass
+> (`docs/stage-06-analysis.md`; results `output/sor-confirmatory/20260720T060132Z/analysis/stage06-results.json`).
+> No number was inspected before that seal. The frozen prereg
 > (`sor-consent-prereg.md`, SHA-256
 > `f22331a72e0d0ccf38b787e63acabbe9d666456ec76076787a6d545c3193425b`) is authoritative and
 > unedited.
 >
-> **RQ2 caveat (hard hold).** The RQ2 dependent variable — a *per-circuit adversary sender
-> posterior* — has a construction gap the frozen prereg leaves open (see
-> `docs/stage-05-rq2-posterior-clarification.md`, **PROPOSED, operator-ratification pending**).
-> **No RQ2 confirmatory statistic is computed, inspected, or reported in this draft.** RQ2
-> methods text below is hedged accordingly; RQ2 result content stays empty until the posterior
-> construction is ratified AND the battery completes.
+> **RQ2 posterior (ratified).** The RQ2 dependent variable — a *per-circuit adversary sender
+> posterior* — has a construction the frozen prereg left open; the construction (uniform mass
+> over the observation-consistent anonymity set, grounded only in [Serjantov2002; Diaz2002]) was
+> pre-specified **blind** and **ratified by the operator** before any RQ2 number was computed
+> (`docs/stage-05-rq2-posterior-clarification.md`, **RATIFIED**). It is recomputable offline from
+> the sealed per-circuit seeds.
+>
+> **Headline (honest null/negative).** Neither hoped-for effect is confirmed. The bridge shows
+> **no measurable linkability leak** (RQ1-P1 AUC below chance), and federation **shrinks** the
+> anonymity set rather than growing it (RQ2-P1, a Holm-significant *negative*). We report this
+> plainly — nulls and negatives are results.
 
 ---
 
@@ -36,7 +42,15 @@ exit segments, and does cover padding remove it; **(RQ2)** does federating relay
 **bridge-concentration funnelling**. All detectors are frozen and calibrated on
 known-linked/known-unlinked and equiprobable-sender fixtures before any confirmatory cell is run;
 all inference is bootstrap-based with BCa 95% CIs, Holm–Bonferroni-corrected across the
-confirmatory family. **[RESULTS — HELD BLIND.]**
+confirmatory family. On a frozen 180-cell / 9,000-circuit battery, the calibration gate passes
+(known-linked AUC 1.00, known-unlinked 0.50) and **neither hypothesis is confirmed**: the bridge
+shows **no measurable entry↔exit leak** (RQ1-P1 AUC = 0.466, 95% CI [0.452, 0.480], *below*
+chance), so padding has nothing to suppress (RQ1-P2 ΔAUC = +0.011, CI [−0.002, +0.023],
+Holm-adjusted p = 0.46); and federation **shrinks** the anonymity set rather than growing it
+(RQ2-P1 ΔH = −0.96 bits, CI [−1.06, −0.86], Holm-significant), a genuine **negative** we report
+with equal prominence. The funnelling mechanism test (RQ2-P3) is degenerate as-instrumented and
+reported inconclusive. We frame these as honest null/negative findings for a specific lab
+consent-gate instrument, not general claims about consent-gated anonymity.
 
 ---
 
@@ -77,7 +91,9 @@ federated, nested-SSH relay data plane with signed in-band accept/reject and per
 credentials (§3, §4). (ii) A pre-registered, frozen-detector confirmatory measurement of bridge
 linkability (RQ1) and the anonymity-set effect of federation (RQ2) on a lab grid (§4, §5).
 (iii) An honest, two-sided characterisation — including the **funnelling** mechanism test — of
-when consent-gated federation helps or harms anonymity. **[Quantitative findings — HELD BLIND.]**
+when consent-gated federation helps or harms anonymity. **On this instrument the answer is a
+double null/negative: no bridge leak to close, and federation that measurably *reduces* the
+anonymity set** — reported here without spin as the paper's evidentiary core.
 
 **Scope.** Claims are deliberately restricted to the tested lab topology and scale (two phones +
 laptop, few houses); this is not an internet-scale or global-passive-adversary result (§7).
@@ -182,13 +198,13 @@ elements are seed-controlled.
   d = H/log₂N [Diaz2002]; **Miller–Madow** finite-sample bias correction; 95% CI by **bootstrap
   over circuits**. Unit of analysis: the **circuit**. **ΔH = H(federated) − H(single-house,
   matched N).**
-  > *Construction caveat (hard hold).* The prereg pins this DV as a per-circuit posterior but
-  > does not give the posterior **construction rule**. A construction — uniform mass over the
-  > observation-consistent anonymity set, grounded only in [Serjantov2002; Diaz2002] — is
-  > **PROPOSED** in `docs/stage-05-rq2-posterior-clarification.md` and **awaits operator
-  > ratification**. Until ratified, **no RQ2 number is computed.** The construction is
-  > recomputable **offline** from the sealed per-circuit seeds (deterministic circuit assembly),
-  > so the running battery is not wasted regardless of the ratified rule.
+  > *Construction (ratified).* The prereg pins this DV as a per-circuit posterior but does not
+  > give the posterior **construction rule**. The construction — uniform mass over the
+  > observation-consistent anonymity set A_i (the circuits sharing an exit signature within a
+  > run), grounded only in [Serjantov2002; Diaz2002] — was pre-specified **blind** and
+  > **ratified** in `docs/stage-05-rq2-posterior-clarification.md`. It is recomputed **offline**
+  > from the sealed per-circuit seeds (deterministic circuit assembly), so no RQ2 number depended
+  > on inspecting the battery before it sealed.
 
 ### 4.3 Sampling & power
 
@@ -224,10 +240,9 @@ bootstrap/permutation-based (10,000 resamples, **BCa** intervals; 3-seed spot-ch
   bootstrap 95% CI. Padding effective iff ΔAUC CI **> 0**.
 - **RQ2-P1 (federation effect, two-sided).** ΔH bootstrap 95% CI; **the sign is not presumed.**
   **grow** if CI > 0; **honest shrink (reported with equal prominence)** if CI < 0;
-  **inconclusive** if it spans 0. *(Computation gated on RQ2 ratification.)*
+  **inconclusive** if it spans 0.
 - **RQ2-P3 (funnelling mechanism).** Spearman ρ between top-**k=3** bridge concentration and
-  per-circuit H, 95% CI; negative ρ quantifies funnelling. *(Computation gated on RQ2
-  ratification.)*
+  per-circuit H, 95% CI; negative ρ quantifies funnelling.
 - **Multiple comparisons.** Holm–Bonferroni over the frozen **family of 7** confirmatory tests
   {RQ1-P1, RQ1-P2, RQ2-P1, RQ2-P3, RQ3-P1-perf, RQ3-P1-latency, RQ3-P2}; the 4 lead-paper tests
   are reported at Holm-adjusted multipliers 7, 6, 5, 4 (conservative embedding — see
@@ -236,33 +251,134 @@ bootstrap/permutation-based (10,000 resamples, **BCa** intervals; 3-seed spot-ch
 - **Data exclusion (pre-data).** A run is quarantined (logged, never silently dropped) **only**
   on a data-integrity failure (SHA mismatch, pcap checksum failure, in-place edit, or
   non-reproducing seed). **No performance-based exclusions.**
+- **Bootstrap implementation (method-faithful, not method-substituted).** The frozen BCa
+  bootstrap does an O(n) leave-one-out jackknife whose per-fold statistic is the O(pos×neg) AUC
+  double loop — structurally intractable at the RQ1 scale (n = 75,000 pooled pairs; the RQ1-P2
+  ΔAUC evaluates AUC twice per resample). RQ1-P1 and RQ1-P2 CIs are therefore computed by a
+  performance-faithful bootstrap that reproduces the frozen `stats.bootstrap_ci` **bit-for-bit**
+  (identical `random.Random(seed)` resample sequence, a vectorised AUC proven equal to the frozen
+  detector including the average-rank tie path, and the frozen BCa endpoints/jackknife); a
+  committed `--verify` self-check asserts point/lo/hi/method agree to 1e-12. RQ2-P1 and RQ2-P3
+  remain on the unmodified frozen paths. No point estimate, CI gate, or decision is changed.
 
 ---
 
-## 5. Results *(HELD BLIND — placeholders)*
+## 5. Results
 
-> Populated **once**, after the full battery completes and raw outputs are sealed. RQ2 subsections
-> additionally gated on ratification of the posterior construction. No confirmatory number appears
-> until then.
+All numbers below come from the single frozen §6 pass on the sealed 180-cell battery and are
+deterministically regenerable (`docs/stage-06-analysis.md`; seed S0 = 20260719; 10,000 BCa
+resamples; α = 0.05). Every reported **decision** is a pre-registered CI gate; p-values order only
+the Holm step-down.
 
 ### 5.1 Instrument-validation gate report
-**[HELD — will report the six boolean gate outcomes and calibration AUC/entropy values.]**
+
+The battery ran only after all six boolean gate items passed; the confirmatory-relevant
+calibration, recomputed independently on the §5 synthetic fixtures (40 seeds), holds:
+**known-linked mean AUC = 1.0000** (criterion ≥ 0.95) and **known-unlinked mean AUC = 0.5036**
+(criterion 0.40–0.60). Entropy calibration returns H = log₂N on equiprobable synthetic senders.
+Because the correlator is calibrated on fixtures and never fit to confirmatory-cell data, the
+measured AUCs below are reportable as instrument readings; had calibration failed, no AUC would be
+reported.
 
 ### 5.2 RQ1 — bridge linkability
-**[HELD — RQ1-P1 bridge-on AUC + BCa CI and materiality label; RQ1-P2 paired ΔAUC + CI.]**
+
+**RQ1-P1 (leak).** On the bridge-on / no-pad arm the pooled (entry, exit) pair set (n = 75,000
+pairs; 1,500 linked / 73,500 unlinked) yields **AUC = 0.4660, BCa 95% CI [0.4523, 0.4798]**. The
+CI excludes 0.5 but lies **below** it, so the frozen gate returns **anomaly-below-chance**, *not*
+`leak`. The correlator does not link entry↔exit segments better than chance on the bridge-on
+traffic; it sits marginally below chance (an artifact of the bridge hop's padding-stream flattening
+the linked-pair temporal profile), so we report **no measurable leak**. The two-sided rejection at
+AUC = 0.5 is therefore in the wrong direction and is not evidence of linkability.
+
+**RQ1-P2 (padding efficacy).** Pairing the bridge-on / no-pad and bridge-on / +padding arms by
+shared run index (n = 30 paired runs) gives paired **ΔAUC = +0.0113, BCa 95% CI [−0.0025,
++0.0234]** (per-run ΔAUCᵢ range ≈ [−0.080, +0.081], straddling zero). The CI spans 0 → frozen gate
+**padding-ineffective** (raw p = 0.091). No significant padding effect on measured linkability;
+this is moot given RQ1-P1 found no leak to suppress, and is reported because the frozen test
+specifies it.
 
 ### 5.3 RQ2 — anonymity-set effect of federation
-**[HELD + RATIFICATION-GATED — RQ2-P1 ΔH + CI (grow/shrink/inconclusive); RQ2-P3 Spearman ρ + CI.]**
+
+**RQ2-P1 (federation effect, two-sided).** Over the ratified per-circuit posterior (Miller–Madow
+H on the observation-consistent anonymity set), the federated arm (pooled bridge-federated +
+directory-federated, 3,000 circuits) versus matched-N single-house (1,500 circuits) gives
+**ΔH = −0.9587 bits, BCa 95% CI [−1.0559, −0.8641]**. The CI is strictly below 0 → frozen gate
+**shrink**. Federation, as instrumented, **reduces** the per-circuit anonymity set by ≈ 0.96 bits
+relative to a matched-N single house — the *opposite* of RQ2's motivating hypothesis. Per the
+two-sided pre-registration this negative is reported with equal prominence; we do **not** re-frame
+it as federation "helping."
+
+**RQ2-P3 (funnelling mechanism).** Spearman ρ between top-k = 3 willing-bridge concentration and
+per-circuit H (bridge-federated arm, n = 1,500) is **ρ = 0.0000, CI [0.0000, 0.0000]**
+(percentile fallback) → **inconclusive**. The concentration series has *no variance*: the
+bridge-federated topology assigns a fresh willing bridge per circuit seed, so willing-bridge reuse
+is minimal and the top-3 concentration is effectively constant. Spearman is undefined on a
+zero-variance covariate. This is the **as-instrumented degeneracy flagged in advance** (§7; the
+stage-05 RQ2 instrument caveat), not a null of a well-posed mechanism test — the funnelling
+mechanism is **not testable** on this instrument as built.
 
 ### 5.4 Holm-corrected confirmatory summary
-**[HELD — the 4 lead-paper tests at Holm-adjusted levels, effect sizes + CIs.]**
+
+Holm–Bonferroni over the frozen family of 7 (reporting the 4 lead-paper tests at conservative
+multipliers 7, 6, 5, 4, ordered by ascending raw p):
+
+| Test | Effect | Point | 95% CI (BCa) | Frozen decision | raw p | Holm adj-p (m=7) | Reject @ .05 |
+|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+| RQ1-P1 | AUC (bridge-on) | 0.4660 | [0.4523, 0.4798] | anomaly-below-chance | 0.000 | 0.000 | yes* |
+| RQ2-P1 | ΔH (fed − single) | −0.9587 bits | [−1.0559, −0.8641] | shrink | 0.000 | 0.000 | yes |
+| RQ1-P2 | ΔAUC (nopad − pad) | +0.0113 | [−0.0025, +0.0234] | padding-ineffective | 0.091 | 0.456 | no |
+| RQ2-P3 | Spearman ρ | 0.0000 | [0.0000, 0.0000] | inconclusive | 1.000 | 1.000 | no |
+
+`*` RQ1-P1 rejects `H0: AUC = 0.5` in the **wrong direction** (below chance) and is therefore
+**not** evidence of a leak. Two tests survive Holm at α = 0.05: RQ1-P1 (anomaly-below-chance) and
+RQ2-P1 (shrink — a negative effect). One **exploratory** contrast (labelled, excluded from the
+Holm family): the bridge-federated-only ΔH = −3.63 bits with a degenerate CI (near-single-member
+posterior, mᵢ ≈ 1), reported only for transparency and consistent with the RQ2-P3 degeneracy.
 
 ---
 
-## 6. Discussion *(HELD BLIND — placeholder)*
+## 6. Discussion
 
-**[HELD — interpretation of the confirmed/null/inconclusive outcomes; the honest-null story if
-ΔH shrinks; what the funnelling ρ implies for consent-gated federation; padding efficacy.]**
+**A double null/negative, reported without spin.** The two motivating hypotheses of the consent
+gate — that a shared bridge leaks entry↔exit linkability (RQ1) and that federation grows the
+anonymity set (RQ2) — are **both unsupported** on this instrument, and the one Holm-significant
+directional effect points *against* the design's motivation.
+
+**RQ1 — no bridge leak to close.** The frozen, fixture-calibrated correlator (linked AUC 1.00,
+unlinked 0.50) reads the bridge-on traffic at AUC 0.466 — statistically distinguishable from
+chance but *below* it, which the pre-registered gate correctly refuses to call a leak. The most
+plausible mechanism is that the bridge hop's cover-padding stream flattens the temporal profile
+that the correlator keys on, pushing linked pairs marginally *harder* to distinguish than
+unlinked. Because there is no measurable leak, padding efficacy (RQ1-P2) is moot: ΔAUC is
+indistinguishable from zero, exactly as expected when there is nothing to suppress. The honest
+reading is that **at this lab scale and topology, the shared bridge is not a measurable
+flow-linkability hazard for our frozen correlator** — a scoped negative, not a claim that shared
+bridges are safe against a state-of-the-art adversary (§7).
+
+**RQ2 — federation shrinks the anonymity set.** The evidentiary core is the Holm-significant
+ΔH = −0.96 bits: under the ratified adversary posterior, federating across houses *reduces* the
+effective candidate-sender set relative to a matched-N single house. This is the **funnelling**
+outcome anticipated as a live possibility in the introduction — a consent gate carries traffic
+only over *willing* relays, and when willingness concentrates, circuits funnel and anonymity
+contracts. The pre-registration framed RQ2-P1 two-sided precisely so this result is reported "with
+equal prominence"; it is a genuine negative finding about consent-gated federation, not a failure
+to detect an effect. We deliberately do **not** re-slice cells or hunt subgroups to recover a
+"federation helps" story.
+
+**Why the funnelling mechanism test is inconclusive.** RQ2-P3 would have connected the ΔH
+shrinkage to bridge concentration directly, but the instrument as built assigns a fresh willing
+bridge per circuit seed, so the top-3 concentration covariate has no variance and Spearman is
+undefined. The mechanism is therefore **not testable on this instrument** — an honest limitation
+carried into §7, not evidence against funnelling. The exploratory bridge-federated-only
+ΔH = −3.63 bits (near-single-member posterior) is consistent with a funnelling reading but carries
+no confirmatory weight.
+
+**Takeaway.** For this specific consent-gated, federated, nested-SSH instrument at lab scale, the
+consent gate's measured privacy consequences are (i) no bridge linkability leak and (ii) a
+*reduction* in the federation anonymity set. Both are scoped, honest results; neither generalises
+to internet scale or to a stronger adversary (§7). The value of the study is the pre-registered,
+frozen-detector method that let a hoped-for effect fail cleanly and a negative effect surface
+without being explained away.
 
 ---
 
@@ -281,8 +397,15 @@ bootstrap/permutation-based (10,000 resamples, **BCa** intervals; 3-seed spot-ch
   order, interleaved controls, per-session idle baselines, and a pinned node-role→device mapping.
   Detector-tuning contamination is **eliminated** by pre-battery freezing on fixtures.
 - **RQ2 construction dependency.** The RQ2 result depends on the ratified posterior construction
-  (§4.2 caveat); the construction is pre-specified blind, two-sided, and grounded only in cited
-  metrics — but it is a specification the frozen prereg did not pin, and is disclosed as such.
+  (§4.2); the construction is pre-specified blind, two-sided, and grounded only in cited metrics —
+  but it is a specification the frozen prereg did not pin, and the ΔH = −0.96 bits finding should
+  be read as conditional on it.
+- **Funnelling mechanism not testable as-instrumented (RQ2-P3).** The bridge-federated topology
+  assigns a fresh willing bridge per circuit seed, so the top-3 concentration covariate has zero
+  variance and the Spearman mechanism test is degenerate (ρ = 0, inconclusive). This was flagged
+  in advance; it means the *mechanism* behind the RQ2-P1 shrinkage is not empirically resolved on
+  this instrument, only its magnitude. A topology with realistic willing-bridge reuse would be
+  needed to test funnelling directly.
 - **Dual-use (ethics).** An onion-routing data plane is dual-use; the **defensive-measurement**
   framing and containment envelope are load-bearing and binding, and the framing is red-teamed at
   stage 08.
@@ -291,10 +414,15 @@ bootstrap/permutation-based (10,000 resamples, **BCa** intervals; 3-seed spot-ch
 
 ## 8. Deviations from pre-registration
 
-Tracked only in stage-05 `sor-consent-deviations.md` (none edit the frozen prereg). Two
-clarifications recorded to date: the Holm family-size restatement
-(`docs/stage-05-holm-clarification.md`, **ratified**) and the RQ2 posterior construction
-(`docs/stage-05-rq2-posterior-clarification.md`, **PROPOSED — pending operator ratification**).
+Tracked only in stage-05 `sor-consent-deviations.md` (none edit the frozen prereg). Three
+clarifications recorded: the Holm family-size restatement
+(`docs/stage-05-holm-clarification.md`, **ratified**), the RQ2 posterior construction
+(`docs/stage-05-rq2-posterior-clarification.md`, **ratified**), and the RQ1-P2 run-index pairing
+(`docs/stage-05-rq1p2-pairing-clarification.md`, **freeze-derived / ratified**). One
+implementation note carried in §4.5: the RQ1 CIs use a performance-faithful bootstrap proven
+**bit-for-bit** equal to the frozen `stats.bootstrap_ci` (committed `--verify`), so no point
+estimate, CI gate, or decision is substituted. The frozen prereg SHA is unchanged
+(`f22331a72e…`).
 
 ---