# Verification report

The originating researcher accepts the explicitly stated theorem scope
after checking the quotient, integral character lattice, fan refinement,
normalization, sharp smoothness obstruction, and measurement graph closure.
No known mathematical gap remains in that scope. The broader source
record is still PARTIAL_RESULT.

The key obstruction is the cone B,C >= 0 and A,D >= B,C. Its five rays
have explicit supporting-face descriptions and every point decomposes
nonnegatively according to whether B >= C or C >= B. It embeds as an
actual arrangement-flat cone in every d >= 2, n >= 3 case. The distinction
between an actual fan cone and an arbitrary slice is explicitly proved.

The exact standard-library checker tests 25 lattice/wall cases, enumerates
the five rays, tests 876 decompositions, 16 flat restrictions and 50
measurement identities. Normal and optimized Python runs agree. A
separate SymPy exploration produced the same witness. The optional
102-chamber diagnostic is not used in the paper's proofs.

Both the built-in standalone compiler and the local PDF exporter succeeded.
The final six PDF pages were visually reviewed. A literal spacing-command
typo, one overfull inline matrix description, and a forced-page-break
layout issue were repaired. No unresolved references or overfull boxes
remain in the final log. Author name is alone at the top; affiliation,
email and GitHub are a footnote. AI assistance is disclosed in the body.

This is self-audit, not independent peer review or formal verification.
No full-source closure or absolute-priority certificate is asserted.