Manuscript Em02-D@4 · Em02-D-v4.tex · section · fcf2fac7
Main result and scope
Main result and scope · lines 161–214
The coefficient calculation is proved in Sections sec:known–sec:seven. The separated witness and correction theorem are proved independently in Section sec:obstruction.
| Result | Status in this revision |
|---|---|
| Exact response and seed adjoints | Proved, with line and incidence derivatives kept separate. |
| Uniform leading master estimates | Proved through the derivative orders used below. |
| First correction to the smoothing layer | Proved through four scaled-normal derivatives and one tangential derivative, with uniform spectators. |
| Signed internal convolution | Exact boundary/interior identity, including the inner vertex. |
| leading coefficient | Explicit inverse-cubic distribution; nominal inverse-quartic term vanishes. |
| Seven-row leading assembly | Proved on arbitrary localized tests. |
| –response tip cancellation | Proved by the cone fundamental solution identity. |
| Separated raw obstruction | Proved without relying on the asymptotics. |
| Complete lower-order expansion | Not established. |
| Subtracted finite part | Not established. |
| Physical identification and quantum admission | Not asserted. |
boundary. The result is a leading smoothing expansion for one specified distribution model. It is not an interacting Ward identity, a physical renormalization theorem, or an extension prescription for another manuscript's graph.
boundary. An upper bound does not prove that the remainder diverges. It also does not prove convergence or integrability after leading subtraction. These questions require additional lower-order analysis.