Both internal placements of K 5

No Brunetti–Fredenhagen or Dang extension theorem is applied to the missing target BF,Dang. XIII-E and a resolved paired construction stay unentered. There is no new contact class.

5: J3–J5 remain unopened

J3 requires a distribution supplied by I4 before uniform transverse estimates can be assigned to it. No such distribution is supplied.

The parallel-line scaling degree eight remains a collision degree. Neither that value, the copied internal conormal orders, nor the distributional frequency degree in Theorem thm:dyadic is used as a transverse degree of ${\mathcal{T}}_{\mathrm{form}}$.

J4 would require composition with the singular spectators and permitted partial contacts, together with overlap agreement and the inherited normalizations. No joint gluing is performed.

J5 would require the complete output wavefront theorem after the actual proper pushforward. The residual-field target is a compact microcausal degree-two kernel, for example with the sufficient bound

under the fixed flat cotangent identifications.

This residual-field output bound is different from an intermediate attachment-kernel bound. Properness of the existing tree datum cannot supply it.

The internal wavefront bound of Proposition prop:WF is not the J5 bound: its attachment variables have not been composed and pushed forward in the required quantum graph.

6: admission and the XV-B exit

An admission line would have to identify ${R_1}^{(1)}$ as the pushed-forward coefficient of the constructed, normalized joint distribution and prove

with XIII-B's retarded convention.

No such line is asserted in this paper. The tree coefficient is not substituted for ${R_1}^{(1)}$.

Under the stated series contract, XIV-I does not open XV-B.

Proof. XV-B requires both the stated free carrier of XV-A and an admitted ${R_1}^{(1)}$ in ${\mathcal{E}}_H$. The latter has not been supplied: I3 is Unresolved and I4–I6 have not been discharged. The conjunction of exit prerequisites therefore fails.

If a later paper supplied the admission line, XV-B could attempt one relative interacting differential through one explicit order in $\kappa$ and $\hslash$ on the free carrier. The relative classical complex would remain a comparison object, not an identified quantum subalgebra.

XV-A's stated odd-sector antifield coupling

belongs to that carrier prerequisite. It does not normalize any amplitude in this paper.

A quantum master-equation defect, anomaly classification, or promotion of ${\mathcal{C}}_{\xi }$ would still belong to subsequent gates, not automatically to XV-B.