Validation of the local reference candidate
Current audit corrections, November 3, 2026
The newly built candidate is ice-reference.duckdb: 26,226,688 bytes,
SHA-256 c0c6f79bea8ad54e84c29103a7d854b68a381d931e104e2a3ccc03c1c80d70a5.
The original database and manifest remain preserved. Each table now has its own
accurate unit in the source lock, README, HF card, dictionary and _metadata.
All four source tables and added row ordinals are unchanged. _provenance,
_geometry_metadata and _columns are also unchanged; embedded descriptions and
build timestamps are the intended metadata changes.
Eleven repository regression tests passed. They include optimized-Python smoke
failure cases, report no-clobber behavior, recursive budget accounting and a
disappearing WAL. The build now uses Parquet file_row_number and verifies its
association with every stored row. Validation-only reports use an explicit new
--report path and exclusive creation. Automatic extension installation is disabled.
The build ran in existing WSL tmpfs with the unchanged 128 MiB working cap and 512 MiB physical reserve. Copy-back preserved at least 128 MiB on Windows. Existing source bytes/pins were reverified; no source acquisition or install ran. The corrected artifact passed exact source checks and a read-only comparison against all prior rows, including raw WKB. Additional checks confirmed EPSG:4269, 265 five-digit ZIPs, nine ZIP+4 values, one NULL ZIP, and no duplicate office four-column keys.
Python Datapond 0.1.5 / DuckDB 1.5.6 and R Datapond 0.1.0 / DuckDB 1.5.5 passed
on this new artifact through localhost, with PYTHONOPTIMIZE=2. Fresh evidence
is in evidence/audit-fix-*.json; earlier receipts remain preserved.
The two companions' acquisition, safety and safety-test files are byte-identical,
closing the corresponding unread-code condition in Claude's source review.
The owner independently reviewed the implementation diff and the exact test/build/client scope. The original candidates remain archived separately.
The initial independent Claude source review completed under included Max usage and identified these corrections. Final corrected-source review is required before publication. These validation claims distinguish executed local checks from that separate source review. Public URL verification is recorded after upload; registry approval or merge is separate.