# Contributing review evidence

Start with `docs/EXPERT_REVIEW.md` or `docs/AI_AGENT_GUIDE.md`. Use claim IDs from `audit/claim_ledger.json` and the structured report in `review/`.

For a correctness issue, supply the exact theorem, missing inference or reproducible counterexample, and minimal correction. For an implementation issue, supply the failing command, environment, input hashes, and a patch. For an originality issue, supply a primary source and the mathematical translation to the present claim.

Keep new runs under `runs/`; preserve the original reports and archived research package. Changes to the mathematics require a research-version update and affected-claim list. Changes only to documentation or packaging require a packaging-version update. Regenerate the manifest for a changed release and record the modifications.

Submit a discussion or change proposal through the repository's available community controls after publication. Do not claim a proposal is accepted before the maintainer records acceptance. Human and AI reviews must remain distinguishable, and no review creates an endorsement beyond its stated scope.

Check `LICENSE_STATUS.md` before redistribution or using the work as a dependency. A future declared license must be an explicit maintainer decision; contributors should not silently relicense the preserved package.