**Overall Verdict:** Strong Accept — The submission is complete, technically rigorous, safely reachable, and supported by a coherent expert repair, adversarial controls, hidden evaluation, provenance, and verification evidence.

**Completeness Check:**
- Instruction: Complete — Defines the repository transformation, preserved exports, semantic invariants, performance threshold, bounded-memory requirement, cleanup behavior, output location, and public verification commands.
- Inputs: Complete — Supplies the full 1,662-line historical target module within a runnable 36-file repository and a deterministic public reproduction.
- Toolchain: Complete — Requires only CPython 3.11 on Linux and the standard library; the evaluator's unprivileged Linux and Landlock requirements are feasible on a suitable ordinary machine.
- Reference output: Complete — Includes the expert repaired repository, final approved source, five negative controls, provenance records, and verification results.
- Rubric: Complete — Thirteen objective evaluator groups cover compilation/API preservation, repeated-window complexity, collision safety, roles and identities, ordering, external runs, cleanup failures, unrelated security behavior, fail-closed limits, external memory use, validation, and immutable freeze behavior. Final scoring is binary, consistent with the exact repair contract.

**File and Task Reachability:**
The attachment set is `reachable`, and the end-to-end task is `reachable`. I inspected all three manifest attachments: `ale_input_leak_fragment_join_repair_01_input.zip`, `ale_input_leak_fragment_join_repair_01_reference.zip`, and `gpt_5_6_luna_exact_candidate.zip`. Their downloaded sizes match the manifest; all are readable ZIP containers with valid integrity checks, no encryption, duplicate names, unsafe paths, links, device entries, or excessive expansion. The contents comprise regular ASCII or UTF-8 Python, Markdown, TOML, and JSON files.

Representative and material files inspected include `TASK.md`, both public-test files, `pyproject.toml`, the starter, expert, approved, control, and self-test versions of `packaging.py`, all control READMEs, `grade.py`, `hidden_fragment_tests.py`, `candidate_probe.py`, `probe_supervisor.py`, `PROVENANCE.md`, `TARGET_REGION_COMPARISON.md`, `HISTORICAL_INPUT_FREEZE_REPORT.md`, `VERIFICATION.md`, and `LINUX_VERIFICATION.json`. The recorded input, expert, evaluator, self-test archive, and approved-region hashes reproduce from the supplied files. Non-target surrounding package modules were inventoried and type-checked but not reviewed line by line. No uploaded program was executed; runtime claims were assessed through static evaluator inspection and submitted execution records.

The contributor can copy the supplied starter repository, repair the general fragment join, run compilation and the public reproduction, and submit the repaired repository. The protected evaluator can then test semantics, performance, memory, cleanup, isolation, and freeze behavior against the supplied expert and negative controls. License keys, accounts, tokens, and other credentials are not required from the contributor. Confidential, proprietary, or internal material may be evaluated as submitted evidence without requiring additional disclosure.

**Special Screening:**
None. External public-identifiability searching was unavailable under the evidence-only review constraint; the supplied provenance identifies this as a preexisting internal production defect and explicitly states that it was neither a public benchmark nor an injected fixture.

**Recommended Changes:**
The submission already provides strong task instructions, authentic-looking source provenance, a collision-safe bounded-memory reference repair, evaluator isolation, adversarial controls, and reproducible verification metadata. No changes are required.