**Overall Verdict:** Accept — The task is complete, objectively evaluable, and end-to-end reachable, with only a non-material checksum inconsistency in the optional self-test evidence.

**Completeness Check:**
- Instruction: Complete — The objective, two temporal provenance labels, fixed tokenization, required 40 cases, and exact JSONL deliverable are clear.
- Inputs: Complete — The participant package contains 40 test essays, 20 person-disjoint worked examples, fixed word IDs, verified character offsets, context, and a prediction template.
- Toolchain: Complete — Python 3.11+, UTF-8 JSONL, and a standard-library evaluator provide a legally obtainable single-machine workflow.
- Reference output: Complete — The sealed package contains gold labels, paired snapshots, feedback, process evidence, source provenance, controls, and deterministic derivation logic for all 40 cases.
- Rubric: Complete — Exact-document accuracy is primary, with word accuracy, per-label F1, macro-F1, and transition-boundary F1 providing meaningful partial-credit diagnostics.

**File and Task Reachability:**
Attachment classification: reachable. The inspected files were `kisspro_ai_feedback_revision_provenance_40_v1_participant.zip`, `kisspro_ai_feedback_revision_provenance_40_v1_reference.zip`, and `kisspro_ai_feedback_revision_provenance_40_v1_gpt55_selftest.zip`. All three were readable, unencrypted ZIP archives containing regular relative files without traversal paths, links, devices, or excessive expansion. All JSON and JSONL records were parsed, all 25 internal manifest sizes and hashes matched, the 11,048 test-word mappings and offsets were consistent, the documented alignment reproduced all 40 gold documents exactly, and all 40 keylogs were structurally parseable. No attachment was left uninspected, although student prose and individual key events were schema-checked rather than manually read exhaustively. The supplied Python was statically inspected but could not be executed because Python was unavailable in the review environment; independent validation reproduced the perfect, single-label, and self-test metrics.

The self-test report names a participant-archive checksum different from the uploaded participant ZIP. Its predictions nevertheless match every current case and word ID, and its reported metrics reproduce exactly, so this does not block the task but weakens archive-level self-test provenance.

Task classification: reachable. A solver can inspect the participant records, complete `predictions.jsonl`, and have it scored against the sealed gold with strict case, word-ID, and label validation on one ordinary machine. 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. No affirmative screening evidence was found; public identifiability could not be independently checked within the permitted evidence boundary.

**Recommended Changes:**
The core benchmark, evaluator, controls, and provenance evidence are ready; no material changes are required. For audit hygiene, regenerate the self-test report against the exact submitted participant ZIP or correct its participant checksum.