**Overall Verdict:** Strong Accept — The submission is complete, professionally specified, objectively evaluable, and reachable end to end without material defects.

**Completeness Check:**

- Instruction: Complete — The objective, stateful protocol, safety limits, phase ordering, exact six-file contract, schemas, and reproduction requirements are explicit.
- Inputs: Complete — The normative simulator, parameter bounds, protocol definition, eight public cases, runtime documentation, and licenses are present; all 12 public-file hashes match the protected manifest.
- Toolchain: Complete — CPython 3.12, NumPy 2.2.6, Linux Bubblewrap requirements, setup commands, licensing, isolation behavior, and fail-closed conditions are documented.
- Reference output: Complete — All six expert artifacts are present and match their SHA-256 manifest. Their public evidence has the expected schemas, eight beliefs, and 496 rollout records. The trusted logic report records 100/100 while clearly distinguishing itself from an authoritative sandboxed score.
- Rubric: Complete — The full 100-point allocation, interpolation thresholds, fatal gates, hidden metrics, safety qualification, and 55-point cap are precise and implemented consistently by the evaluator.

**File and Task Reachability:**

Attachment classification: `reachable`. Task classification: `reachable`.

Both manifest attachments, `01_INPUT_MATERIALS__SAFE_ACTIVE_IDENTIFICATION.zip` and `02_REFERENCE_OUTPUT__SAFE_ACTIVE_IDENTIFICATION.zip`, were inspected. Their declared sizes match, both are readable unencrypted ZIP containers, and all 47 members were inventoried without traversal paths, links, encryption, unsafe entries, or excessive expansion. Inspection covered all input documentation, configuration and case JSON, simulator source, licenses, evaluator and sandbox source, hidden manifests and cases, six expert artifacts, evidence reports, pipeline code, and tests. JSON, JSONL, and CSV structures were parsed or schema-checked; executable content was reviewed statically and not run. No archive content was left unreviewed.

The solver-visible input and evaluator-only reference material are separated. The completion path is clear: implement the exact six artifacts, generate public evidence with the authoritative runner, reproduce it byte-for-byte, then evaluate 20 hidden cases under a fresh-process Bubblewrap boundary. The submitted protected-status record appropriately reports that the author-host run was unavailable and requires production execution on the documented Linux worker with `details.sandbox.enforced=true`; this is an infrastructure limitation rather than an attachment defect.

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. Simulator-generated data do not establish AI fabrication or a synthetic-defect fixture. Public identifiability was not independently checked because external search is outside the permitted evidence boundary.

**Recommended Changes:**

The submission provides a coherent protocol, reproducible expert baseline, strong integrity controls, and a detailed fail-closed evaluator. No contributor changes are required. Production scoring should follow the documented Linux Bubblewrap procedure and accept only a report confirming sandbox enforcement.