PHASE 5b — SORRY / INCOMPLETENESS CHECK

================================================================
RESULT: PASS (no sorry in the audited solution)
================================================================
Comparator exited 0. Its documented function includes checking "for `sorry`
and other incomplete proofs" in the solution, and enforcing that the
solution's theorems use no axioms outside the whitelist — a whitelist that
does NOT contain sorryAx. A solution containing a reachable `sorry` would
carry sorryAx and would fail that check.

================================================================
THREE INDEPENDENT LINES OF EVIDENCE, IN ASCENDING STRENGTH
================================================================
1. TEXT SEARCH (weakest — see source_searches.txt)
   ConnesRigidity.lean contains zero occurrences of the whole words
   `sorry`, `sorryAx`, `admit`, `axiom`, `unsafe`, `opaque`,
   `implemented_by`, `extern`, `native_decl`, `partial`.

   Per audit rule 11 this proves nothing on its own: a declaration can
   depend on sorryAx transitively through an import without the token ever
   appearing in this file. It is recorded as a source fact, not as an
   answer.

2. LEAN'S #print axioms (machine-checked — see print_axioms.log)
   Neither final theorem, nor any of 11 supporting declarations, reports
   sorryAx. This walks the actual proof terms, including through every
   Mathlib import, and is the mechanism the audit prompt correctly insists
   upon.

3. COMPARATOR + NANODA (independent kernel — this file)
   Exit 0 against a whitelist excluding sorryAx, with the solution's proof
   terms exported and replayed through both the Lean kernel and nanoda.

================================================================
THE `sorry` TOKENS THAT DO EXIST IN THE REPOSITORY — AND WHY THEY ARE FINE
================================================================
ComparatorChallenges/E_ConnesRigidity.lean contains `sorry` at lines 206
and 221. Every other ComparatorChallenges/*.lean file likewise contains
`sorry`, uniformly across all ten problems.

THIS IS THE INTENDED ARCHITECTURE, NOT A PROOF HOLE.

The challenge files are statement-only specifications: they declare the
definitions needed to state a problem and then state the target theorems
with `sorry` bodies, precisely because the challenge's role is to FIX THE
STATEMENT that a solution must prove. Comparator's whole purpose is to
verify that the solution proves those same statements without sorry.

Comparator itself replayed the challenge module through the kernel in this
run ("[8655/8655] Replayed ComparatorChallenges.E_ConnesRigidity") with the
sorries present, then separately built and checked the SOLUTION. The
sorries live on the specification side of the comparison, never on the
proof side.

A repository-wide grep for `sorry` will hit these files. Reporting that as
evidence of an incomplete proof would be a category error, and this audit
does not make it.
