docs: sync Paper III ledger and repo hygiene

Author: Lukas Geiger

.gitignore

@@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ Thumbs.db
 desktop.ini
 
 # Internal/private files
+LOCK*.txt
 Plan.txt
 BEWEISNOTIZ.md
 BEWEISNOTIZ*.md

README.md

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ This repository contains the bilingual paper series, the `crm_fR` / `cfm_fR` ana
 
 **Current headline CMB result in this repository:** the native `crm_fR` model yields **Delta chi2 = -3.7** relative to LCDM on Planck 2018 CMB TT+TE+EE data in the current MCMC best-fit run, with alpha_M_0 = 0.0011 +/- 0.0007 and 100*theta_s = 1.04173.
 
-**Research status:** this is an open research/preprint repository, not a consensus cosmology package. Theoretical and statistical limitations are tracked in `TODO.md`, `Plan.txt`, and `PUBLIKATIONSSTRATEGIE.md`; the live Zenodo v7 record has not yet been updated to the latest local paper rebuilds.
+**Research status:** this is an open research/preprint repository, not a consensus cosmology package. Theoretical and statistical limitations are summarized in the paper texts and public result artifacts included here; additional working notes remain local. The live Zenodo v7 record has not yet been updated to the latest local paper rebuilds.
 
 ## What This Repository Is For
 

papers/Paper3_DE.pdf

@@ -32,7 +32,8 @@
 \titleformat{\subsubsection}{\normalsize\bfseries\sffamily\color{darkgray}}{\thesubsubsection}{1em}{}
 
 \hypersetup{
-    pdftitle={Von der Kr\"ummungs-R\"uckgabe zur Quantengravitation},
+    unicode=true,
+    pdftitle={Von der Krümmungs-Rückgabe zur Quantengravitation},
     pdfauthor={Lukas Geiger},
     colorlinks=true,
     linkcolor=black,
@@ -735,6 +736,31 @@ \subsection{Parameterbr\"ucke: Ph\"anomenologische vs.\ Lagrange-Formulierung}
 
 Die Konsistenzpr\"ufung ist dreifach: (i)~die akustische Winkelskala $\theta_s$ ist in beiden Rahmenwerken identisch (Tabelle~\ref{tab:theta_s}); (ii)~die Wachstumsrate $f\sigma_8$ aus der Lagrange-St\"orungsanalyse verbessert den BOSS-Fit gegen\"uber $\Lambda$CDM, konsistent mit der verst\"arkten Strukturbildung von Paper~II; und (iii)~die CMB-Entfernungspriors ($\ell_A$, $\mathcal{R}$) stimmen auf besser als $0{,}01\%$ \"uberein.
 
+\begin{table}[H]
+\centering
+\caption{Validierungs- und offene-Pr\"ufgate-Tabelle f\"ur Paper~III. Die Tabelle trennt gefittete Evidenz, abgeleitete Pr\"ufungen und noch offene Tests; sie ist eine Lesehilfe, keine zus\"atzliche statistische Analyse.}
+\label{tab:validation_gate_ledger}
+\footnotesize
+\begingroup
+\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.14}
+\setlength{\tabcolsep}{3pt}
+\newcommand{\ledgercell}[2]{\parbox[t]{#1}{\raggedright #2}}
+\begin{tabular}{@{}llll@{}}
+\toprule
+\ledgercell{0.17\textwidth}{\textbf{Evidenzebene}} & \ledgercell{0.23\textwidth}{\textbf{Datenanker}} & \ledgercell{0.27\textwidth}{\textbf{Aktueller Befund}} & \ledgercell{0.25\textwidth}{\textbf{Pr\"ufgate vor st\"arkerem Claim}} \\
+\midrule
+\ledgercell{0.17\textwidth}{SN-Hintergrund} & \ledgercell{0.23\textwidth}{Pantheon+-Hintergrundfit aus Paper~II, 1.590 SN-Ia-Punkte} & \ledgercell{0.27\textwidth}{Das erweiterte CRM erreicht $\Delta\chi^2=-26{,}3$ gegen\"uber $\Lambda$CDM in der ph\"anomenologischen Hintergrundanalyse.} & \ledgercell{0.25\textwidth}{Als Hintergrundmotivation beibehalten; dies ist noch kein Lagrange-St\"orungs- oder Lensing-Test.} \\
+\ledgercell{0.17\textwidth}{Gemeinsame Distanzanker} & \ledgercell{0.23\textwidth}{Paper-II-SN+CMB+BAO-Distanzanker} & \ledgercell{0.27\textwidth}{$\ell_A=301{,}471$, $\mathcal{R}=1{,}7502$, $H_0=67{,}3$\,km/s/Mpc und $\Delta\chi^2=-5{,}5$ mit null Fr\"uher Dunkler Energie.} & \ledgercell{0.25\textwidth}{Erst mit voller Kovarianz und einer einheitlichen End-to-End-Likelihood hochstufen.} \\
+\ledgercell{0.17\textwidth}{Nativer St\"orungsfit} & \ledgercell{0.23\textwidth}{Planck 2018 TT+TE+EE, 6.405 High-$\ell$-Punkte in hi\_class} & \ledgercell{0.27\textwidth}{Der cfm\_fR-MCMC-Best-Fit liefert $\Delta\chi^2=-3{,}7$; die marginalisierte Einschr\"ankung ist $\alpha_{M,0}=0{,}0011^{+0{,}0010}_{-0{,}0006}$.} & \ledgercell{0.25\textwidth}{Vor Detektionssprache die volle Planck-TTTEEE+lowl+lowE+lensing-Likelihood verwenden.} \\
+\ledgercell{0.17\textwidth}{Wachstum / RSD} & \ledgercell{0.23\textwidth}{BOSS-$f\sigma_8$-Punkte in Abschnitt~\ref{sec:numerical}} & \ledgercell{0.27\textwidth}{Der konservative CRM-Punkt erh\"oht $f\sigma_8$ moderat und verbessert das LOWZ-Residuum gegen\"uber $\Lambda$CDM.} & \ledgercell{0.25\textwidth}{Korrelierte RSD-Likelihoods und Modellkovarianz erg\"anzen, bevor gel\"oste Wachstumsspannungen behauptet werden.} \\
+\ledgercell{0.17\textwidth}{Schwache-Linsen-$S_8$} & \ledgercell{0.23\textwidth}{Vergleich von CMB, Clustern und kosmischer Scherung 2026} & \ledgercell{0.27\textwidth}{Das konservative CRM sagt $S_8=0{,}845$--$0{,}855$ vorher, nahe dem hohen CMB/eROSITA-$S_8$-Ast, aber in Spannung zu DES-artig niedrigen Scherwerten.} & \ledgercell{0.25\textwidth}{Euclid/LSST und Marginalisierung baryonischen Feedbacks entscheiden, ob dies Unterst\"utzung oder Falsifikationsdruck ist.} \\
+\ledgercell{0.17\textwidth}{Lyman-$\alpha$-Wald} & \ledgercell{0.23\textwidth}{Lineare $P(k)$-Absch\"atzung bei $z=2{,}3$} & \ledgercell{0.27\textwidth}{Die Verst\"arkung betr\"agt $+0{,}7\%$ im konservativen Modell und $+4{,}4\%$ im MCMC-Best-Fit, innerhalb der aktuellen eBOSS-Amplitudenunsicherheit.} & \ledgercell{0.25\textwidth}{Nichtlineare $f(R)$-Simulationen f\"ur $k>1\,h/$Mpc und explizite Lyman-$\alpha$-Nuisance-Behandlung erforderlich.} \\
+\ledgercell{0.17\textwidth}{Zukunftsobservablen} & \ledgercell{0.23\textwidth}{CMB-Lensing, BAO-Updates, GW-Geschwindigkeit und gravitativer Slip} & \ledgercell{0.27\textwidth}{Das Paper nennt explizite Vorhersagen, aber noch nicht jede Observable wird in einer gemeinsamen Pipeline berechnet.} & \ledgercell{0.25\textwidth}{Erst nach Berechnung von $C_L^{\phi\phi}$, $\Sigma(k,a)$ und BAO-Likelihoods als Hauptvalidierungsclaim hochstufen.} \\
+\bottomrule
+\end{tabular}
+\endgroup
+\end{table}
+
 
 % ===================================================================
 % 9. DISKUSSION UND AUSBLICK

papers/Paper3_DE.tex

@@ -841,6 +841,31 @@ \subsection{Parameter Bridge: Phenomenological vs.\ Lagrangian Formulation}
 
 The consistency check is threefold: (i)~the angular acoustic scale $\theta_s$ is identical in both frameworks (Table~\ref{tab:theta_s}); (ii)~the growth rate $f\sigma_8$ from the Lagrangian perturbation analysis improves the BOSS fit over $\Lambda$CDM, consistent with Paper~II's enhanced structure formation; and (iii)~the CMB distance priors ($\ell_A$, $\mathcal{R}$) agree to better than $0.01\%$.
 
+\begin{table*}[t]
+\centering
+\caption{Validation and open-gate ledger for Paper~III. The table separates fitted evidence, derived checks, and still-open tests; it is a reading aid, not an additional statistical analysis.}
+\label{tab:validation_gate_ledger}
+\footnotesize
+\begingroup
+\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.13}
+\setlength{\tabcolsep}{3pt}
+\newcommand{\ledgercell}[2]{\parbox[t]{#1}{\raggedright #2}}
+\begin{tabular}{@{}llll@{}}
+\toprule
+\ledgercell{0.16\textwidth}{\textbf{Evidence layer}} & \ledgercell{0.24\textwidth}{\textbf{Data anchor}} & \ledgercell{0.28\textwidth}{\textbf{Current result}} & \ledgercell{0.25\textwidth}{\textbf{Gate before stronger claim}} \\
+\midrule
+\ledgercell{0.16\textwidth}{SN-only background} & \ledgercell{0.24\textwidth}{Pantheon+ background fit from Paper~II, 1{,}590 SN-Ia points} & \ledgercell{0.28\textwidth}{Extended CRM yields $\Delta\chi^2=-26.3$ versus $\Lambda$CDM in the phenomenological background analysis.} & \ledgercell{0.25\textwidth}{Retain as background-level motivation; it is not a Lagrangian perturbation or lensing test.} \\
+\ledgercell{0.16\textwidth}{Joint distance priors} & \ledgercell{0.24\textwidth}{Paper~II SN+CMB+BAO distance anchors} & \ledgercell{0.28\textwidth}{$\ell_A=301.471$, $\mathcal{R}=1.7502$, $H_0=67.3$\,km/s/Mpc, and $\Delta\chi^2=-5.5$ with zero EDE.} & \ledgercell{0.25\textwidth}{Upgrade only with full covariance and a single end-to-end likelihood.} \\
+\ledgercell{0.16\textwidth}{Native perturbation fit} & \ledgercell{0.24\textwidth}{Planck 2018 TT+TE+EE, 6{,}405 high-$\ell$ points in hi\_class} & \ledgercell{0.28\textwidth}{The cfm\_fR MCMC best fit gives $\Delta\chi^2=-3.7$; the marginalized constraint is $\alpha_{M,0}=0.0011^{+0.0010}_{-0.0006}$.} & \ledgercell{0.25\textwidth}{Use the full Planck TTTEEE+lowl+lowE+lensing likelihood before detection language.} \\
+\ledgercell{0.16\textwidth}{Growth / RSD} & \ledgercell{0.24\textwidth}{BOSS $f\sigma_8$ points in Section~\ref{sec:numerical}} & \ledgercell{0.28\textwidth}{The conservative CRM point raises $f\sigma_8$ modestly and improves the LOWZ residual relative to $\Lambda$CDM.} & \ledgercell{0.25\textwidth}{Add correlated RSD likelihoods and model covariance before claiming resolved growth tensions.} \\
+\ledgercell{0.16\textwidth}{Weak-lensing $S_8$} & \ledgercell{0.24\textwidth}{2026 CMB, cluster, and cosmic-shear comparison} & \ledgercell{0.28\textwidth}{Conservative CRM predicts $S_8=0.845$--$0.855$, near the high-$S_8$ CMB/eROSITA branch but in tension with DES-like low shear values.} & \ledgercell{0.25\textwidth}{Euclid/LSST and baryonic-feedback marginalization decide whether this is support or falsification pressure.} \\
+\ledgercell{0.16\textwidth}{Lyman-$\alpha$ forest} & \ledgercell{0.24\textwidth}{Linear $P(k)$ estimate at $z=2.3$} & \ledgercell{0.28\textwidth}{The enhancement is $+0.7\%$ for the conservative model and $+4.4\%$ for the MCMC best fit, within current eBOSS amplitude uncertainty.} & \ledgercell{0.25\textwidth}{Require nonlinear $f(R)$ simulations for $k>1\,h/$Mpc and explicit Lyman-$\alpha$ nuisance treatment.} \\
+\ledgercell{0.16\textwidth}{Future observables} & \ledgercell{0.24\textwidth}{CMB lensing, BAO updates, GW speed, and gravitational slip} & \ledgercell{0.28\textwidth}{The paper states explicit predictions, but not every observable is computed in a joint pipeline.} & \ledgercell{0.25\textwidth}{Promote to a main validation claim only after $C_L^{\phi\phi}$, $\Sigma(k,a)$, and BAO likelihoods are computed.} \\
+\bottomrule
+\end{tabular}
+\endgroup
+\end{table*}
+
 
 % ===================================================================
 % 9. DISKUSSION UND AUSBLICK