70dd19c9-2af0-4c95-8c9a-c074573087ebIMD JOB

Created [artifacts/answer.json](/home/identitymd/.identitymd/work/70dd19c9-2af0-4c95-8c9a-c074573087eb/370f8723-dac8-4350-a13c-05f414f51cf8/artifacts/answer.json). Answer: `70300000000000000` wei. The supplied verifier reports `ok`.

Created and validated [artifacts/answer.json]( /Users/zhuminquan/.identitymd-2/work/70dd19c9-2af0-4c95-8c9a-c074573087eb/370f8723-dac8-4350-a13c-05f414f51cf8/artifacts/answer.json ). The computed floor is `70300000000000000` wei. The supplied checker prints `ok`.

I'll start by reading all the provided inputs.Now let me read the RPC references and the scripts.I have the full picture now. Let me read the rest of `scan.mjs` and check the environment.Environment is clean with Node 22. The question needs a custom decode of Seaport `OrderFulfilled` logs (offer/consideration item arrays) — `scan.mjs` gives me keccak, RPC plumbing patterns, and pin verification, but the item-level decode I'll do in a scratch script. First, let me verify endpoints and the event topic.Topic0 confirmed and three endpoints are live on chain 1. Now verify the pinned closing block hash.Wrong hex — let me compute the block number properly and re-check.Pin verified on three endpoints. Now let me count `OrderFulfilled` logs over the window on both Seaport contracts using the scan script — this confirms the pin and tells me the log volume before decoding.11,247 `OrderFulfilled` logs over the window, pin confirmed on publicnode. Now I'll write a scratch script that fetches those logs, ABI-decodes the offer/consideration item arrays, applies the definitions, and computes the minimum price. As a sanity cross-check it also scans the collection's own `Transfer` events — every ERC-721 sale must move the token.A log's data is shorter than its array offsets claim — I'll make the decoder defensive and report the malformed ones instead of crashing.55 fills touch the collection but all were skipped on `offerShape` — likely a decode nuance or multi-item offers. Let me inspect the decoded shape of a few of them (compactly).Suspicious: decoded `offer` is empty and the NFT sits alone in `consideration` — my offsets may be off. Let me dump the raw words of one such log's data.Found it — `orderHash` is non-indexed in Seaport's `OrderFulfilled` (3 topics, not 4), so data is `[orderHash, recipient, offerOff, consOff, ...]` and my offsets were shifted by one word. Fixing the decoder.Decoding works now — sales are coming through. Let me see the summary head of that output.All 11247 logs decoded cleanly; 130 fills touch the collection and all 130 qualify (no bundles, no non-ETH/WETH payments). Floor candidate: **70300000000000000 wei** (0.0703 ETH), from bid fills in tx `0x43b864…` at block 26025152. Since this is a `panel`-evidence question (nothing gets rerun by the deployer — my computation is the evidence), a cross-check on a different operator is worth it. Let me verify the log count and floor on Flashbots.Same floor on a second operator. Let me verify the actual floor log decodes as expected — tx `0x43b864…`, logIndex 45 should show offer=[WETH 0.0703], cons=[NFT + fees].Structure confirmed: offer = `[itemType 1, WETH, amount]`, consideration = `[NFT(itemType 2, collection), ...fees]` — a bid fill. Let me verify the amount word equals 70300000000000000.Floor fill verified on the raw log: bid of exactly 70300000000000000 wei WETH for tokenId 26. Let me confirm the second same-price fill (logIndex 46, tokenId 8474).Both floor fills verified: identical 70300000000000000 wei WETH bids in the same tx (tokenIds 26 and 8474). All 130 collection fills qualified with zero exclusions — no ambiguity about the minimum. Now writing `artifacts/answer.json`. The brief has `"evidence": "panel"`, so the recipe must be `{ kind: "panel", source }` — the source names where I read the fact (the chain via public RPC).Done. `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok`. **Answer: `70300000000000000` wei** (0.0703 ETH) — the floor of Blokyz over blocks 26020641–26027793. How it was computed: - Fetched all 11,247 `OrderFulfilled` logs emitted by Seaport 1.5 and 1.6 over exactly the pinned window (topic `0x9d9af8e3…b31`), chunked `eth_getLogs` with halving-on-refusal, deduped by `block:logIndex`. Closing block hash matched the pin on publicnode, flashbots, and mevblocker. - ABI-decoded each log's `offer`/`consideration` item arrays (note: `orderHash` is non-indexed, so data starts `[orderHash, recipient, offerOff, consOff, …]` — the first decode attempt was off by one wor

Completed [artifacts/answer.json](/home/imd/.identitymd/work/70dd19c9-2af0-4c95-8c9a-c074573087eb/370f8723-dac8-4350-a13c-05f414f51cf8/artifacts/answer.json). Computed floor: `70300000000000000` wei. The supplied verifier returns `ok`.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](/Users/git/.identitymd/work/70dd19c9-2af0-4c95-8c9a-c074573087eb/370f8723-dac8-4350-a13c-05f414f51cf8/artifacts/answer.json). Answer: `70300000000000000` wei. Validated successfully with the supplied checker (`ok`).

Completed [artifacts/answer.json](/root/.identitymd/work/70dd19c9-2af0-4c95-8c9a-c074573087eb/370f8723-dac8-4350-a13c-05f414f51cf8/artifacts/answer.json). Floor: `70300000000000000` wei. Validation: `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok`.

Check passes. `artifacts/answer.json` contains the floor price of Blokyz over the pinned window: **70,300,000,000,000,000 wei (0.0703 ETH)**, from tx `0x43b864d4...` — computed by scanning both Seaport contracts' `OrderFulfilled` logs across the pinned blocks (130 qualifying single-NFT ETH/WETH fills found), decoded by hand per Seaport's ABI, pin-confirmed on two independent RPC operators.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](/home/imd3/.identitymd/work/70dd19c9-2af0-4c95-8c9a-c074573087eb/370f8723-dac8-4350-a13c-05f414f51cf8/artifacts/answer.json). Validation passed: `check-answer.mjs` printed `ok`.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](/home/imd/.identitymd/work/70dd19c9-2af0-4c95-8c9a-c074573087eb/370f8723-dac8-4350-a13c-05f414f51cf8/artifacts/answer.json). Answer: `70300000000000000` wei. Validation passed: `check-answer.mjs` printed `ok`.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](/home/imd-worker2/.identitymd/work/70dd19c9-2af0-4c95-8c9a-c074573087eb/370f8723-dac8-4350-a13c-05f414f51cf8/artifacts/answer.json). Computed floor: `70300000000000000` wei. Validation passed: `check-answer.mjs` printed `ok`.

required outputs are missing or invalid: artifacts/answer.json: ENOENT: no such file or directory, lstat '/home/imd/.identitymd/work/70dd19c9-2af0-4c95-8c9a-c074573087eb/370f8723-dac8-4350-a13c-05f414f51cf8/artifacts'

FAILURE: runtime_error

Created [artifacts/answer.json](/root/.identitymd/work/70dd19c9-2af0-4c95-8c9a-c074573087eb/370f8723-dac8-4350-a13c-05f414f51cf8/artifacts/answer.json). Answer: `70300000000000000` wei. Validation: `check-answer.mjs` returned `ok`.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](/home/worker/.imd/seat2/work/70dd19c9-2af0-4c95-8c9a-c074573087eb/370f8723-dac8-4350-a13c-05f414f51cf8/artifacts/answer.json). Computed floor: `70300000000000000` wei. Official checker result: `ok`.

Created [answer.json](/home/imd2/.identitymd/work/70dd19c9-2af0-4c95-8c9a-c074573087eb/370f8723-dac8-4350-a13c-05f414f51cf8/artifacts/answer.json). Floor: `70300000000000000` wei. Validated successfully with the supplied checker (`ok`).

Done. `artifacts/answer.json` is written and `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok`. **Answer: 70300000000000000 wei (0.0703 ETH)** — the realized floor of Blokyz over blocks 26020641–26027793 on Ethereum mainnet. How it was computed, exactly as the brief's definitions pin it: - Fetched all `OrderFulfilled` logs (topic `0x9d9af8e3…`) from Seaport 1.5 and 1.6 over the whole pinned window from `https://ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com`, after confirming `eth_chainId` = 1 and the pinned closing hash there — and confirming the same hash on a second operator, `eth.drpc.org` (my first check there mismatched only because I'd hex-encoded the wrong block number; the corrected call matched the pin exactly). - Decoded all 11,247 logs with the Seaport ABI in a scratch script (`test/scratch/floor.mjs`, dependency-free Node), since the catalogue's scan script can't decode Seaport's dynamic item arrays. - Applied the brief's filter: exactly one ERC-721 (itemType 2) of `0x86ffb7…cfe62` across offer+consideration and no other NFT; listing fills priced as the sum of all consideration amounts (only if every consideration item is ETH or WETH, fees included), bid fills priced as the offer amount. That yielded **130 qualifying sales**, all on Seaport 1.6; the lowest was 0.0703 ETH in tx `0x43b864d4…` at block 26025152, comfortably above the `min: 1` guard. - Because the brief says `"evidence": "panel"`, the recipe is `{kind: "panel", source: "https://ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com"}` (the only kind the checker accepts for a panel brief), with the full reproduction method in `notes` and the choices the brief left open (per-event counting of matchOrders pairs, the listing/bid shape classification, endpoints used) stated under `definitions`. The answer file is untracked as required, and nothing outside `artifacts/answer.json` and `test/scratch/` was touched.

Created `artifacts/answer.json` with **70300000000000000 wei**. The embedded reproduction code returned the same minimum across 130 qualifying sales. The required checker printed `ok`.

Completed [artifacts/answer.json](/Users/peterhucik/.identitymd/work/70dd19c9-2af0-4c95-8c9a-c074573087eb/370f8723-dac8-4350-a13c-05f414f51cf8/artifacts/answer.json). Floor: `70300000000000000` wei. The provided verifier reports `ok`.

Check passes. `artifacts/answer.json` is written with the computed floor: **70300000000000000 wei** (0.0703 ETH), based on 130 qualifying single-NFT ETH/WETH Seaport fills of the Blokyz collection found across 11,247 `OrderFulfilled` logs over the pinned block window, verified against the pinned closing-block hash.

Check passes with "ok". Summary: scanned Seaport 1.5/1.6 `OrderFulfilled` logs across the pinned block window (26020641–26027793), decoded offer/consideration tuples by hand, filtered to single-ERC721-of-Blokyz sales paid entirely in ETH/WETH, and found the floor price to be **70300000000000000 wei (0.0703 ETH)** among 130 qualifying sales — verified by re-fetching and independently decoding the winning transaction's receipt. Wrote `artifacts/answer.json` with a `panel` recipe (required since the brief pins `evidence: panel`) and it passes `check-answer.mjs`.

Check passes. Answer written to `artifacts/answer.json`: floor of Blokyz = **70300000000000000 wei** (0.0703 ETH), computed from 130 qualifying Seaport OrderFulfilled sales over the pinned block window, cross-checked on two independent public RPC endpoints.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](artifacts/answer.json). Floor: **70300000000000000 wei** across 130 qualifying sales. Included reproduction code returned the same result. Required checker printed `ok`.

check-answer.mjs prints `ok`. Computed the Blokyz floor as 70,300,000,000,000,000 wei (0.0703 ETH) from 130 qualifying Seaport OrderFulfilled fills over the pinned window, written to `artifacts/answer.json`.

I wrote `artifacts/answer.json` with a floor of 70300000000000000 wei (0.0703 ETH) for Blokyz, and `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok` for it. I scanned the pinned blocks 26020641 to 26027793 through the publicnode endpoint. That gave 11,247 Seaport 1.5 and 1.6 `OrderFulfilled` logs. 130 of them qualified as a single Blokyz ERC-721 paid in ETH or WETH, and 70300000000000000 is the lowest price among them. I confirmed the closing block hash matches the pin on that same endpoint only, not on a second operator's. The request is marked panel-evidence, so the recipe had to be `kind: panel` with a source. The source names the endpoint, the event topic and the block range so the scan can be reproduced. I did not use `scan.mjs`, which cannot decode the Seaport arrays. I wrote a small decoder in `test/scratch/s.mjs`, which is not submitted.

required outputs are missing or invalid: artifacts/answer.json: ENOENT: no such file or directory, lstat 'C:\Users\owner\.identitymd-729\work\70dd19c9-2af0-4c95-8c9a-c074573087eb\370f8723-dac8-4350-a13c-05f414f51cf8\artifacts'

FAILURE: runtime_error

I wrote `artifacts/answer.json` with a floor of 70300000000000000 wei (0.0703 ETH) for Blokyz over blocks 26020641 to 26027793. `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok` for it. - **Scan:** I pulled every Seaport 1.5 and 1.6 `OrderFulfilled` log in the window from `https://ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com`, 11,247 logs in all. I confirmed the closing block hash on that endpoint. I did not cross-check it on a second endpoint. - **Decoding:** I decoded the logs by hand from the Seaport ABI, since `scan.mjs` has no mode for NFT sale prices. The scratch script is `test/scratch/s.mjs`; it is not submitted. - **Result:** 130 fills qualified as sales of exactly one Blokyz ERC-721. The lowest price among them is the answer. - **Recipe:** the request is `"evidence": "panel"`, so the only allowed recipe kind is `panel`. Its `source` is the RPC URL, and the deployer cannot rerun it, so the panel's agreement is the only check on the value. - **Not done:** I did not run a second full scan.

The floor over blocks 26020641–26027793 is **70300000000000000 wei** (0.0703 ETH). `artifacts/answer.json` is written and `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok`. - **How I got it:** I fetched the collection's Transfer logs for the window (187 logs across 118 blocks). Then I pulled Seaport `OrderFulfilled` logs from both Seaport contracts in just those blocks and decoded the offer and consideration items myself. I did not use `scan.mjs`, because it can't filter to one collection. - **Qualifying sales:** 130 sales had exactly one ERC-721 of Blokyz, and all were paid in ETH or WETH. Two of them sit at the lowest price, and the next lowest is 70800000000000000 wei. - **Endpoint:** I read everything from `https://ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com`, and the closing block hash matched the pin. I did not cross-check the hash on a second operator's endpoint. - **Recipe kind:** The brief says `"evidence": "panel"`, so the only recipe the check allows is `panel`. I put the RPC URL as its source, but the deployer can't rerun a panel recipe. The full method is in `notes`, and the answer is only as reproducible as that description.

I wrote `artifacts/answer.json` with a floor of 70300000000000000 wei (0.0703 ETH), and `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok` for it. - **Scan:** I scanned `OrderFulfilled` logs on both Seaport contracts (1.5 and 1.6) over blocks 26020641 to 26027793 from `https://ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com`. The closing block hash matched the pin. That was 11,247 fills, of which 130 qualified. - **Definitions:** I applied the request's definitions as written: exactly one ERC-721 item of the collection, listing fills priced as the sum of all consideration amounts, bid fills as the offer amount, and ETH or WETH only. - **Script:** I used my own decoder (`test/scratch/s.mjs`) rather than the catalogue's `scan.mjs`. `scan.mjs` can't decode Seaport's nested offer and consideration arrays. - **Recipe kind:** The brief says `"evidence": "panel"`, and that takes only the `panel` recipe. The recipe is therefore `panel` with the RPC endpoint as its source. The deployer can't rerun it as a catalogue computation, so the notes describe the actual method. - **Cross-check:** I did not confirm the pinned hash on a second operator's endpoint.

`artifacts/answer.json` is written. The floor of Blokyz over blocks 26020641 to 26027793 is 70300000000000000 wei (0.0703 ETH). `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok` for it. - **How I computed it:** I fetched all 11,247 Seaport 1.5 and 1.6 `OrderFulfilled` logs for the window from `https://ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com` and decoded them with my own script. I did not use `scan.mjs`, because it only sums or ranks one field and cannot decode Seaport's nested offer and consideration arrays. - **What qualified:** 130 fills contained exactly one ERC-721 item of the collection and no other NFT, paid in ETH or WETH. Listing fills were priced as the sum of all consideration amounts, and bid fills as the offer amount. The answer is the lowest of those 130 prices. - **Pin:** The closing block hash on that endpoint matches the one in `oracle.json`. I did not check it on a second endpoint from another operator. - **Recipe kind:** The brief says `"evidence": "panel"`, so the catalogue only allows the `panel` recipe. Its `source` is a URL naming that endpoint and the log query. The deployer cannot rerun it as a chain recipe, so it will have to rely on the panel's agreement. - **Earlier failure:** The previous attempt died on a `--model` flag error, which my work doesn't touch. The first draft of my file failed the check because the `window` keys were in the wrong order (`fromBlock` before `toBlock`). I reordered them to match the brief. My decoding script is in `test/scratch/s.mjs`, which is not submitted.

The floor of Blokyz over the pinned window (blocks 26020641 to 26027793) was **70300000000000000 wei** (0.0703 ETH). `artifacts/answer.json` is written, and `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok` for it. - **How I computed it:** I pulled every Seaport `OrderFulfilled` log from both the 1.5 and 1.6 contracts over the pinned blocks, 11,247 logs in all. I decoded the offer and consideration items myself and applied the brief's definitions of sale and price. I did not use `scan.mjs`, because it can't filter by collection. - **Result:** 130 sales qualified, and the lowest of them was 0.0703 ETH. - **Endpoint and pin:** all reads came from `https://ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com`, and the closing block hash matched the pin on that endpoint. I did not check the hash on a second operator's endpoint or rerun the scan there. - **Recipe kind:** the brief sets `"evidence": "panel"`, so the only recipe the catalogue allows is `panel`. It cites the RPC endpoint as its source, and the full method is in `notes`. The deployer can't rerun a panel recipe, so the answer's evidence is the panel agreeing. The first check failed because the `window` keys have to appear in the same order as `oracle.json`, so I reordered them.

required named outputs are invalid: artifacts/answer.json: ENOENT: no such file or directory, lstat '/home/imd-worker/.identitymd/work/70dd19c9-2af0-4c95-8c9a-c074573087eb/370f8723-dac8-4350-a13c-05f414f51cf8/artifacts'

FAILURE: runtime_error

unexpected status 401 Unauthorized: Missing bearer or basic authentication in header, url: https://api.openai.com/v1/responses, cf-ray: a3eb473edff1f3ef-ICN, request id: req_0738cb9b97f74b86a127ee29c99d53d5

FAILURE: runtime_error

Not logged in · Please run /login

FAILURE: runtime_error

Not logged in · Please run /login

FAILURE: runtime_error

error: the argument '--model <MODEL>' cannot be used multiple times Usage: codex exec [OPTIONS] [PROMPT] codex exec [OPTIONS] <COMMAND> [ARGS] For more information, try '--help'.

FAILURE: runtime_error