ec749299-b116-41b0-8908-d11d59b0fda0IMD JOB

Created `artifacts/answer.json` with **45959502499999999 wei**, averaged across 32 qualifying sales. The included reproduction script returned the same result. The required checker printed `ok`.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](/Users/peterhucik/.identitymd/work/ec749299-b116-41b0-8908-d11d59b0fda0/7066dba1-5f57-4500-96d2-226fab01f027/artifacts/answer.json). Average sale price: `45959502499999999` wei. The supplied validator prints `ok`.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](artifacts/answer.json) with the reproduction recipe. Average: **45,959,502,499,999,999 wei** across **32 qualifying sales**. The required checker printed `ok`.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](<.../artifacts/answer.json>) with the computed average: `41263114074074073` wei. Verification: `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok`.

required named outputs are invalid: artifacts/answer.json: ENOENT: no such file or directory, lstat 'C:\Users\owner\.identitymd-729\work\ec749299-b116-41b0-8908-d11d59b0fda0\7066dba1-5f57-4500-96d2-226fab01f027\artifacts'

FAILURE: runtime_error

I'll start by reading the pinned request and the skill references.Now let me read the scan and check scripts.The brief is clear: compute the average OpenSea sale price of the ApuApustajas collection over the pinned window by decoding Seaport `OrderFulfilled` logs. The brief has `"evidence": "panel"`, so the recipe must be `panel` per the check script. Let me set up and verify the environment.Node 22 is available. First, let me compute the `OrderFulfilled` topic hash and verify an endpoint.The topic matches Seaport's `OrderFulfilled` (0x9d9af8...6f31). The block query returned null — let me check my hex conversion.Window is 7157 blocks, fully in the past (head ~26026961). Now verify the pinned closing hash on two endpoints.Pin confirmed on three endpoints. Now I'll write a scratch script that scans `OrderFulfilled` logs on both Seaport contracts, decodes them, applies the sale/price definitions, and computes the average.12,231 logs fetched, pin confirmed. Fixing a BigInt mixing bug.32 qualifying sales: 27 listings, 5 bids; sum ≈ 1.4707 ETH, average = 45959502499999999 wei. Let me spot-check the decode by listing the qualifying sales and verifying one against its transaction.The import re-ran the first script. Let me run the listing script on its own.No output — likely some chunk returned empty or threw silently. Let me add diagnostics.Chunks return fine (12,231 total). Let me debug why the listing script printed nothing.Bug: the helpers check `it.itemType` but the objects use field `t`. Fixing.Only 22 sales here vs 32 in the first script — something differs. Let me check how many logs this run actually saw.Same 12,231 logs. Let me see which blocks the first script's 32 sales landed in — the second script only found sales in two blocks.The second script had a field-name bug (`it.token` vs `it.tok`) — it only caught ETH-paid sales. The first script's logic is correct. Interesting pattern: some txs contain both a bid and a listing event — each `OrderFulfilled` counts independently per the definitions. One concern: my `getLogs` started with the full 7157-block range — if the endpoint silently truncated instead of refusing, I'd have missed logs. Let me verify coverage by rescanning with different chunk boundaries and a different endpoint.Coverage confirmed: 12,231 logs on a second endpoint with different chunking. Now let me sanity-check the decode against a real transaction's ERC-721 transfer and payment flow.This tx matched a bid and a listing for the same NFT — two `OrderFulfilled` events. Per the definitions each event counts. Let me decode both events fully to verify my parser.Decode verified: the tx matched a bid (offer 0.0244 WETH) with a listing (consideration 0.02226012 WETH to seller) for tokenId 7561 — two qualifying `OrderFulfilled` events, each counted per the pinned definitions. My parser's amounts match the real WETH transfers exactly. Result: 32 qualifying sales (27 listing fills, 5 bid fills), sum 1,470,704,079,999,999,996 wei, average = **45,959,502,499,999,999 wei**. Since the brief has `"evidence": "panel"`, the recipe must be `{kind: "panel", source: <URL>}` — I'll cite the RPC endpoint used. Writing the answer now.Check passes. Let me verify the final state of the workspace.Done. `artifacts/answer.json` is written and `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok`. **Answer: 45,959,502,499,999,999 wei** (~0.046 ETH) How it was computed: - **Scan**: `eth_getLogs` for `OrderFulfilled` (topic `0x9d9af8…6f31`) on Seaport 1.5 (`0x…adc0…`) and 1.6 (`0x…68f1…`) over blocks 26019451–26026607. Pin hash `0x8a84f5aa…cdec2` confirmed on three endpoints. - **Coverage**: 12,231 logs, cross-checked on a second endpoint (mevblocker) with different chunk boundaries — same total. - **Filtering** (per the pinned definitions): exactly one itemType-2 item of `0xe2fc…cdd7` across offer+consideration, no other NFT items; listing fills priced as the sum of all ETH/WETH consideration (only when every consideration item is ETH/WETH); bid fills pr

Created `artifacts/answer.json` with the average **45,959,502,499,999,999 wei** across 32 qualifying sales, definitions, and reproduction code. The required checker prints `ok`.

Completed [artifacts/answer.json](/home/imd-worker/.identitymd/work/ec749299-b116-41b0-8908-d11d59b0fda0/7066dba1-5f57-4500-96d2-226fab01f027/artifacts/answer.json). Average sale price: `45959502499999999` wei. Validated with the supplied checker: `ok`.

`artifacts/answer.json` is written, and `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok`. The average sale price is **45959502499999999 wei**, about 0.04596 ETH. - **Scan:** I decoded every Seaport 1.5 and 1.6 `OrderFulfilled` log over exactly blocks 26019451 to 26026607, 12,231 logs in all. They came from `https://ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com`, and I confirmed the closing block hash against the pin. I also confirmed the hash on `https://rpc.mevblocker.io/fast`. - **Result:** 32 events qualify under the definitions. Their prices sum to 1470704079999999996 wei, and that divided by 32 and rounded down gives the figure above. - **Recipe kind:** The brief says `"evidence": "panel"`, and `check-answer.mjs` requires a `panel` recipe for that. So the recipe is `panel` with the RPC and log query as its `source`, not a `log-sum` that the deployer can rerun. - **Judgement call:** four of the 32 events are pairs from matched orders, where a collection bid was matched to a listing. Seaport emitted two events for one NFT transfer, and both meet the literal definition, so I counted both rather than deduplicating by transaction. If the deployer deduplicates, the average will differ. This is stated under `definitions.openChoice`. - **Tooling:** I used my own decoder in `test/scratch/s.mjs`, because `scan.mjs` doesn't decode the Seaport item arrays. It isn't submitted, and `notes` says so. - **Key order:** `check-answer.mjs` also demands the `window` keys in the brief's order (`toBlock`, `fromBlock`, `toBlockHash`), so I fixed that.

Created `artifacts/answer.json` with the average **45,959,502,499,999,999 wei** across **32 sales**, plus definitions and reproducible RPC calculation code. The required checker printed `ok`.

`artifacts/answer.json` is written, and `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok` for it. - **Answer:** 45959502499999999 wei. The total paid was 1470704079999999996 wei over 32 sales, and the average is that divided by 32, rounded down. - **Sales:** 27 were listing fills and 5 were bid fills. None were excluded for non-ETH/WETH payment. - **Window:** exactly blocks 26019451 to 26026607. The chain id is 1 and the closing block hash matched the pin. - **Data:** I fetched all 12,231 `OrderFulfilled` logs from Seaport 1.5 and 1.6 over that window from `https://ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com` and decoded them with a scratch script. - **Recipe:** the brief sets `evidence: "panel"`, and the checker rejects any other kind for that. The recipe is therefore `{kind: "panel", source}`, with the RPC URL and log filter as the source. The definitions and method are in `definitions` and `notes`. - **Cross-check:** I did not run a second full scan or a second-endpoint hash check, as the reference says one scan is enough. - **Git:** the answer file is untracked and nothing is committed.

Done. `artifacts/answer.json` is written and `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok`. **Answer: `45959502499999999` wei** (≈0.04596 ETH) average, from a sum of `1470704079999999996` wei over 32 qualifying fills. How it was computed: - Pin confirmed: `eth_chainId` = 0x1 and block 26026607 hash `0x8a84…dec2` on `https://ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com`, and the same hash independently on `https://eth.drpc.org`. Window spans exactly 86400 s. - `eth_getLogs` over exactly blocks 26019451–26026607, both Seaport addresses, topic0 `0x9d9af8e3…6f31`, 250-block chunks halving on refusal → 12231 `OrderFulfilled` events. Each decoded to `(orderHash, recipient, SpentItem[], ReceivedItem[])` in-process; no logs printed. - 32 events touched `0xe2fc…cdd7`; all 32 qualified (no bundles, no ERC-1155, none paid in another token). 27 listing fills (price = sum of ETH/WETH consideration, fees included), 5 bid fills (price = the single ETH/WETH offer amount). Decoding was cross-checked against transaction data, not just self-consistency: the decoded consideration sums for the two ETH bulk purchases equal those transactions' ETH values to the wei, and in the bid-fill transaction the three WETH transfers sum exactly to the bid's offer amount — confirming the bid-side offer amount is the fee-inclusive price. One judgment call worth flagging: 5 transactions emit *two* `OrderFulfilled` events for the same token (a bid fill plus the seller's net listing leg). The brief defines a sale as the event and gives a price rule for each side, with no rule for collapsing a pair, so I counted per event. Collapsing each pair to its gross leg would give `42421403703703703` over 27 sales — that alternative and the reason for rejecting it are recorded in `definitions.unit_of_sale` and `notes`. The recipe is `{ kind: "panel", source: "https://ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com" }`, which the brief's `"evidence": "panel"` requires; the chain recipe kinds cannot express a Seaport item-level filter. Git config is unreadable in this sandbox, so nothing was staged — the file is untracked as intended.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](/home/imd-worker/.identitymd/work/ec749299-b116-41b0-8908-d11d59b0fda0/7066dba1-5f57-4500-96d2-226fab01f027/artifacts/answer.json). Answer: `45959502499999999` wei. Validation passed: `check-answer.mjs` printed `ok`.

`artifacts/answer.json` is written and passes the check. **Result: 45959502499999999 wei** (≈0.04596 ETH) average ApuApustajas sale price over blocks 26019451–26026607. How it was computed: - `scan.mjs --keccak` gave the `OrderFulfilled` topic0 `0x9d9af8e3…`; a first small scan confirmed chainId 1 and the pinned closing hash. - A scratch script (`test/scratch/seaport.mjs`, not submitted) pulled every `OrderFulfilled` log from Seaport 1.5 and 1.6 over exactly the pinned range (12231 logs) and ABI-decoded the `SpentItem[] offer` / `ReceivedItem[] consideration` arrays, which no catalogue recipe can express — `log-sum` only adds one fixed data word. It prints totals only, never logs. - 32 fills qualified (exactly one ERC-721 item of `0xe2fc…cdd7`, paid wholly in ETH/WETH, fees included); sum 1470704079999999996 wei; floor(sum/32) = 45959502499999999. - Scanned whole on `https://rpc.flashbots.net/fast` (200-block chunks) and re-scanned on `https://ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com` (100-block chunks, different operator): identical log count, sales and sum, both confirming the pin — so nothing was silently truncated. Two judgment calls, both stated under `definitions` and expanded in `notes`: - The brief is `"evidence": "panel"`, so the recipe is `{kind: "panel", source}` naming the RPC endpoint and exact log filter; the check rejects a chain recipe here. - 32 qualifying logs cover 27 distinct (tx, tokenId) pairs — 5 tokens went through a Seaport match that emitted both the bid order's log and the listing order's log. The brief defines a sale as the event and gives a price rule for bid fills as well as listing fills, so both are counted. The deduplicated alternative (27 sales, average 41263114074074073) is recorded in `notes`. Every collection-touching log in the window qualified (32 of 32), so no bundle/ERC-1155/other-token exclusion applied.

**Answer: 45959502499999999 wei** — 32 qualifying Seaport `OrderFulfilled` fills of ApuApustajas in blocks 26019451–26026607, summing 1470704079999999996 wei (mean floored). Pinned hash and the 30-log transfer candidate set were confirmed on three independent public endpoints; the keyed local route was at its hourly cap (429), so the scan ran on public RPCs. `node .imd/reads/skills/oracle-assess/scripts/check-answer.mjs` prints **ok** (exit 0) for `artifacts/answer.json`.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](/root/.identitymd/work/ec749299-b116-41b0-8908-d11d59b0fda0/7066dba1-5f57-4500-96d2-226fab01f027/artifacts/answer.json). Answer: `45959502499999999` wei. The supplied checker prints `ok`.

I wrote `artifacts/answer.json`, and `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok` for it. The average sale price is **45959502499999999 wei**, about 0.04596 ETH. - **Sales counted:** 32 qualifying sales, summing to 1470704079999999996 wei. - **Scan:** I fetched 12,231 `OrderFulfilled` logs from both Seaport contracts over blocks 26019451 to 26026607. I used `https://ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com`. It returned chain ID 1 and the pinned closing hash `0x8a84f5aa…cdec2`. I did not cross-check the hash on a second operator's endpoint. - **Definitions:** I applied the request's own definitions. That means exactly one NFT in the event, an ERC-721 of the collection, paid in ETH or WETH, fees included, and each log counted once. - **Script:** I used my own decoder in `test/scratch/s.mjs` rather than `scan.mjs`, because the collection filter lives in the event data, not the topics. My first pass had a token-offset bug that produced zero sales. I fixed it before this figure. - **Recipe:** The brief is marked `"evidence": "panel"`, so the recipe kind is `panel`. Its `source` is the endpoint plus the topic, contract addresses and block range, so it can be rerun from public RPC data. - **Window key order:** The check requires the `window` keys in the same order as the brief (`toBlock`, `fromBlock`, `toBlockHash`). My first draft had them in a different order and failed until I reordered them.

Created `artifacts/answer.json` with **45,959,502,499,999,999 wei**, averaged across 32 qualifying sales, and the RPC reproduction procedure. Required checker printed `ok`.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](artifacts/answer.json). Average: **45,959,502,499,999,999 wei** across 32 qualifying sales. Includes reproduction steps and definitions. Validation: `check-answer.mjs` printed `ok`.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](/home/imd/.identitymd/work/ec749299-b116-41b0-8908-d11d59b0fda0/7066dba1-5f57-4500-96d2-226fab01f027/artifacts/answer.json). Average sale price: `45959502499999999` wei. Validation passed: `check-answer.mjs` printed `ok`.

Created `artifacts/answer.json` with the reproducible calculation. Average: **45,959,502,499,999,999 wei** across **32 sales**. Reproduction verified against fetched logs; the required checker prints `ok`.

`artifacts/answer.json` is written and `check-answer.mjs` prints **ok** (exit 0). **Answer: 45959502499999999 wei** (~0.04596 ETH) average sale price. How it was computed, over exactly blocks 26019451–26026607: 1. **Pin confirmed on two operators** — `eth_chainId` = 1 and block 26026607 hash = `0x8a84…dec2` on both `rpc.flashbots.net/fast` and `ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com`. 2. **Candidate blocks** — 30 ERC-721 `Transfer` logs of `0xe2fc…cdd7` in the window (via `scan.mjs`, pinned true), landing in 10 blocks. Any Seaport fill of the collection necessarily moves the token, so no qualifying event can sit outside them. 3. **Seaport logs** — `OrderFulfilled` (`0x9d9af8e3…`) on Seaport 1.5 and 1.6 in those blocks: 46 events, decoded with the Seaport ABI in a scratch script (`scan.mjs` can't decode `SpentItem[]`/`ReceivedItem[]`). 4. **Filter and price** — 32 qualifying sales (27 listing fills priced as the full consideration incl. fees, 5 bid fills priced as the WETH offer); 13 dropped as another collection, 1 as not itemType 2. Sum 1470704079999999996 wei ÷ 32, floored. Both endpoints returned identical totals, so nothing was truncated. One judgment call, stated in `definitions` and `notes`: 5 transactions are OpenSea collection-bid matches where Seaport emits two qualifying events for one economic trade (the gross bid fill and the seller's net counter-order fill). The pinned `sale` definition is written per event and prices the bid-fill shape explicitly, so both halves are counted. The deduplicated alternative — 27 sales, average 42421403703703703 wei — is recorded in `notes` in case the panel reads it the other way. The recipe is `{kind: "panel", source}` as the brief's `"evidence": "panel"` requires; no catalogue chain recipe can decode Seaport's item arrays, and that limitation is stated in `notes`.

I wrote `artifacts/answer.json` with an average sale price of **45959502499999999 wei**, and the answer check prints `ok`. - **Sales counted:** 32 qualifying Seaport 1.5 and 1.6 `OrderFulfilled` events in 10 transactions over blocks 26019451–26026607, summing to 1470704079999999996 wei. Of these, 27 are listing fills and 5 are bid fills, all paid in ETH or WETH. - **Pin:** the chain id is 1 and the closing block hash matches the pin on `ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com`. - **Method:** I used the collection's ERC-721 `Transfer` logs to find the 30 transfers in 10 transactions. I then decoded every `OrderFulfilled` event in those transaction receipts against your definitions. I did not use `scan.mjs` because it can't decode Seaport's item arrays. This covers every fill of the token, since a fill always moves the NFT. - **Counting choice:** five `matchOrders` transactions each emit two events for the same token, one bid-side and one listing-side. I counted each event as its own sale, following the literal definition, and stated this under `definitions`. Deduping by token would change the count and the average. - **Recipe kind:** the brief says `"evidence": "panel"`, and the check requires a `panel` recipe with a source URL in that case. The recipe therefore names the RPC endpoint I read from, and the exact computation is in `notes` instead. The decoding script is in `test/scratch/` and is not part of the deliverable.

Created `artifacts/answer.json` with **45,959,502,499,999,999 wei**, averaged over 32 qualifying sales, plus reproduction code. Required checker returned `ok`.

`artifacts/answer.json` is written and `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok`. The average sale price is **45959502499999999 wei**. - **Sales:** 32 sales qualified, totalling 1470704079999999996 wei. The average is that total divided by 32, rounded down. - **Scan:** I pulled all 12231 `OrderFulfilled` logs from Seaport 1.5 and 1.6 over exactly blocks 26019451 to 26026607. I used `https://ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com` in 1000-block chunks, halving on refusal. It reported chain id 1, and the closing block hash matches the pin. I did not cross-check the hash on a second operator's endpoint. - **Decoding:** I decoded the offer and consideration arrays from the log data by hand and applied the request's sale and price definitions, including bid fills. My script is in `test/scratch/s.mjs`, which is not submitted. - **Recipe kind:** The brief has `"evidence": "panel"`, and the checker only accepts a `panel` recipe for such briefs. The recipe therefore names the scan as its source, but a `panel` recipe is not rerun by the deployer. The log-based catalogue recipes could not decode the nested arrays anyway. I explain this in `notes`.

The average sale price is **45959502499999999 wei** (about 0.04596 ETH): 32 qualifying sales totalling 1470704079999999996 wei, divided and rounded down. The answer is in `artifacts/answer.json`, and `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok` for it. - **Scan:** I fetched every OrderFulfilled log from both Seaport contracts over exactly blocks 26019451–26026607 from `ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com`, 12,231 logs with no duplicates. The chain id is 1, and the closing block hash matches the pin there and on `rpc.mevblocker.io/fast`. - **Decoding:** the provided `scan.mjs` can't read Seaport's item lists, so I decoded them with my own script in `test/scratch/` (not submitted). - **Recipe:** the request marks this as a `panel` question, so the recipe is `kind: panel`. Its source names the endpoint and the `eth_getLogs` query I used. **Decision for you:** the count depends on how accepted offers are treated. Five of the 32 sales are accepted offers (bids), and each of those emits two qualifying events in the same transaction. One is the buyer's offer, priced at the full offer amount. The other is the matching counter-order, priced at what the seller received after fees. I counted every event, because the request defines a sale as an event. If each accepted offer should count only once, there are 27 sales, a total of 1145377899999999996 wei, and an average of **42421403703703703 wei**. Other panel members could pick either reading, so the notes give both numbers. Tell me if you want the answer switched to the one-per-offer figure. All 32 fills were single ERC-721 tokens of the collection paid in ETH or WETH, so none were excluded. They break down as 22 bought listings (17 of them in one multi-item purchase) plus the 5 accepted offers counted twice.

Created `artifacts/answer.json`: **45,959,502,499,999,999 wei**, averaged over 32 qualifying sales. Included reproducible RPC calculation code. The required checker printed `ok`.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](/home/imd2/.identitymd/work/ec749299-b116-41b0-8908-d11d59b0fda0/7066dba1-5f57-4500-96d2-226fab01f027/artifacts/answer.json). Average: **45,959,502,499,999,999 wei** across **32 qualifying sales**. Includes definitions and a self-contained RPC reproduction procedure. Reproduction matched the captured data; the required validator printed `ok`.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](artifacts/answer.json). Average: **45,959,502,499,999,999 wei** across 32 qualifying sales. Includes reproduction steps and definitions. Supplied checker: `ok`.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](/home/worker/.imd/seat2/work/ec749299-b116-41b0-8908-d11d59b0fda0/7066dba1-5f57-4500-96d2-226fab01f027/artifacts/answer.json). Average sale price: `45959502499999999` wei. Validation passed: `ok`.

Done. Wrote `artifacts/answer.json` with answer: `45959502499999999` Verification run: `node .imd/reads/skills/oracle-assess/scripts/check-answer.mjs artifacts/answer.json .imd/reads/oracle.json` Output: `ok`

I wrote `artifacts/answer.json`, and `check-answer.mjs` prints **ok** for it. **Answer: `45959502499999999` wei (about 0.04596 ETH).** That is 32 qualifying sales totalling 1470704079999999996 wei, divided by 32 and rounded down. **How I got it** - I pulled every OrderFulfilled log from both Seaport contracts (1.5 and 1.6) over exactly blocks 26019451–26026607 from `https://ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com`. It fetched 500 blocks per request and split any refused range in half. - On that endpoint the chain id was 1 and the closing block's hash matched the pinned one. I also checked that hash on `https://rpc.mevblocker.io`, a different operator, and it matched. - There were 12,231 logs in total. 32 involve this collection, and all 32 qualify: 27 are listing fills and 5 are bid fills. None were dropped as bundles, ERC-1155 fills or payments in another token. - The provided `scan.mjs` can't decode Seaport's item lists, so I wrote a small Node decoder in `test/scratch/`. It isn't part of the submission. - The brief sets evidence to "panel", so the checker only accepts a `panel` recipe. Its `source` names the endpoint, the two contracts, the event topic and the block range. **Decision for the reviewer:** five of the sales are accepted bids that were settled by matching two orders. Each one emits two events that both qualify under the brief's definition: - the bid itself, carrying the full price; - the seller's matching order, carrying what the seller received after fees. I followed the definition literally and counted every qualifying event, so those five sales are each counted twice. If each accepted bid should count once, the result is 27 sales and an average of `42421403703703703` wei. The notes in the answer file list the five transactions and this alternative. I ran one full scan only; I didn't repeat it on a second endpoint.

`artifacts/answer.json` is written and `check-answer.mjs` prints `ok`. The average sale price is **45959502499999999 wei**, about 0.04596 ETH. - **Scan:** I fetched all 12,231 `OrderFulfilled` logs from Seaport 1.5 and 1.6 over exactly blocks 26019451–26026607. Of those, 32 events qualified: 27 listing fills and 5 bid fills. None were excluded as bundles or as paid in another token. - **Result:** The prices sum to 1470704079999999996 wei, and dividing by 32 and rounding down gives the answer. - **Endpoints:** I ran the scan on `rpc.flashbots.net/fast` and again on `ethereum-rpc.publicnode.com`. Both gave identical results, and both confirmed chain 1 and the pinned closing hash. - **Matched pairs counted twice:** Four transactions and a fifth (`0x1072ac93`) each emit two qualifying events for the same token, a bid order and a listing order matched together. The brief's definition treats each qualifying `OrderFulfilled` event as a sale, so I counted both. This is stated under `definitions`. Counting each such pair once would change the average. - **Recipe kind:** The brief marks the evidence as `panel`, and the answer check requires a `panel` recipe in that case. The recipe's `source` is the publicnode endpoint URL. The full recipe is in `notes`, and the throwaway script is in `test/scratch/sales.mjs`, which is not submitted.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](artifacts/answer.json). Average: **45,959,502,499,999,999 wei** across **32 sales**. The included procedure reproduced the result, and the required checker printed `ok`.

Created and validated [artifacts/answer.json](/home/imd1/.identitymd/work/ec749299-b116-41b0-8908-d11d59b0fda0/7066dba1-5f57-4500-96d2-226fab01f027/artifacts/answer.json). The verifier prints `ok`.

Created [artifacts/answer.json](artifacts/answer.json). Average: **45,959,502,499,999,999 wei** across **32 sales**. Includes a dependency-free reproduction script. The required checker printed `ok`.

Created `artifacts/answer.json`: **45959502499999999 wei**, averaged over 32 qualifying sales. The included reproduction returned the same result. The required checker printed `ok`.