# Author visual review
## Candidate draft16 -> rev1
Read runner drawing `out/t0_p336d70065d_draft_draft16.png` before submission. All three through holes remain void. The circular region is occupied from approximately 0 to 0.753, and both other level regions remain occupied at their listed heights; none is treated as a void. Hole 2 has a compact enclosure about 1.2 wide for a 0.75 diameter hole. Hole 1 is isolated by its rectangular level loop and a ring. The upper hole connects to the nearby enclosing outer round, with wider clearance now between that hole and the circular occupied region. Boss and capsule footprints have surrounding and interior rings.

The layout is strongly subdivided (143 blocks). Several diagonal fans and broad background wedges remain in the lower and left rounded material. These follow the rounded/angled outer shape and connect isolated features, but the quantity exceeds the preferred fewest-block ideal. The upper hole's left transition is larger than ideal. The capsule ring now has local tangency splits, preventing a narrow curved transition from stretching across its full height. Local symmetry is imperfect, especially in the capsule's core and the upper hole/boss transition; neighboring features and tight height boundaries motivated this. A short narrow strip beside the rectangular recess remains, and the expert rule-11 mark is recorded rather than disguised. The last numerical repairs widened the upper-hole clearance and moved its neighbor cut; they improved that feature transition without adding subdivisions.

Decision: submit as a necessary tradeoff. The entire 2-D entry, block-structure limits and shape forecast pass. This is my author review, not a human/expert grade. Mesh quality and doubled-density checks remain decisive.
## Rev1 result and repair draft18 -> rev2
Read `out/t0_p336d70065d_rev1.png`. The full run refused STRICT with C5 boundary-crossing reports at q73 and q125; 2-D passed, and the builder stopped before mesh quality/refinement could run. I inspected the named transitions in my own layout. The flat drawing does not show an obvious crossing there, so I do not claim the builder is wrong. Draft17 moved the two patch centers more strongly and was refused by AR-3D; it was not submitted.
Read `out/t0_p336d70065d_draft_draft18.png`. Draft18 makes small moves of those two background centers while preserving every feature ring and level boundary, with no added blocks. Its 2-D check and structure/shape forecasts pass. Local feature isolation, enclosure scales, symmetry compromises and diagonal background tradeoffs remain as reviewed above; these moves change the nearby element shapes but do not cure the overall surplus of subdivisions. Submit rev2 to determine whether the strict builder realizes these regularized transitions.
## Rev2 result / final review
Read `out/t0_p336d70065d_rev2.png` after the full run. The same STRICT C5 reports at q73 and q125 remain. Both 2-D region checks pass; mesh quality, doubled-density stability, occupancy and mesh-component results are unavailable because the builder stopped. The visual result retains all features and local rings, but retains the documented excess partitions, diagonal fans and asymmetric capsule core. These are author-identified tradeoffs, not an expert grade. No further subdivision was added after this failed repair. Stop at the repeated strict realization failure within the session time limit; preserve both revisions and every draft.