The larger proposals as open tests [fdip-00A2]

The compatibility test fixes one finite spinor datum. The same 5 criteria now record the larger proposals left open by the status of that datum. Each proposal states the claim under test, the algebraic datum already in hand, the map that is missing, and whether any finite witness is available. An open mark records that absence. It is not a theorem that no later construction exists, and it is not a physical identification.

The 4 Lie-group names are those already listed as unconstructed in Proposition [fdip-00A1]. Their source claims are not the same. Three names do not occur in the cited Wilson paper. \(SL(4,\mathbb R)\) does, in a later section, and the Hessian route is the claim of Section 2.2. Both remarks below quote the claim that was rechecked and say what is missing. A correspondence still has to specify an action and a representation, an algebra map, any preserved structure or form, a unit-group choice where applicable, and the intended physical meaning, as required by why begin with 2T?. Resemblance is not a model, and neither remark below adopts a group.

The two remarks below keep these proposals open. Neither remark adopts a group as the symmetry of the lattice theory, and neither draws a no-go conclusion from the missing map.