The universe contains matter but almost no antimatter, quantified by the measured baryon-to-photon ratio η_B ≈ 6.1×10⁻¹⁰ (fixed by CMB and Big-Bang-nucleosynthesis data). This gate asks whether that number emerges from thermal leptogenesis running on the theory's frozen flavor and Majorana data — that is, whether the asymmetry follows from the geometry rather than being put in by hand. Because η_B is already measured, this is an observation-locked target: the theory must produce a number and submit it to comparison, not retrofit one.
The frozen 13D branch supplies the ingredients a leptogenesis calculation needs — the right-handed-neutrino Majorana data declared at the order-three fixed point τ = ω, and the low-energy CP phases derived in the flavor sector. It does not supply the assembled answer. A direct, recipe-traced attempt to compute the high-scale inputs found that the absolute neutrino Yukawa is mathematically degenerate with the heavy scale M_R, that M_R itself is recipe-absent (the mechanism is named but no formula converts the geometry into a spectrum), and that the measured low-energy CP phase is firewalled out of the leptogenesis source by a 6-versus-3 phase-counting argument. The geometry therefore fixes texture and structure, not the magnitudes that decide η_B.
Badge: OPEN / Diagnostic — 0 of 4 at certificate grade. No part of η_B is derived; no number is asserted; No status was ever upgraded.
Four named, coupled computations would be required, and none has been run at certificate grade: (1) a canonical, basis-invariant CP invariant I_CP; (2) a real-intermediate-state-subtracted ΔL=2 washout treatment; (3) an N₂/N₃ damping ledger; (4) flavored density-matrix kinetics. A parallel narrative thread dismantled a circulated "clean result" and located the residue precisely:
BG10-Axiom-SpinC-QP). Notably, the geometry's default value gives the wrong sign for the asymmetry — so the required axiom departs from the target rather than being fitted to it. The needed quarter-phase is a declared assumption, not derivable from the frozen record.Load-bearing caution. A widely circulated "κ³/π" manifest gives η_B ≈ 6.05×10⁻¹⁰, but it is true by construction — its load-bearing entries were reverse-engineered to land in the window (and the value is provably the maximum of a one-parameter CP family, attained only at the chosen phase). It must never be cited as a prediction.
There is a concrete path, but it is owner-physics, not yet executed: derive the high-scale CP invariant from the geometry, then run the full four-fix thermal-leptogenesis computation to a single post-freeze number with a propagated 3σ band, and compare it exactly once to the pre-registered window η_B ∈ [6.0, 6.2]×10⁻¹⁰ — accepting falsification if it lands outside. The comparison is mechanized to refuse early or partial closure (the standing 0/4 is enforced, not merely asserted). Until all four fixes reach certificate grade, no η_B may be claimed; the diagnostic thermal-leptogenesis "floor" that passes the temperature range is explicitly not the result.
This is not a Yang-Mills-style wall — the formalisms are known and citable, the obstruction is unfinished computation plus one underived discrete bit. It is an honestly-held open gate with a pre-registered falsifier, not a solved one.
Status: OPEN. No value for the matter/antimatter ratio ηB is claimed. Because ηB is already measured, this gate is observation-locked: the theory must produce a number and submit it to the data exactly once — it may not be retrofitted. No part of the number is yet derived.
Established (given the observed inputs): the matter/antimatter ratio reduces to exactly one measured anchor (ηB itself, the pre-registered falsifier) plus one proved structural firewall that costs nothing — the seesaw degeneracy and the high-vs-low CP phase count, which together show the high-scale inputs are genuinely under-determined by the data. The geometry does real, load-bearing work fixing the flavor texture; the magnitudes that decide ηB rest on no derived geometric quantity.
Precisely the open piece: (1) whether a high-scale CP source — existence and sign — can be derived from the frozen structure without using the answer; (2) the absolute neutrino-coupling and heavy-mass magnitudes, jointly under-determined by the proven seesaw firewall; (3) the four coupled computations, standing at zero of four. This is not a deep no-go wall: the methods are known and citable, the obstruction is unfinished computation plus one underived discrete sign. No ηB may be claimed until all four are finished and the single number is compared once to the window [6.0, 6.2]×10−10, accepting falsification.
Bottom line: an honestly-held open gate with a pre-registered falsifier — a serious candidate, not a validated account of baryogenesis.
Ceiling on this brief: serious candidate / partial unification — NOT validated. Given the observed spectrum is an input, not a derivation of it. No status was ever upgraded.