# r3-b1-05

**Claim (as registered):** The average count of individual-text-within-a-composite-manuscript rows per parent manuscript record is source-specific and reflects manuscript culture, not a universal constant: a Byzantine/Greek-codex catalogue shows markedly higher text-per-manuscript density than a Perso-Arabic catalogue or an English lost-book catalogue, while a fourth (title-grain) source shows exactly 1:1 by construction.

**Proposed mechanism:** Composite-codex density is proposed to reflect real codicological/manuscript-culture differences -- how many separate texts get bound into one physical volume in a given tradition -- not a cataloguing-depth artifact of one project.

**Scope:** This conjecture concerns the manuscript-catalogue source(s) named below only -- it does not involve NAMAMI or India data at all, and is not decided by NAMAMI's India-state holdout in any way (no India state's landing can confirm or refute it). It is decided only by future growth of, or new landings to, the specific source(s) named below; no such test has run yet. Specifically: four sources that populate a contained-text table at all (a Byzantine/Greek-manuscript catalogue, a Perso-Arabic catalogue, an English lost-book catalogue, and a Chinese Buddhist canon catalogue).

**Training-side evidence:** Ratios (contained-text rows per parent record): 6.53 (260,182/39,842), 2.43 (37,176/15,318), 1.01 (8,300/8,199), and exactly 1.00 (5,005/5,005 -- flagged as very likely a structural artifact of how that fourth source's harvester constructs its rows, not an emergent codicological fact).

**Holdout test and outcome:** No holdout test has been run for this conjecture. Evaluate the rival mechanisms against the training evidence alone.

**Status:** Not yet tested; decided only by future landings/increments to these sources.
