# Analysis result

## Run metadata

Model: GPT-5 (Codex)  
Provider: OpenAI  
Settings: Unknown  
Tools were available but excluded by the access boundary and not used. External data was unavailable and not used.

## Machine-readable result

```json
{
  "schema_version": "2.1.0",
  "analyst_model": "GPT-5",
  "case_id": "CASE-8JQJ",
  "cues": {
    "tonal_stability": {
      "score": 1,
      "evidence_ids": ["E015", "E017"],
      "reason": "Observed: E015 begins with B–D-sharp–F-sharp, not the home tonic D; D-centered sonority appears later in E017. Inference: home-tonic stability at the candidate is weak."
    },
    "thematic_correspondence": {
      "score": 4,
      "evidence_ids": ["E001", "E002", "E003", "E015", "E016", "E017"],
      "reason": "Observed: E015 reproduces E001’s rhythm and texture with a transposed head; E016–E017 closely parallel E002–E003. Inference: this is an extensive opening-theme return despite tonal alteration."
    },
    "preparation_strength": {
      "score": 2,
      "evidence_ids": ["E013", "E014", "E015"],
      "reason": "Observed: E014 thins to p and ends on D–E–G before E015’s B-major sonority and f entrance; no clear dominant cadence precedes it. Inference: rhetorical preparation exists, but cadential preparation is weak."
    },
    "proportional_location": {
      "score": 4,
      "evidence_ids": ["E015"],
      "reason": "Observed: the candidate begins 72 of 141 quarter notes into the second part, almost exactly its midpoint. Inference: this location is strongly compatible with a recapitulatory division."
    },
    "rhetorical_emphasis": {
      "score": 3,
      "evidence_ids": ["E014", "E015", "E016"],
      "reason": "Observed: p in E014 yields to f in E015, the opening texture returns, and E016 reaches G5; no special barline or articulation marks arrival. Inference: emphasis is substantial but not maximal."
    },
    "rotational_continuation": {
      "score": 3,
      "evidence_ids": ["E002", "E003", "E004", "E016", "E017", "E018", "E021", "E022", "E023", "E024", "E025", "E026"],
      "reason": "Observed: E016–E018 track E002–E004 closely, while E021–E026 move into repeated sequential figuration. Inference: early continuation supports recapitulatory rotation, though later behavior retains developmental ambiguity."
    }
  },
  "status_distribution": {
    "not_recapitulation": 0.08,
    "off_tonic_recapitulation": 0.915,
    "tonic_double_return": 0.005
  },
  "suspected_recognition": {
    "level": "style",
    "confidence": 0.82
  },
  "case_note": "The candidate is best read as an off-tonic return: thematic and proportional evidence outweigh weak harmonic preparation, while the B-major onset strongly excludes a tonic double return."
}
```

## Limitations

Missing dossier evidence: only selected windows are supplied, so the complete formal correspondence and later tonal resolution cannot be checked; no sounding performance is available. Analytical uncertainty: the off-tonic thematic return is clear, but deciding whether it is a true recapitulation or a developmental false return remains interpretive because the later continuation becomes sequential.