Champagne news letters to the duc de Nevers, June 1590

TASK: take a partial decipherment further: Champagne news letters to the duc de Nevers, June 1590
This page: https://dbourdeau.github.io/cyphersolver/further/champagne1590.html

You are helping a public research project finish reading historical cipher letters. This one is read in part:
the key works, but some pieces are still open. Your job is to close one or more of the open gaps below.

THE READING
  Write-up:   https://dbourdeau.github.io/cyphersolver/champagne1590.html (read it first: how the text was read, the key, the reading)
  Date:       1590
  Outcome:    external key matched · partial
  Read now:   92.5% of the deciphered cipher tokens give sense (pieces below may be untouched)
  Files:      https://github.com/dbourdeau/cyphersolver/tree/main/targets/champagne1590 (NOTES.md, key, transcription, reading, scripts)

OPEN GAPS (from NOTES.md, "## Remaining gaps")
  1. [illegible: needs a new source] No. 25: 72 holes in the reading (doubtful clear words such as [?poix] [?doigt], [?Lamour], [?balliages] [?de] [?flandre], the besieged town in K) and the isolated figure 3 in the Soissons run - blocker: illegible; contrast-enhanced enlargements of the native scan did not resolve them (Brackx); a second palaeographic reader is the next step
  2. [not-attempted: doable now] Nos. 24 and 60: the clear text not transcribed, so no reading of either letter; their cipher runs decode with key no. 25 except the no. 24 l. 22 join and the barred figures 22, 44, 51, 84 - blocker: not-attempted; transcribe both letters and check the barred figures on the image
  3. [not-attempted: doable now] Nevers key no. 25 sheet (fr. 3995 f. 51r): only six barred entries transcribed - blocker: not-attempted; the rest of the nomenclator would identify no. 24's barred figures
  4. [too-short: needs a new source] No. 78 (f. 111r), one group of about six mixed signs - blocker: too-short; a single group, probably a name, in a different mixed code
  5. [no-key-material: needs a new source] Nos. 24/25/60 runs tried with key no. 57 (words57.tsv, syllables): no sense ('qui pi bo ni lo fi ...'); a different, alphabetical two-digit system; bracketed exhaustive LM search (anneal_twodigit.py) proposes 52 i, 62 n, 92 u/v, 95 y but none verifies on a second occurrence - blocker: no-key-material; no key or gloss for the code numbers, single-occurrence letter values cannot be checked

ALREADY TRIED (from NOTES.md, "## Escalation")
  [x] siblings: DECODE siblings R9456/R9457 (nos. 26, 27) checked, another key; fr. 3623 nos. 23-27 and 60 viewed
  [x] clear-pages: the interlinear glosses on nos. 25 and 60 used as anchors; no clear copy of nos. 24/25/60
  [x] known-keys: **Nevers key no. 25 fits** (Brackx, issue #96, 24 Oct 2026; keys 28, 30, 38 compared and rejected); earlier: Nevers keys of fr. 3995 (Tomokiyo nevers.htm) reviewed; no. 46 tested against the two-digit table and does not fit; no. 57 tried on no. 78's group (no sense) and on the two-digit runs (3 Oct 2026, no sense); no. 23's name key conflicts with the alphabet
  [x] print: Tomokiyo nevers.htm and GL.htm, Memoires de Nevers index: no printed decipherment
  [x] key-rebuild: table bracketed by alphabetical order, the anchored slots filled; 3 Oct 2026 exhaustive LM search of the bracketed values (anneal_twodigit.py), none verifies on a second occurrence; the code numbers have no gloss to fit
  [x] retry: all ten runs re-scored with the bracketed candidates (3 Oct 2026); no change in the count

STEPS
0. Set up. If you can run a shell, fork and clone the repository and work inside it:
     git clone https://github.com/dbourdeau/cyphersolver.git
   Then read, in this order: CONTRIBUTING.md (how a contribution is sent and credited); README.md, sections
   "Repository layout" and "Conventions" (how readings are measured and named); targets/champagne1590/NOTES.md in full, and the
   key, transcription and reading files it names; lang/README.md (shared language models).
   Work in targets/champagne1590/. Add your findings to NOTES.md under a dated heading without rewriting what is there, and
   update the "## Remaining gaps" line of every gap you close. Keep WORKLOG.md there: one dated line per step
   (hypothesis, value tried, solver run, crib, control), failures included. Do not edit docs/ (the site is generated).
   If you cannot run a shell, fetch the files from the links above and keep your work in files you send with the issue.
1. Pick a gap. Start with the ones marked "doable now" (open-codes, not-attempted, left-open): the images and the key
   are online, so they need only work. A gap marked "needs a new source" (no-key-material, too-short, illegible,
   needs-physical-access) can be closed only by something new: a key
   or a deciphered sibling found elsewhere, a better image, a printed edition or calendar, a photograph from the archive.
   For those, search for that material first, and say where you looked even when you find nothing.
2. Start from the existing key and transcription in the folder. Do not rebuild the key from scratch, and do not
   re-read parts that are already read unless you find an error in them.
3. For a code group or sign value: list every place the group occurs, show how each reads with the value you propose,
   and say what still does not fit. For a passage: re-read it at the image and give the folio and line. For a missing
   letter or leaf: say where it is held and how it can be reached.
4. Measure again. Apply the key to the whole text, write the reading file, and count the share of cipher tokens that
   give sense (not an estimate). The reading is "complete" only when (1) at least 95% of its cipher tokens give sense;
   (2) no gap is left untried; (3) every letter in it is covered; (4) what stays open is scattered code groups or names,
   or pieces blocked from outside. Otherwise it stays "partial": say which gaps are still open and why.
5. Be honest. Mark every uncertain word with [?], leave unread groups as their numbers or signs, and never fill a gap
   with a plausible guess. A gap retried and still open, with what was ruled out, is worth reporting.

REPORT BACK
With a clone: open a pull request with your changes to targets/champagne1590/. Say in the description which gaps you worked on,
  the share read before and after, and how you want to be credited (name, initials or handle, and a link).
Without one: open an issue: https://github.com/dbourdeau/cyphersolver/issues/new?template=further-reading.yml&title=Further+reading%3A+champagne1590&page=champagne1590.html
  Give the write-up, the gap you worked on (its line in Remaining gaps, or the code group, folio and line), what you
  propose, the evidence (every occurrence, the images or sources), the share read before and after, your step log,
  and the tools and AI model you used.
If you cannot open issues or pull requests, write this report for your human to send. Credit goes to the person who sends it.