Python has a restart marker. PLC capture has no request sequence recorded beside the acknowledgement.

Keep the original order inside each log. Don't shift whole timelines until there's an independently identifiable event connecting them; otherwise you're arranging the evidence to fit your guess

What does acknowledgement mean in that interface, Jack? It might only confirm receipt of the request, so even a reliable assignment would not necessarily establish whether the coupon inspection completed.

Receipt only. Our incident summary called it a result, which I've corrected.

We once found the missing link in a retained application session log, but that only helped because it named the request rather than repeating a high bit.

Any older capture on the engineering laptop, Jack? Worth checking before assuming the link is lost.

Jo, exactly. A longer trace full of the same held state isn't a richer identity record, however many rows it adds

I would separate the physical coupon's disposition from this software reconstruction as well. Quality may have an independent record, but that record should not be invented from the timeout or receipt acknowledgement.

No earlier capture found. Quality has held the coupon; acknowledgement ownership remains unknown between the two attempts.

Then leave it unassigned. Future attempt IDs won't repair the missing history for this coupon.