No published independent real-world detection data yet confirms or refutes the Hecla–Kemp model's predicted Burevestnik isotope signature

[unverified — could not confirm or deny after search] Three facts, read together, leave the tracked question (question-verify-burevestnik-radioactive-exhaust-corroboration) open rather than answered. First, the Hecla–Kemp model is a physics prediction, not a measurement, and the one real-world accident most plausibly linked to the missile produced a different class of radionuclide by a different mechanism. Second, the one published independent forensic search of available samples targeted a different isotope tied to a different hypothesis and found nothing, while noting its samples likely lay outside the actual plume. Third, the radionuclide-monitoring stations that in principle sat astride the plume path went silent for reasons a senior Russian official's own words suggest were not technical.

No study currently exists that puts the Hecla–Kemp ⁴¹Ar/⁸⁵ᵐKr/⁸³ᵐKr/¹⁴C prediction against a confirmed atmospheric measurement, positive or negative. This is an absence in the literature itself — not a gap this capture's search effort failed to close.