Rate each subblock of the topic "{topic}" by relevance: relevant or peripheral. The relevance controls whether a point goes into the focused guides or only into the complete guide.

SUBBLOCKS (in brackets the parent block of the number; many state their core points with "Kern:"):
{subblocks}

Use the core points for a well-grounded rating — judge on the content, not just the title.

Relevance:
- **relevant**: core/standard knowledge that CARRIES the topic — central concepts, definitions, properties, common practice. For practical topics: what you need in actual use. For theoretical topics: central theorems/properties, EVEN without practical use. What you genuinely should know.
- **peripheral**: a side note, special/niche case, "nice to know", deprecated/exotic — PLUS purely historical details (who/when), concrete numeric examples of a general principle, mere cross-references. NOT peripheral: a central theorem or a fundamental property just because it seems "theoretical". Belongs only in a complete guide.

Rules:
- These subblocks **all already** belong to the topic — the question is not *whether* but *how central*. Judge **core vs. peripheral within its own block**, one at a time.
- `peripheral` is a **genuine category**, not a leftover bucket. Deliberately mark peripheral items (nice-to-know, special/niche cases, detail/numeric examples, historical notes, cross-references) as `peripheral`.
- Don't bump the level up out of caution. Only **true core concepts / central theorems** are never `peripheral`.
- Only judge — invent nothing, change no subblocks.

Write ONLY the JSON file to: {out_path}

Format (exactly one value for EACH number; no other text):
{{"relevance": {{"1": "relevant", "2": "peripheral", "3": "relevant"}}}}
{extra}