{"data":{"sci_version": "1.2", "schema": "https://corpus.bntrg.co.uk/sci/1.0/sci.schema.json", "id": "pmid:28029654", "kind": "science-record", "revision": 9, "content_hash": "sha256:2b5305dd49c1978747a911763257651e540665b2307b1a96790ea618554bfa15", "created_at": "2026-11-01T15:40:22Z", "updated_at": "2026-11-01T22:42:51Z", "generator": {"name": "corpus-assay-engine", "run_id": "reading-sci-2026-11-01"}, "paper": {"state": "complete", "title": "ABCG2 confers promotion in gastric cancer through modulating downstream CRKL in vitro combining with biostatistics mining.", "doi": "10.18632/oncotarget.14128", "pmid": "28029654", "authors": ["Junqing Wang", "Zhou Yunyun", "Lu Wang", "Xuehua Chen", "Zhenggang Zhu"], "journal": "Oncotarget", "year": 2017, "abstract": "ABCG2, member of ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporter family, is known as crucial regulator related to multi-drug resistance in human tumors and has recently been putatively studied as human carcinoma cell biomarker. While, effects of ABCG2 on human gastric cancer (GC) has not been illustrated thoroughly. In this study, by applying biostatistics mining methods, we observed that ABCG2 is frequently aberrantly expressed in GC patients through exploring dataset of GSE19826 in NCBI GEO database. Contemporary, extreme up-regulation of ABCG2 was discovered in both GC specimens and cell lines of our center, from which we observed high level of ABCG2 associated with GC clinicopathologic features and poor outcomes. Depletion of ABCG2 in MKN-45 GC cells, the cell proliferation was significantly impacted along with cell cycle arrest, and cell apoptosis was induced. Interestingly, combined with data mining of NCBI database, CRKL, a pivotal GC promoter, presents a significant positive correlation with ABCG2. And the expression of CRKL in GC cells was obviously affected through ABCG2 depletion. Simultaneously, over-expression of CRKL in MKN-45 cells significantly rescued most of the phenotypes induced by ABCG2 depletion. Thus, we suggest that ABCG2 is a potential biomarker and target upstream CRKL, which could be further studied for GC diagnosis and therapeutic treatment.", "claims": [{"id": "claim-data-access", "statement": "The GC patients mRNA expression microarray data were downloaded from GSE19826 in NCBI GEO. There are 26 samples after removing 1 outlier on the quality control with 12 tumor samples vs. 14 normal gastric mucosa samples in this dataset.", "kind": "methodological", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:28029654", "locator": "sections[12] \"Biostatistics mining of NCBI database\" paragraph 2", "quote": "The GC patients mRNA expression microarray data were downloaded from GSE19826 in NCBI GEO. There are 26 samples after removing 1 outlier on the quality control with 12 tumor samples vs. 14 normal gastric mucosa samples in this dataset."}], "state": "complete"}, {"id": "claim-target-result", "statement": "The study used biostatistical and survival analyses of NCBI GEO dataset GSE19826—downloaded through NCBI GEO and analyzed with Oncomine—to identify ABCG2 and CRKL as up-regulated, prognostically associated, positively correlated genes in gastric cancer; specimen associations were evaluated with SPSS 18.0, and survival curves were generated with Kaplan–Meier Plotter for 876 gastric cancer patients. The headline finding is that ABCG2 is a potential gastric-cancer biomarker and an upstream regulator of CRKL.", "kind": "qualitative", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:28029654", "locator": "sections[0] \"Abstract\" paragraph 1", "quote": "Thus, we suggest that ABCG2 is a potential biomarker and target upstream CRKL, which could be further studied for GC diagnosis and therapeutic treatment"}, {"asset": "source:pmid:28029654", "locator": "sections[12] \"Biostatistics mining of NCBI database\" paragraph 2", "quote": "The GC patients mRNA expression microarray data were downloaded from GSE19826 in NCBI GEO. There are 26 samples after removing 1 outlier on the quality control with 12 tumor samples vs. 14 normal gastric mucosa samples in this dataset. These data were preprocessed and analyzed by online database tools Oncomine (http://oncomine.org/)."}, {"asset": "source:pmid:28029654", "locator": "sections[12] \"Biostatistics mining of NCBI database\" paragraph 2", "quote": "The differential expression comparison of ABCG2 between tumor and non-tumor samples was conducted by student's t-test."}, {"asset": "source:pmid:28029654", "locator": "sections[12] \"Biostatistics mining of NCBI database\" paragraph 3", "quote": "Association analysis for the ABCG2 mRNA and protein expression and 72 cases’ clinicopathologic features was carried out by SPSS 18.0. P values were calculated by paired t-test and Fisher's exact text. P values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant."}, {"asset": "source:pmid:28029654", "locator": "sections[12] \"Biostatistics mining of NCBI database\" paragraph 4", "quote": "For the survival analysis of ABCG2 and CRKL, we use online tool (http://www.kmplot.com/gastric) to generate Kaplan–Meier curves, which include 876 gastric cancer patients with available clinical data."}], "state": "complete"}], "gaps": []}, "experiment": {"state": "complete", "objective": "The study used biostatistical and survival analyses of NCBI GEO dataset GSE19826—downloaded through NCBI GEO and analyzed with Oncomine—to identify ABCG2 and CRKL as up-regulated, prognostically associated, positively correlated genes in gastric cancer; specimen associations were evaluated with SPSS 18.0, and survival curves were generated with Kaplan–Meier Plotter for 876 gastric cancer patients. The headline finding is that ABCG2 is a potential gastric-cancer biomarker and an upstream regulator of CRKL.", "steps": [{"id": "read_published_estimate", "order": 1, "name": "Read the published estimate from the source", "kind": "other", "state": "complete", "blocked_on": null, "description": "The claim, method and evidence span published with the source article.", "duration_hours": null, "parameters": {}, "inputs": ["source:pmid:28029654"], "outputs": ["the published estimate and its evidence"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}, {"id": "obtain_source_data", "order": 2, "name": "Obtain the source data from the named repository", "kind": "data-preparation", "state": "complete", "blocked_on": null, "description": "The GEO series accession resolves and its sample accessions are listed. This lane did not download the dataset or read its licence.", "duration_hours": null, "parameters": {}, "inputs": ["data:geo:GSE19826"], "outputs": ["the source data with its repository provenance"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}, {"id": "run_analysis", "order": 3, "name": "Run the published analysis", "kind": "analysis", "state": "complete", "blocked_on": null, "description": "Apply the paper's statistical method to the resolved series and compare the result with the published target.", "duration_hours": null, "parameters": {}, "inputs": ["data:geo:GSE19826"], "outputs": ["the replicated result and its comparison"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}], "materials": [], "instruments": [], "reagents": [], "conditions": {}, "gaps": []}, "data": {"state": "partial", "assets": [{"id": "source:pmid:28029654", "role": "manuscript", "format": "xml", "media_type": "application/xml", "uri": "https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.14128", "sha256": "sha256:1b988efed420dbc32bd5996d4e1aac29edd52d668367dba800180e96db691280", "bytes": 38900, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "10.18632/oncotarget.14128", "version": null, "note": "Full article fetched from PMC; the checksum covers the rendered section body, not the original XML bytes.", "structure": {"pmcid": "PMC5354906", "source": "europe_pmc_fulltext", "coverage": "whole_body", "text_hash_scope": "rendered_section_body"}}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE19826", "role": "raw", "format": "geo-series", "media_type": "application/vnd.ncbi.geo-series+json", "uri": "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE19826", "sha256": null, "bytes": null, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "GSE19826", "version": null, "note": "The GC patients mRNA expression microarray data were downloaded from GSE19826 in NCBI GEO. There are 26 samples after removing 1 outlier on the quality control with 12 tumor samples vs. 14 normal gastric mucosa samples in this dataset.", "structure": {"repository": "GEO", "access_route": "GEO accession URL", "access_statement_verbatim": "The GC patients mRNA expression microarray data were downloaded from GSE19826 in NCBI GEO. There are 26 samples after removing 1 outlier on the quality control with 12 tumor samples vs. 14 normal gastric mucosa samples in this dataset.", "access_statement_kind": "repository_route_statement", "sample_accessions": ["GSM495051", "GSM495052", "GSM495053", "GSM495054", "GSM495055", "GSM495056", "GSM495057", "GSM495058", "GSM495059", "GSM495060", "GSM495061", "GSM495062", "GSM495063", "GSM495064", "GSM495065", "GSM495066", "GSM495067", "GSM495068", "GSM495069", "GSM495070", "GSM495071", "GSM495072", "GSM495073", "GSM495074", "GSM495075", "GSM495076", "GSM495077"], "sample_count": 27, "group_sizes": null, "group_sizes_basis": null, "platform": "570", "taxon": "Homo sapiens", "title": "Expression data from gastric cancer", "resolution_checked_at": "2026-11-01T15:39:54Z", "resolution_check": "identifier_resolution_only_no_download_no_licence_read", "downloaded": false, "licence_read": false}}, {"id": "asset:table:pmid:28029654:1", "role": "table", "format": "jats-table", "media_type": "application/vnd.jats.table+json", "uri": null, "sha256": "sha256:4eead414e3bcd0c3fabd2d7a426854fc624e828fd2df853a17f9496c0561d68a", "bytes": 1721, "access": "open", "state": "verified", "reader": "read_table", "reader_status": "available", "identifier": "section[5]/table-wrap[1]#T1", "version": null, "note": "The correlation between expression characteristic of CRKL and ABCG2 in GC specimens and GC clinicopathologic features", "structure": {"pmcid": "PMC5354906", "section_index": 5, "section_title": "Expression characteristic of ABCG2 is correlated with the clinicopathologic features and ABCG2 is an independent prognostic factor of GC", "row_count": 28, "column_count": 7}, "table": {"label": "Table 1", "caption": "The correlation between expression characteristic of CRKL and ABCG2 in GC specimens and GC clinicopathologic features", "rows": [["Clinicopathologic parameters", "CRKL expression (n=e52)", "P *", "ABCG2 expression (n=72)", "P *"], ["Low (n=15)", "High(n=37)", "Low (n=27)", "High(n=45)"], ["Age (years)"], ["≤60", "5 (33%)", "16 (43%)", "0.509", "14 (51%)", "21 (47%)", "0.808"], [">60", "10 (67%)", "21 (57%)", "13 (49%)", "24 (53%)"], ["Gender"], ["Male", "12 (80%)", "25 (68%)", "0.37", "15 (56%)", "28 (62%)", "0.625"], ["Female", "3 (20%)", "12 (32%)", "12 (44%)", "17 (38%)"], ["Diameter (cm)"], ["≤5", "12 (80%)", "18 (49%)", "0.038", "19 (70%)", "18 (40%)", "0.016"], [">5", "3 (20%)", "19 (51%)", "8 (30%)", "27 (60%)"], ["Location"], ["Distal third", "10 (67%)", "23 (62%)", "0.76", "14 (52%)", "31 (69%)", "0.209"], ["Middle or proximal third", "5 (33%)", "14 (38%)", "13 (48%)", "14 (31%)"], ["Histologic Classification"], ["Poorly differerntial", "7 (47%)", "22 (59%)", "0.792", "11 (41%)", "23 (51%)", "0.501"], ["Middle/well differerntial", "4 (25%)", "6 (16%)", "9 (37%)", "8 (18%)"], ["Signer ring cell cancer", "3 (20%)", "6 (16%)", "3 (11%)", "7 (16%)"], ["Mucinous asenocainoma", "1 (8%)", "3 (9%)", "4 (11%)", "7 (14%)"], ["Location invasion"], ["T1, T2", "6 (40%)", "2 (5%)", "0.002", "15 (56%)", "13 (29%)", "0.045"], ["T3, T4", "9 (60%)", "35 (95%)", "12 (44%)", "32 (71%)"], ["Lymph node metastasis"], ["No", "7 (47%)", "4 (11%)", "0.004", "14 (52%)", "10 (22%)", "0.019"], ["Yes", "8 (53%)", "33 (89%)", "13 (48%)", "35 (78%)"], ["TNM stage"], ["I, II", "7 (47%)", "2 (5%)", "0.001", "15 (56%)", "12 (27%)", "0.023"], ["III, IV", "8 (53%)", "35 (95%)", "12 (44%)", "33 (73%)"]], "row_count": 28, "column_count": 7, "numeric_cells": 98, "header_rows": 2, "locator": "section[5]/table-wrap[1]#T1"}}], "gaps": ["asset:data:geo:GSE19826 not downloaded", "asset:data:geo:GSE19826 licence not read"]}, "analysis": {"state": "complete", "methods": [{"id": "method-1", "family": "contingency_analysis", "specific": "fisher_exact", "label": "Categorical (contingency table) analysis", "dsl_operations": ["contingency_table", "chi_square_test"], "missing_operations": [], "expressible": true, "parameters": {}, "data_shapes": ["categorical_cross_tabulation"], "evidence": {"score": 1.0, "band": "reordered", "quote": "“P values were calculated by paired t-test and Fisher's exact text.”"}}], "targets": [], "gaps": []}, "capability": {"state": "complete", "requirements": [{"capability_id": "capability:computational_analysis", "label": "Computational analysis platform", "assay_families": ["meta_analysis", "machine_learning", "survival_analysis", "statistical_regression", "pca", "molecular_docking", "network_analysis", "differential_expression", "gwas"], "availability_state": "owned", "tier_unlocked": "R1", "candidate": "Automated Assays Laravel application and simulated adapters"}], "gaps": []}, "readiness": {"state": "complete", "tier": "R1", "blocking_axis": "none", "blocked_on": "nothing:replicable_now", "axes": {"method": {"tier": "R1", "expressible": true, "required_operations": ["contingency_table", "chi_square_test"], "missing_operations": [], "basis": "The paper names the method it used and the corpus's method extractor maps it onto the DSL catalogue: fisher_exact."}, "capability": {"tier": "R1", "capability_id": "capability:computational_analysis", "availability_state": "owned", "basis": "The computational analysis is owned. The physical bench the paper used is not, so a physical validation cannot be run here."}, "data": {"tier": "R1", "reachable": true, "accessions": ["GSE19826"], "resolved_accessions": ["GSE19826"], "statements": ["The GC patients mRNA expression microarray data were downloaded from GSE19826 in NCBI GEO. There are 26 samples after removing 1 outlier on the quality control with 12 tumor samples vs. 14 normal gastric mucosa samples in this dataset."], "basis": "The paper names GSE19826 in NCBI GEO and the accession resolves in the repository. No dataset was downloaded and no licence was read."}}, "can_run": {"dsl_operations": ["contingency_table", "chi_square_test"], "assets": ["source:pmid:28029654", "data:geo:GSE19826", "asset:table:pmid:28029654:1"], "steps": ["run_analysis"]}, "must_build": {"dsl_operations": [], "converters": [], "readers": [], "capabilities": [], "data_gaps": ["data:geo:GSE19826"]}, "gaps": []}, "review": {"state": "partial", "machine_critique": {"kind": "extraction_review", "reader": {"model": "MiniMax-M3.1-Flash", "provider": "minimax", "provider_family": "minimax", "read_at": "2026-10-31T18:30:13Z", "independence": "same_provider"}, "evidence_check": {"method": "reordered", "availability": null}, "calls": 8, "usage": {"prompt_tokens": 84049, "completion_tokens": 4014, "cached_tokens": 1584}}, "human_critique": null, "stages": [{"id": "extraction", "state": "complete", "reader": "MiniMax-M3.1-Flash", "provider": "minimax"}], "gaps": ["review.independent_reader", "review.machine_critique", "review.human_critique"]}, "execution": {"state": "absent", "status": "not_run", "mode": null, "runs": [], "gaps": ["execution.not_run"]}, "provenance": {"entities": [{"id": "pmid:28029654", "type": "paper", "label": "pmid:28029654"}, {"id": "source:pmid:28029654", "type": "manuscript", "label": "PMID 28029654 full text"}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE19826", "type": "dataset", "label": "GEO GSE19826"}], "activities": [{"id": "activity-reading-sci-2026-11-01", "type": "classification", "used": [{"id": "pmid:28029654", "type": "paper", "label": "pmid:28029654"}, {"id": "source:pmid:28029654", "type": "manuscript", "label": "PMID 28029654 full text"}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE19826", "type": "dataset", "label": "GEO GSE19826"}], "agent": "agent:corpus-assay-engine"}, {"id": "activity-read-28029654", "type": "extraction", "used": ["source:pmid:28029654"], "agent": "agent:minimax-reader"}, {"id": "activity-resolve-GSE19826", "type": "accession_resolution", "used": ["data:geo:GSE19826"], "agent": "agent:corpus-assay-engine"}], "agents": [{"id": "agent:corpus-assay-engine", "type": "software", "label": "Corpus assay engine"}, {"id": "agent:minimax-reader", "type": "software", "label": "MiniMax literature reader"}], "source_run_id": "reading-sci-2026-11-01", "dsl_catalogue_fingerprint": "343fb30756ba6ec3", "capability_table_fingerprint": "2cb3e42f047d2ecf", "snapshot_id": "ba34b49490d9bfaf"}, "lineage": {"parent_id": "pmid:28029654", "parent_hash": "sha256:4cbb0ad65cd6931d0914e88cbe2b095971fd639d2094ac0ff805eb3a96bc071b", "fork_of": null, "generation": 8}, "gaps": ["asset:data:geo:GSE19826 licence not read", "asset:data:geo:GSE19826 not downloaded", "execution.not_run", "review.human_critique", "review.independent_reader", "review.machine_critique"], "assays": [{"role": "data_generation", "definition_id": "apoptosis_assay", "definition_version": "99e1195c7d6f", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": [], "support_state": "partial", "source_hashes": {"assay_lexicon": "99e1195c7d6f"}, "confidence": 0.69, "evidence": ["acted along with cell cycle arrest, and cell apoptosis was induced. Interestingly, combined with da"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:924", "id": "assay:1"}, {"role": "data_generation", "definition_id": "cell_culture", "definition_version": "99e1195c7d6f", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": [], "support_state": "partial", "source_hashes": {"assay_lexicon": "99e1195c7d6f"}, "confidence": 0.77, "evidence": ["of Science (Shanghai, China). All cells were cultured in RPMI 1640 supplemented with 10% heat-inactiv"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:1718", "id": "assay:2"}, {"role": "data_generation", "definition_id": "microarray", "definition_version": "99e1195c7d6f", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": [], "support_state": "partial", "source_hashes": {"assay_lexicon": "99e1195c7d6f"}, "confidence": 0.93, "evidence": ["ing 2014-2015. Tissues were made into tissue microarray by Outdo Biotech Company, Shanghai, China. E"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:2247", "id": "assay:3"}, {"role": "analysis", "definition_id": "contingency_analysis", "definition_version": "f2132e96ae6c7a4e", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": ["contingency_table", "chi_square_test"], "support_state": "supported", "source_hashes": {"dsl_catalogue": "f2132e96ae6c7a4e"}, "confidence": 1.0, "evidence": ["“P values were calculated by paired t-test and Fisher's exact text.”"], "order_basis": "consumes_earlier_output", "id": "assay:4"}]},"meta":{"api_version":"v1","automation_ladder_snapshot":"ba34b49490d9bfaf","automation_ladder_caveats":["Method extraction is rule-based and has no hand-judged accuracy sample. Evidence bands order textual support; method agreement intervals are null (n=0), never probabilities. Work-type validation does not validate methods.","Operation coverage describes only explicitly named methods. It does not prove a complete protocol, compatible parameters, successful compilation or re-execution. Unrecognised or ambiguous methods require review.","Data reachability is a textual accession or public-data statement. No dataset was downloaded or checked for access, completeness or licence.","Capabilities are planning states seeded from the dated equipment register. No bench ownership, completed quote or partner booking is inferred. Procurement counts are dependencies, not guaranteed replications or financial returns.","Tier and blocker counts are deterministic assessments of this corpus, not measured agreement. R3 is reserved for procurement; unresolved methods and data require human work (R4). The most restrictive axis wins, with capability, method, data as tie-breaks. Resolving one blocker can leave another at the same tier."],"engine":"corpus_engine","engine_provider":"rule_based_v1+lex99e1195c7d6f","run_id":"run-20261023T122449232913","source":"esearch","source_detail":"PubMed mirror biomed_pubmed (read-only)","run_status":"complete","imported_at":"2026-11-03T20:16:52+00:00","generated_at":"2026-11-04T02:24:45+00:00","total_papers":5529,"total_assays_tracked":29,"automatable_assay_families":6,"validated":true,"caveat_count":9,"blocking_caveats":5,"caveats":[{"code":"low_evidence_dominates","basis":["4,152 of 5,529 classifications (75.1%) matched no cue evidence and sit at the 0.05 floor.","34 of 230 data_only calls (14.8%) are in that group."],"claim":"Work type and confidence bands","gloss":"Most records were classified from their title and framing alone, with assay-cue coverage at zero.","detail":"Most classifications in this run rest on no matched evidence at all. At the evidence floor the work type comes from title framing and a fixed prior, not from anything in the paper, so the published work-type split should be read as a rough triage signal rather than a measured distribution. The impact is bounded but not removed: since 2026-10-23 the engine excludes floor-confidence records from the shortlist entirely and publishes them separately as held out, so the recommendation is unaffected even though the census is.","status":"unverified","severity":"high"},{"code":"runtime_is_modelled","basis":["Runtime is summed from published per-assay hour figures. Timing awaits the first executed replication.","4,407 of 5,529 records (79.7%) model to 0.00 hours because no assay was matched, which the ranking then reads as \"cheapest\".","0 of 10 shortlisted records carry a 0.00-hour estimate."],"claim":"Estimated replication runtime","gloss":"The hour figures are estimates built from assay mentions; timing awaits the first executed replication.","detail":"The hour figures are a cost model derived from the bench steps implied by each matched assay family. The first executed replication will supply measured timing. Records without an assay match currently receive a zero-hour model value.","status":"unverified","severity":"high"},{"code":"signal_score_without_citations","basis":["5,529 of 5,529 records (100.0%) have no citation count from the source metadata."],"claim":"Signal score","gloss":"The signal score uses publication-type weight because the mirror supplied zero citation counts.","detail":"The source supplied no citation counts for any record in this run, so the signal score is publication-type weight only. The citation term of the ranking is inert here, and the shortlist is ordered by publication type alone.","status":"unverified","severity":"high"},{"code":"abstract_absent","basis":["1,667 of 5,529 records (30.2%) carry no abstract at all."],"claim":"Evidence base for classification","gloss":"Some records contain a title and publication type only, defining the available classification evidence.","detail":"Where the mirror contains a title and publication types only, those fields define the classifier evidence. A methods section is required for fuller automated and human review.","status":"unverified","severity":"medium"},{"code":"classifier_agreement_measured","basis":["Published two-way decision agreement 77.7% (310 of 399 decidable records) from a stratified hand-check of 438 real records.","Three-way diagnostic agreement 73.9% (288 of 390 decidable records).","data_only agreement 75.2% (100 of 133 decidable).","48 record(s) could not be decided from title and abstract and were excluded from the denominator.","56 analysis-only records were published under another work type, so the data_only share is not an upper bound."],"claim":"Published automatable decision","gloss":"This figure has been checked against a human reading the same papers, so we know how often it is right.","detail":"The published automatable / not-automatable distribution comes from a rule-based classifier that was hand-checked against a fixed ground-truth definition. The agreement rates below are measured, not estimated. The three-way work type remains a diagnostic and is reported separately.","status":"measured","severity":"high"},{"code":"llm_comparison_not_measured","basis":["rule_based_v1+lex99e1195c7d6f produced 5,529 of 5,529 classifications.","Measured on 438 labelled records; these are RULE-BASED figures, not model results."],"claim":"Rule-based versus LLM agreement","gloss":"Every number here is the rule engine’s own. Model comparison begins when a working API credential is connected and measured.","detail":"The published two-way decision agreed with a human reading on 310 of 399 decidable records (77.7%). The diagnostic three-way label agreed on 288 of 390 decidable records (73.9%). Every percentage in this run belongs to the rule engine. Model comparison begins when a working API credential is connected and measured.","status":"not_measured","severity":"high"},{"code":"confidence_is_a_band","basis":["low band: 135 of 210 hand-judged records were correct, 64.3% [57.6, 70.5] (95% CI).","medium band: 80 of 104 hand-judged records were correct, 76.9% [68.0, 84.0] (95% CI).","high band: 73 of 76 hand-judged records were correct, 96.0% [89.0, 98.7] (95% CI).","A fitted calibrated probability was built, measured and withdrawn: it overstated held-out accuracy and reorders nothing."],"claim":"Confidence band and evidence score","gloss":"The confidence band carries a measured accuracy interval; 0.85 represents relative rank strength.","detail":"Confidence on this run is a BAND plus its measured accuracy interval. The number stored alongside each record is a monotone evidence score that orders records; 0.85 represents relative rank strength. A fitted probability was withdrawn after it overstated held-out accuracy. Threshold on the band.","status":"measured","severity":"medium"},{"code":"three_way_split_is_diagnostic","basis":["The corpus is published at the two-way decision: automatable or not-automatable. The three-way split (data_only / physical / mixed) is published as a diagnostic with its measured reliability attached, not as a claim, because the rule engine's `mixed` call cannot be defended.","The engine called 22 record(s) mixed; 10 matched the human judgement (45.5%, 95% CI 26.9-65.3).","The engine's `mixed` call is right on 10/22 hand-judged records (45.5%, 95% CI 26.9%-65.3%); a constant `physical` guess scores 36.4%.","The engine's `mixed` call does not reliably beat a constant `physical` guess on the hand-judged records it labels mixed.","The sign of that difference flips between two independent samples, so the three-way refinement is not demonstrably informative.","The mixed stratum contributes a disproportionate share of errors relative to its size.","At title-only depth the physical/mixed split collapses: a title says that work was done, not whether it was also analysed."],"claim":"The published decision is two-way","gloss":"The three-way split is shown for diagnosis only. The published split is two ways.","detail":"Count and filter the corpus on automatable versus not-automatable. The data_only / physical / mixed split remains an internal engine diagnostic because the mixed call has lower measured reliability.","status":"measured","severity":"medium"},{"code":"automatable_flag_unproven","basis":["6 of 29 assay families are marked automatable now: meta_analysis, machine_learning, survival_analysis, pca, molecular_docking, differential_expression.","The flag is a rule over assay family and work type; validation begins with the first executed replication.","It inherits the 75.2% data_only agreement rate, because the flag requires the record to be analysis-only."],"claim":"Automatable now","gloss":"This flag marks assay families the rules classify as data-only. The first executed replication will validate it.","detail":"This flag marks families the rules consider replicable from data alone. Its validity depends on the analysis-only classification and will be measured through an executed replication.","status":"unverified","severity":"medium"}],"confidence_policy":"band_with_measured_interval","confidence_contract":{"policy":"band_with_measured_interval","summary":"Confidence is reported as a BAND with a measured accuracy interval. The raw evidence score supplies monotone ordering. A fitted point estimate was withdrawn after it overstated held-out accuracy.","evidence_score":"A monotone evidence score in [0,1] built from cue mass, axis separation and text coverage. Use it to order records. Interpret 0.85 as relative rank strength.","confidence_band":"low | medium | high. Consumers threshold on this value.","band_accuracy":"Wilson 95% interval on the measured agreement of the hand-judged records in this band.","calibrated_confidence":"WITHDRAWN. Reintroduction requires held-out evidence demonstrating reliable estimates across every bin."},"band_accuracy":{"low":{"n":210,"low":0.576,"band":"low","high":0.7046,"agree":135,"accuracy":0.6429},"high":{"n":76,"low":0.8903,"band":"high","high":0.9865,"agree":73,"accuracy":0.9605},"medium":{"n":104,"low":0.6795,"band":"medium","high":0.8397,"agree":80,"accuracy":0.7692}},"provider":"rule_based_v1+lex99e1195c7d6f","lexicon_id":"99e1195c7d6f","contract_published_at":"2026-10-23T12:25:29.022232+00:00","confidence_is_band":true,"confidence_is_probability":false,"decision_taxonomy":"two_way","decidable_fraction_two_way":0.8854,"decidable_fraction_two_way_low":0.8565,"decidable_fraction_two_way_high":0.9143,"decidable_fraction_three_way":0.8586,"decidable_fraction_three_way_low":0.8287,"decidable_fraction_three_way_high":0.8884,"decidable_population":5529,"validation_sample_size":438,"three_way_cost_fraction":0.0268,"three_way_cost_records":148,"decision_counts":{"automatable":230,"not_automatable":5299},"decision_split":{"automatable":{"count":230,"share":0.04159884246699222},"not_automatable":{"count":5299,"share":0.9584011575330078}},"diagnostic_work_type_counts":{"mixed":24,"physical":5275,"data_only":230}}}