{"data":{"sci_version": "1.0", "schema": "https://corpus.bntrg.co.uk/sci/1.0/sci.schema.json", "id": "pmid:31396442", "kind": "science-record", "revision": 4, "content_hash": "sha256:5296320ea14c4c8e2fe29c8373b8e8be0555d0df7e862496afb868b5249c3fd5", "created_at": "2026-11-01T15:40:48Z", "updated_at": "2026-11-01T21:22:24Z", "generator": {"name": "corpus-assay-engine", "run_id": "reading-sci-2026-11-01"}, "paper": {"state": "complete", "title": "A 3-mRNA-based prognostic signature of survival in oral squamous cell carcinoma.", "doi": "10.7717/peerj.7360", "pmid": "31396442", "authors": ["Ruoyan Cao", "Qiqi Wu", "Qiulan Li", "Mianfeng Yao", "Hongbo Zhou"], "journal": "PeerJ", "year": 2019, "abstract": "BACKGROUND: Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is the most common type of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma with an unsatisfactory prognosis. The aim of this study was to identify potential prognostic mRNA biomarkers of OSCC based on analysis of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA).\nMETHODS: Expression profiles and clinical data of OSCC patients were collected from TCGA database. Univariate Cox analysis and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator Cox (LASSO Cox) regression were used to primarily screen prognostic biomarkers. Then multivariate Cox analysis was performed to build a prognostic model based on the selected prognostic mRNAs. Nomograms were generated to predict the individual's overall survival at 3 and 5 years. The model performance was assessed by the time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and calibration plot in both training cohort and validation cohort (GSE41613 from NCBI GEO databases). In addition, machine learning was used to assess the importance of risk factors of OSCC. Finally, in order to explore the potential mechanisms of OSCC, Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathway analysis was completed.\nRESULTS: Three mRNAs (CLEC3B, C6 and CLCN1) were finally identified as a prognostic biomarker pattern. The risk score was imputed as: (-0.38602 × expression level of CLEC3B) + (-0.20632 × expression level of CLCN1) + (0.31541 × expression level of C6). In the TCGA training cohort, the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.705 and 0.711 for 3- and 5-year survival, respectively. In the validation cohort, AUC was 0.718 and 0.717 for 3- and 5-year survival. A satisfactory agreement between predictive values and observation values was demonstrated by the calibration curve in the probabilities of 3- and 5- year survival in both cohorts. Furthermore, machine learning identified the 3-mRNA signature as the most important risk factor to survival of OSCC. Neuroactive ligand-receptor interaction was most enriched mostly in KEGG pathway analysis.\nCONCLUSION: A 3-mRNA signature (CLEC3B, C6 and CLCN1) successfully predicted the survival of OSCC patients in both training and test cohort. In addition, this signature was an independent and the most important risk factor of OSCC.", "claims": [{"id": "claim-method", "statement": "Univariate Cox analysis and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator Cox (LASSO Cox) regression were used to primarily screen prognostic biomarkers.", "kind": "methodological", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:31396442", "locator": "sections[0] \"Abstract\" paragraph 2", "quote": "Univariate Cox analysis and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator Cox (LASSO Cox) regression were used to primarily screen prognostic biomarkers."}], "state": "complete"}, {"id": "claim-data-access", "statement": "The following information was supplied regarding data availability:The raw measurements are available in the Supplemental Files.", "kind": "methodological", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:31396442", "locator": "sections[22] \"Data Availability\" paragraph 2", "quote": "The following information was supplied regarding data availability:The raw measurements are available in the Supplemental Files."}], "state": "complete"}], "gaps": []}, "experiment": {"state": "complete", "objective": null, "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:31396442"], "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:GSE41613"], "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:GSE41613"], "outputs": ["the replicated result and its comparison"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}], "materials": [], "instruments": [], "reagents": [], "conditions": {}, "gaps": []}, "data": {"state": "partial", "assets": [{"id": "source:pmid:31396442", "role": "manuscript", "format": "xml", "media_type": "application/xml", "uri": "https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.7360", "sha256": "sha256:e3fac5d7f340f1d9d005f48ef11113c6cc432d58582784986daeeacab45b5b38", "bytes": 35784, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "10.7717/peerj.7360", "version": null, "note": "Full article fetched from PMC; the checksum covers the rendered section body, not the original XML bytes.", "structure": {"pmcid": "PMC6679650", "source": "europe_pmc_fulltext", "coverage": "whole_body", "text_hash_scope": "rendered_section_body"}}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE41613", "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=GSE41613", "sha256": null, "bytes": null, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "GSE41613", "version": null, "note": "The following information was supplied regarding data availability:The raw measurements are available in the Supplemental Files.", "structure": {"repository": "GEO", "access_route": "GEO accession URL", "access_statement_verbatim": "The following information was supplied regarding data availability:The raw measurements are available in the Supplemental Files.", "access_statement_kind": "data_availability_statement", "sample_accessions": ["GSM1020099", "GSM1020100", "GSM1020101", "GSM1020102", "GSM1020103", "GSM1020104", "GSM1020105", "GSM1020106", "GSM1020107", "GSM1020108", "GSM1020109", "GSM1020110", "GSM1020111", "GSM1020112", "GSM1020113", "GSM1020114", "GSM1020115", "GSM1020116", "GSM1020117", "GSM1020118", "GSM1020119", "GSM1020120", "GSM1020121", "GSM1020122", "GSM1020123", "GSM1020124", "GSM1020125", "GSM1020126", "GSM1020127", "GSM1020128", "GSM1020129", "GSM1020130", "GSM1020131", "GSM1020132", "GSM1020133", "GSM1020134", "GSM1020135", "GSM1020136", "GSM1020137", "GSM1020138", "GSM1020139", "GSM1020140", "GSM1020141", "GSM1020142", "GSM1020143", "GSM1020144", "GSM1020145", "GSM1020146", "GSM1020147", "GSM1020148", "GSM1020149", "GSM1020150", "GSM1020151", "GSM1020152", "GSM1020153", "GSM1020154", "GSM1020155", "GSM1020156", "GSM1020157", "GSM1020158", "GSM1020159", "GSM1020160", "GSM1020161", "GSM1020162", "GSM1020163", "GSM1020164", "GSM1020165", "GSM1020166", "GSM1020167", "GSM1020168", "GSM1020169", "GSM1020170", "GSM1020171", "GSM1020172", "GSM1020173", "GSM1020174", "GSM1020175", "GSM1020176", "GSM1020177", "GSM1020178", "GSM1020179", "GSM1020180", "GSM1020181", "GSM1020182", "GSM1020183", "GSM1020184", "GSM1020185", "GSM1020186", "GSM1020187", "GSM1020188", "GSM1020189", "GSM1020190", "GSM1020191", "GSM1020192", "GSM1020193", "GSM1020194", "GSM1020195"], "sample_count": 97, "group_sizes": null, "group_sizes_basis": null, "platform": "570", "taxon": "Homo sapiens", "title": "A 13-gene signature prognostic of HPV-negative OSCC: discovery and external validation", "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:31396442:1", "role": "table", "format": "jats-table", "media_type": "application/vnd.jats.table+json", "uri": null, "sha256": "sha256:1d4f2afe91c7d81026ebe03f2e9f06704015139d32272a3ac6919d7b9ccbb24a", "bytes": 1087, "access": "open", "state": "verified", "reader": "read_table", "reader_status": "available", "identifier": "section[4]/table-wrap[1]#table-1", "version": null, "note": "Clinicopathological characteristics of 259 patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma.", "structure": {"pmcid": "PMC6679650", "section_index": 4, "section_title": "Construction and evaluation of mRNA prediction model", "row_count": 28, "column_count": 3}, "table": {"label": "Table 1", "caption": "Clinicopathological characteristics of 259 patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma.", "rows": [["Characteristic", "Subtype", "No. of cases (%)"], ["Age (years)", "<50", "41 (15.83)"], ["", "≥50, <60", "69 (26.64)"], ["", "≥60, <70", "88 (33.98)"], ["", "≥70", "61 (23.55)"], ["Gender", "Male", "179 (69.11)"], ["", "Female", "80 (30.89)"], ["Race", "White", "232 (89.58)"], ["", "Asian", "9 (3.47%)"], ["", "Black or African American", "18 (6.95)"], ["Histologic grade", "G1", "39 (15.06)"], ["", "G2", "172 (66.41)"], ["", "G3", "47 (18.15)"], ["", "G4", "1 (0.39)"], ["Pathological stage", "Stage I", "16 (6.18)"], ["", "Stage II", "36 (13.90)"], ["", "Stage III", "54 (20.85)"], ["", "Stage IV", "153 (59.07)"], ["Pathological T", "T1", "23 (8.88)"], ["", "T2", "76 (29.34)"], ["", "T3", "60 (23.17)"], ["", "T4", "100 (38.61)"], ["Pathological N", "N0", "113 (43.63)"], ["", "N1", "45 (17.37)"], ["", "N2", "99 (38.22)"], ["", "N3", "2 (0.77)"], ["Vital status", "Alive", "157 (60.62)"], ["", "Dead", "102 (39.38)"]], "row_count": 28, "column_count": 3, "numeric_cells": 31, "header_rows": 1, "locator": "section[4]/table-wrap[1]#table-1"}}, {"id": "asset:table:pmid:31396442:2", "role": "table", "format": "jats-table", "media_type": "application/vnd.jats.table+json", "uri": null, "sha256": "sha256:499b7bbf275db2227cc182596ffd566082d3f92a89f793605e8a92465f7c8feb", "bytes": 1920, "access": "open", "state": "verified", "reader": "read_table", "reader_status": "available", "identifier": "section[12]/table-wrap[1]#table-2", "version": null, "note": "The risk score generated from the 3-mRNA signature as an independent indicator according to Cox proportional hazards regression model.", "structure": {"pmcid": "PMC6679650", "section_index": 12, "section_title": "Risk score of 3-mRNA signature as an independent indicator to predict OSCC prognosis", "row_count": 29, "column_count": 8}, "table": {"label": "Table 2", "caption": "The risk score generated from the 3-mRNA signature as an independent indicator according to Cox proportional hazards regression model.", "rows": [["Factors", "Subgroup", "Univariate analysis", "Multivariate analysis"], ["", "", "Hazard ratio", "95% CI", "p", "Hazard ratio", "95% CI", "p"], ["Age (year)", "<50", "1", "", "", "", "", ""], ["", "≥50, <60", "0.8", "0.4–1.5", "0.516", "", "", ""], ["", "≥60, <70", "1", "0.5–1.8", "0.925", "", "", ""], ["", ">70", "1.6", "0.9–3.0", "0.125", "", "", ""], ["Gender", "Male", "1", "", "", "", "", ""], ["", "Female", "1.1", "0.7–1.6", "0.722", "", "", ""], ["Race", "White", "1", "", "", "", "", ""], ["", "Asian", "0.7", "0.2–2.7", "0.561", "", "", ""], ["", "Black or African American", "1.9", "0.9–3.9", "0.086", "", "", ""], ["Histologic grade", "G1", "1", "", "", "1", "", ""], ["", "G2", "1.7", "0.9–3.2", "0.121", "1.3", "0.7–2.6", "0.405"], ["", "G3", "2.2", "1.1–4.5", "0.035", "1.8", "0.9–3.8", "0.111"], ["", "G4", "0", "0.0–Inf", "0.996", "0", "0.0–Inf", "0.996"], ["Pathological stage", "Stage I", "1", "", "", "1", "", ""], ["", "Stage II", "1.5", "0.3–7.3", "0.604", "1", "0.1–13.6", "0.986"], ["", "Stage III", "3.4", "0.8–14.4", "0.1", "2.3", "0.2–27.8", "0.518"], ["", "Stage IV", "5.1", "1.2–20.8", "0.024", "1.9", "0.1–23.8", "0.6636"], ["Pathological T", "T1", "1", "", "", "1", "", ""], ["", "T2", "2.1", "0.6–7.1", "0.23", "1.6", "0.2–12.5", "0.647"], ["", "T3", "4.8", "1.5–15.8", "0.009", "2.3", "0.3–17.7", "0.411"], ["", "T4", "4.4", "1.4–14.2", "0.013", "2.2", "0.3–17.2", "0.45"], ["Pathological N", "N0", "1", "", "", "1", "", ""], ["", "N1", "0.9", "0.5–1.8", "0.813", "0.6", "0.3–1.3", "0.217"], ["", "N2", "2.2", "1.4–3.3", "<0.001", "1.3", "0.7–2.4", "0.447"], ["", "N3", "4.2", "1.0–17.5", "0.05", "3.5", "0.8–15.4", "0.099"], ["Risk scores", "Low risk", "1", "", "", "1", "", ""], ["", "High risk", "2.3", "1.5–3.6", "<0.001", "1.9", "1.2–2.9", "0.004"]], "row_count": 29, "column_count": 8, "numeric_cells": 115, "header_rows": 2, "locator": "section[12]/table-wrap[1]#table-2"}}, {"id": "asset:table:pmid:31396442:3", "role": "table", "format": "jats-table", "media_type": "application/vnd.jats.table+json", "uri": null, "sha256": "sha256:b71c9b582d2573d394ee223fe874b2a5c086ed9f468cc463a0d321cd6b41eac8", "bytes": 751, "access": "open", "state": "verified", "reader": "read_table", "reader_status": "available", "identifier": "section[12]/table-wrap[2]#table-3", "version": null, "note": "Parameters contribution to final survival status prediction.", "structure": {"pmcid": "PMC6679650", "section_index": 12, "section_title": "Risk score of 3-mRNA signature as an independent indicator to predict OSCC prognosis", "row_count": 14, "column_count": 3}, "table": {"label": "Table 3", "caption": "Parameters contribution to final survival status prediction.", "rows": [["Feature", "Gain", "Relative importance"], ["Risk scores", "0.4158", "100%"], ["Age", "0.2885", "69.38%"], ["Pathological N: 2", "0.0647", "15.56%"], ["Pathological T: 3", "0.0454", "10.92%"], ["Pathological T: 4", "0.0399", "9.60%"], ["Pathological N: 0", "0.0325", "7.82%"], ["Pathological stage: IV", "0.0292", "7.02%"], ["Gender: Male", "0.0285", "6.85%"], ["Pathological T: 2", "0.0194", "4.67%"], ["Histologic grade: G3", "0.0187", "4.50%"], ["Pathological stage: 3", "0.0083", "2.00%"], ["Histologic grade: G2", "0.0069", "1.66%"], ["Gender: Female", "0.0023", "0.55%"]], "row_count": 14, "column_count": 3, "numeric_cells": 32, "header_rows": 1, "locator": "section[12]/table-wrap[2]#table-3"}}], "gaps": ["asset:data:geo:GSE41613 not downloaded", "asset:data:geo:GSE41613 licence not read"]}, "analysis": {"state": "partial", "methods": [{"id": "method-1", "family": null, "specific": null, "label": "least absolute shrinkage and selection operator Cox (LASSO Cox) regression", "dsl_operations": [], "missing_operations": [], "expressible": null, "parameters": {}, "data_shapes": [], "evidence": {"score": 1.0, "band": "verbatim", "quote": "Univariate Cox analysis and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator Cox (LASSO Cox) regression were used to primarily screen prognostic biomarkers."}}], "targets": [], "gaps": ["method.reader_named_unmapped"]}, "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": "blocked", "tier": "R4", "blocking_axis": "method", "blocked_on": "method:not_determinable", "axes": {"method": {"tier": "R4", "expressible": false, "required_operations": [], "missing_operations": [], "basis": "The reader quoted the method the paper names (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator Cox (LASSO Cox) regression), but the corpus's method extractor could not map it onto a DSL operation, so the method is published but not expressible."}, "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": ["GSE41613"], "resolved_accessions": ["GSE41613"], "statements": ["The following information was supplied regarding data availability:The raw measurements are available in the Supplemental Files."], "basis": "The paper names GSE41613 in Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO), NCBI and the accession resolves in the repository. No dataset was downloaded and no licence was read."}}, "can_run": {"dsl_operations": [], "assets": ["source:pmid:31396442", "data:geo:GSE41613", "asset:table:pmid:31396442:1", "asset:table:pmid:31396442:2", "asset:table:pmid:31396442:3"], "steps": ["run_analysis"]}, "must_build": {"dsl_operations": [], "converters": [], "readers": [], "capabilities": [], "data_gaps": ["data:geo:GSE41613"]}, "gaps": ["method:not_determinable"]}, "review": {"state": "partial", "machine_critique": {"kind": "extraction_review", "reader": {"model": "MiniMax-M3.1-Flash", "provider": "minimax", "provider_family": "minimax", "read_at": "2026-10-31T18:16:01Z", "independence": "single_reader"}, "evidence_check": {"method": "verbatim", "availability": "verbatim"}, "calls": 3, "usage": {"prompt_tokens": 29148, "completion_tokens": 1906, "cached_tokens": 520}}, "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:31396442", "type": "paper", "label": "pmid:31396442"}, {"id": "source:pmid:31396442", "type": "manuscript", "label": "PMID 31396442 full text"}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE41613", "type": "dataset", "label": "GEO GSE41613"}], "activities": [{"id": "activity-reading-sci-2026-11-01", "type": "classification", "used": [{"id": "pmid:31396442", "type": "paper", "label": "pmid:31396442"}, {"id": "source:pmid:31396442", "type": "manuscript", "label": "PMID 31396442 full text"}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE41613", "type": "dataset", "label": "GEO GSE41613"}], "agent": "agent:corpus-assay-engine"}, {"id": "activity-read-31396442", "type": "extraction", "used": ["source:pmid:31396442"], "agent": "agent:minimax-reader"}, {"id": "activity-resolve-GSE41613", "type": "accession_resolution", "used": ["data:geo:GSE41613"], "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:31396442", "parent_hash": "sha256:f54a4cd059a40c638610cd87aaf479ba11015764ff0ee424e7f0d2678d8766eb", "fork_of": null, "generation": 3}, "gaps": ["asset:data:geo:GSE41613 licence not read", "asset:data:geo:GSE41613 not downloaded", "execution.not_run", "method.reader_named_unmapped", "review.human_critique", "review.independent_reader", "review.machine_critique"]},"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":"2026-11-04T01:48:54+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}}}