{"data":{"sci_version": "1.2", "schema": "https://corpus.bntrg.co.uk/sci/1.0/sci.schema.json", "id": "pmid:36117173", "kind": "science-record", "revision": 3, "content_hash": "sha256:6253b5e8a43fdcec5535f9988c4fbca3f81e62f30eca81d7d68fa46ce011d845", "created_at": "2026-11-01T18:15:22Z", "updated_at": "2026-11-01T21:28:57Z", "generator": {"name": "corpus-assay-engine", "run_id": "reading-sci-2026-11-01"}, "paper": {"state": "complete", "title": "Single-cell and WGCNA uncover a prognostic model and potential oncogenes in colorectal cancer.", "doi": "10.1186/s12575-022-00175-x", "pmid": "36117173", "authors": ["Ziyang Di", "Sicheng Zhou", "Gaoran Xu", "Lian Ren", "Chengxin Li", "Zheyu Ding", "Kaixin Huang", "Leilei Liang", "Yihang Yuan"], "journal": "Biological procedures online", "year": 2022, "abstract": "BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death worldwide. Single-cell transcriptome sequencing (scRNA-seq) can provide accurate gene expression data for individual cells. In this study, a new prognostic model was constructed by scRNA-seq and bulk transcriptome sequencing (bulk RNA-seq) data of CRC samples to develop a new understanding of CRC.\nMETHODS: CRC scRNA-seq data were downloaded from the GSE161277 database, and CRC bulk RNA-seq data were downloaded from the TCGA and GSE17537 databases. The cells were clustered by the FindNeighbors and FindClusters functions in scRNA-seq data. CIBERSORTx was applied to detect the abundance of cell clusters in the bulk RNA-seq expression matrix. WGCNA was performed with the expression profiles to construct the gene coexpression networks of TCGA-CRC. Next, we used a tenfold cross test to construct the model and a nomogram to assess the independence of the model for clinical application. Finally, we examined the expression of the unreported model genes by qPCR and immunohistochemistry. A clone formation assay and orthotopic colorectal tumour model were applied to detect the regulatory roles of unreported model genes.\nRESULTS: A total of 43,851 cells were included after quality control, and 20 cell clusters were classified by the FindCluster () function. We found that the abundances of C1, C2, C4, C5, C15, C16 and C19 were high and the abundances of C7, C10, C11, C13, C14 and C17 were low in CRC tumour tissues. Meanwhile, the results of survival analysis showed that high abundances of C4, C11 and C13 and low abundances of C5 and C14 were associated with better survival. The WGCNA results showed that the red module was most related to the tumour and the C14 cluster, which contains 615 genes. Lasso Cox regression analysis revealed 8 genes (PBXIP1, MPMZ, SCARA3, INA, ILK, MPP2, L1CAM and FLNA), which were chosen to construct a risk model. In the model, the risk score features had the greatest impact on survival prediction, indicating that the 8-gene risk model can better predict prognosis. qPCR and immunohistochemistry analysis showed that the expression levels of MPZ, SCARA3, MPP2 and PBXIP1 were high in CRC tissues. The functional experiment results indicated that MPZ, SCARA3, MPP2 and PBXIP1 could promote the colony formation ability of CRC cells in vitro and tumorigenicity in vivo.\nCONCLUSIONS: We constructed a risk model to predict the prognosis of CRC patients based on scRNA-seq and bulk RNA-seq data, which could be used for clinical application. We also identified 4 previously unreported model genes (MPZ, SCARA3, MPP2 and PBXIP1) as novel oncogenes in CRC. These results suggest that this model could potentially be used to evaluate the prognostic risk and provide potential therapeutic targets for CRC patients.", "claims": [{"id": "claim-method", "statement": "Then, Lasso regression was used to solve the multicollinearity problem during regression analysis and reduce the number of genes in the risk model.", "kind": "methodological", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:36117173", "locator": "sections[21] \"Construction and evaluation of a prognostic risk model\" paragraph 2", "quote": "Then, Lasso regression was used to solve the multicollinearity problem during regression analysis and reduce the number of genes in the risk model."}], "state": "complete"}, {"id": "claim-data-access", "statement": "The datasets used or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.", "kind": "methodological", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:36117173", "locator": "sections[33] \"notes\" paragraph 1", "quote": "The datasets used or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request."}], "state": "complete"}, {"id": "claim-target-result", "statement": "An 8-gene risk model constructed from CRC scRNA-seq and bulk RNA-seq data predicted overall survival, with TCGA 1-, 3- and 5-year AUCs of 0.72, 0.70 and 0.65, respectively.", "kind": "qualitative", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:36117173", "locator": "sections[0] \"Abstract\" paragraph 3", "quote": "Lasso Cox regression analysis revealed 8 genes (PBXIP1, MPMZ, SCARA3, INA, ILK, MPP2, L1CAM and FLNA), which were chosen to construct a risk model."}, {"asset": "source:pmid:36117173", "locator": "sections[21] \"Construction and evaluation of a prognostic risk model\" paragraph 4", "quote": "The AUCs of the risk model for predicting 1-, 3- and 5-year survival were 0.72, 0.70 and 0.65, respectively (Fig. 7C)."}], "state": "complete"}], "gaps": []}, "experiment": {"state": "complete", "objective": "An 8-gene risk model constructed from CRC scRNA-seq and bulk RNA-seq data predicted overall survival, with TCGA 1-, 3- and 5-year AUCs of 0.72, 0.70 and 0.65, respectively.", "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:36117173"], "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:GSE161277"], "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:GSE161277"], "outputs": ["the replicated result and its comparison"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}], "materials": [], "instruments": [], "reagents": [], "conditions": {}, "gaps": []}, "data": {"state": "partial", "assets": [{"id": "source:pmid:36117173", "role": "manuscript", "format": "xml", "media_type": "application/xml", "uri": "https://doi.org/10.1186/s12575-022-00175-x", "sha256": "sha256:375985e8540e2d5ebd45a0695ebadf13b681fa07927cefb946cf0b373eabeb66", "bytes": 45713, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "10.1186/s12575-022-00175-x", "version": null, "note": "Full article fetched from PMC; the checksum covers the rendered section body, not the original XML bytes.", "structure": {"pmcid": "PMC9484253", "source": "europe_pmc_fulltext", "coverage": "whole_body_without_references", "text_hash_scope": "rendered_section_body"}}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE161277", "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=GSE161277", "sha256": null, "bytes": null, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "GSE161277", "version": null, "note": "The datasets used or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.", "structure": {"repository": "GEO", "access_route": "GEO accession URL", "access_statement_verbatim": "The datasets used or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.", "access_statement_kind": "data_availability_statement", "sample_accessions": ["GSM4904234", "GSM4904235", "GSM4904236", "GSM4904237", "GSM4904238", "GSM4904239", "GSM4904240", "GSM4904241", "GSM4904242", "GSM4904243", "GSM4904244", "GSM4904245", "GSM4904246"], "sample_count": 13, "group_sizes": null, "group_sizes_basis": null, "platform": "20795", "taxon": "Homo sapiens", "title": "Dissecting the Epithelial and Immune Evolution during Colorectal Carcinogenesis by Single-Cell RNA Sequencing", "resolution_checked_at": "2026-11-01T18:06:43Z", "resolution_check": "identifier_resolution_only_no_download_no_licence_read", "downloaded": false, "licence_read": false}}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE17537", "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=GSE17537", "sha256": null, "bytes": null, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "GSE17537", "version": null, "note": "The datasets used or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.", "structure": {"repository": "GEO", "access_route": "GEO accession URL", "access_statement_verbatim": "The datasets used or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.", "access_statement_kind": "data_availability_statement", "sample_accessions": ["GSM437270", "GSM437271", "GSM437272", "GSM437273", "GSM437274", "GSM437275", "GSM437276", "GSM437277", "GSM437278", "GSM437279", "GSM437280", "GSM437281", "GSM437282", "GSM437283", "GSM437284", "GSM437285", "GSM437286", "GSM437287", "GSM437288", "GSM437289", "GSM437290", "GSM437291", "GSM437292", "GSM437293", "GSM437294", "GSM437295", "GSM437296", "GSM437297", "GSM437298", "GSM437299", "GSM437300", "GSM437301", "GSM437302", "GSM437303", "GSM437304", "GSM437305", "GSM437306", "GSM437307", "GSM437308", "GSM437309", "GSM437310", "GSM437311", "GSM437312", "GSM437313", "GSM437314", "GSM437315", "GSM437316", "GSM437317", "GSM437318", "GSM437319", "GSM437320", "GSM437321", "GSM437322", "GSM437323", "GSM437324"], "sample_count": 55, "group_sizes": null, "group_sizes_basis": null, "platform": "570", "taxon": "Homo sapiens", "title": "Metastasis Gene Expression Profile Predicts Recurrence and Death in Colon Cancer Patients (VMC Samples)", "resolution_checked_at": "2026-11-01T15:39:54Z", "resolution_check": "identifier_resolution_only_no_download_no_licence_read", "downloaded": false, "licence_read": false}}], "gaps": ["asset:data:geo:GSE161277 not downloaded", "asset:data:geo:GSE161277 licence not read", "asset:data:geo:GSE17537 not downloaded", "asset:data:geo:GSE17537 licence not read"]}, "analysis": {"state": "complete", "methods": [{"id": "method-1", "family": "survival_analysis", "specific": "cox_proportional_hazards", "label": "Survival analysis", "dsl_operations": ["cox_ph"], "missing_operations": [], "expressible": true, "parameters": {}, "data_shapes": ["time_to_event_with_censoring"], "evidence": {"score": 1.0, "band": "verbatim", "quote": "Then, Lasso regression was used to solve the multicollinearity problem during regression analysis and reduce the number of genes in the risk model."}}, {"id": "method-2", "family": "principal_component_analysis", "specific": "pca", "label": "Principal component analysis", "dsl_operations": ["pca_fit"], "missing_operations": [], "expressible": true, "parameters": {}, "data_shapes": ["wide_numeric_matrix"], "evidence": {"score": 0.8, "band": "high", "quote": "principal component analysis"}}, {"id": "method-3", "family": "network_analysis", "specific": "pathway_enrichment", "label": "Network / pathway analysis", "dsl_operations": ["pathway_enrich"], "missing_operations": [], "expressible": true, "parameters": {}, "data_shapes": ["edge_list"], "evidence": {"score": 0.8, "band": "high", "quote": "pathway enrichment"}}], "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": ["cox_ph"], "missing_operations": [], "basis": "The paper names the method it used and the corpus's method extractor maps it onto the DSL catalogue: cox_proportional_hazards."}, "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": ["GSE161277", "GSE17537"], "resolved_accessions": ["GSE161277", "GSE17537"], "statements": ["The datasets used or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request."], "basis": "The paper names GSE161277, GSE17537 in GEO Database and the accession resolves in the repository. No dataset was downloaded and no licence was read."}}, "can_run": {"dsl_operations": ["cox_ph"], "assets": ["source:pmid:36117173", "data:geo:GSE161277"], "steps": ["run_analysis"]}, "must_build": {"dsl_operations": [], "converters": [], "readers": [], "capabilities": [], "data_gaps": ["data:geo:GSE161277"]}, "gaps": []}, "review": {"state": "partial", "machine_critique": {"kind": "extraction_review", "reader": {"model": "MiniMax-M3.1-Flash", "provider": "minimax", "provider_family": "minimax", "read_at": "2026-11-01T18:05:50Z", "independence": "single_reader"}, "evidence_check": {"method": "verbatim", "availability": "verbatim"}, "calls": 5, "usage": {"prompt_tokens": 13415, "completion_tokens": 1896, "cached_tokens": 264}}, "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:36117173", "type": "paper", "label": "pmid:36117173"}, {"id": "source:pmid:36117173", "type": "manuscript", "label": "PMID 36117173 full text"}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE161277", "type": "dataset", "label": "GEO GSE161277"}], "activities": [{"id": "activity-reading-sci-2026-11-01", "type": "classification", "used": [{"id": "pmid:36117173", "type": "paper", "label": "pmid:36117173"}, {"id": "source:pmid:36117173", "type": "manuscript", "label": "PMID 36117173 full text"}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE161277", "type": "dataset", "label": "GEO GSE161277"}], "agent": "agent:corpus-assay-engine"}, {"id": "activity-read-36117173", "type": "extraction", "used": ["source:pmid:36117173"], "agent": "agent:minimax-reader"}, {"id": "activity-resolve-GSE161277", "type": "accession_resolution", "used": ["data:geo:GSE161277"], "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:36117173", "parent_hash": "sha256:a0356e007e025dd7ad37ffb836ae378908fe505e91767036fb13a0c73470360c", "fork_of": null, "generation": 2}, "gaps": ["asset:data:geo:GSE161277 licence not read", "asset:data:geo:GSE161277 not downloaded", "asset:data:geo:GSE17537 licence not read", "asset:data:geo:GSE17537 not downloaded", "execution.not_run", "review.human_critique", "review.independent_reader", "review.machine_critique"], "assays": [{"role": "data_generation", "definition_id": "scrna_seq", "definition_version": "99e1195c7d6f", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": [], "support_state": "unsupported", "source_hashes": {"assay_lexicon": "99e1195c7d6f"}, "confidence": 0.99, "evidence": ["dwide. Single-cell transcriptome sequencing (scRNA-seq) can provide accurate gene expression data f", "y, a new prognostic model was constructed by scRNA-seq and bulk transcriptome sequencing (bulk RNA-", "lop a new understanding of CRC. METHODS: CRC scRNA-seq data were downloaded from the GSE161277 data", "FindNeighbors and FindClusters functions in scRNA-seq data. CIBERSORTx was applied to detect the a"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:188", "id": "assay:1"}, {"role": "data_generation", "definition_id": "rna_seq", "definition_version": "99e1195c7d6f", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": [], "support_state": "partial", "source_hashes": {"assay_lexicon": "99e1195c7d6f"}, "confidence": 0.99, "evidence": ["-seq and bulk transcriptome sequencing (bulk RNA-seq) data of CRC samples to develop a new unders", "t the abundance of cell clusters in the bulk RNA-seq expression matrix. WGCNA was performed with", "of CRC patients based on scRNA-seq and bulk RNA-seq data, which could be used for clinical appli", "ells. Abundance analysis of clusters in bulk RNA-seq samples To assess the correlation between ce"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:370", "id": "assay:2"}, {"role": "data_generation", "definition_id": "qpcr", "definition_version": "99e1195c7d6f", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": [], "support_state": "partial", "source_hashes": {"assay_lexicon": "99e1195c7d6f"}, "confidence": 0.99, "evidence": ["expression of the unreported model genes by qPCR and immunohistochemistry. A clone formation", "ene risk model can better predict prognosis. qPCR and immunohistochemistry analysis showed tha", "P1) in clinical samples from CRC patients by qPCR (Fig. 9A-D) and IHC (Fig. 9E-H) analysis and", "e unreported model genes. The results of A-D qPCR and E–H IHC analysis showed that the express"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:1101", "id": "assay:3"}, {"role": "data_generation", "definition_id": "ihc", "definition_version": "99e1195c7d6f", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": [], "support_state": "partial", "source_hashes": {"assay_lexicon": "99e1195c7d6f"}, "confidence": 0.99, "evidence": ["on of the unreported model genes by qPCR and immunohistochemistry. A clone formation assay and orthotopic colo", "model can better predict prognosis. qPCR and immunohistochemistry analysis showed that the expression levels o", "es from CRC patients by qPCR (Fig. 9A-D) and IHC (Fig. 9E-H) analysis and found that the expr", "model genes. The results of A-D qPCR and E–H IHC analysis showed that the expression of MPZ,"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:1109", "id": "assay:4"}, {"role": "data_generation", "definition_id": "animal_model", "definition_version": "99e1195c7d6f", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": [], "support_state": "partial", "source_hashes": {"assay_lexicon": "99e1195c7d6f"}, "confidence": 0.99, "evidence": ["ity of CRC cells in vitro and tumorigenicity in vivo. CONCLUSIONS: We constructed a risk model to", "ells in vitro (Fig. 10 A) and tumorigenicity in vivo (Fig. 10 B-C), while overexpression of MPZ,", "cells in vitro (Fig. S7B) and tumorigenicity in vivo (Fig. S7C). IHC analysis of xenografted tumo", "W620 cells A in vitro and B-C tumorigenicity in vivo. D IHC analysis of xenografted tumour tissue"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:2444", "id": "assay:5"}, {"role": "data_generation", "definition_id": "transfection", "definition_version": "99e1195c7d6f", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": [], "support_state": "partial", "source_hashes": {"assay_lexicon": "99e1195c7d6f"}, "confidence": 0.99, "evidence": ["e cell lines in SW620 cells, and SW620 cells transfected with sh-NC were considered the control. West", "Western blots were used to validate the cell transfection efficiency and the results are presented in", "in the CRC cell line SW480, and SW480 cells transfected with vector were considered the control. The"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:12067", "id": "assay:6"}, {"role": "data_generation", "definition_id": "western_blot", "definition_version": "99e1195c7d6f", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": [], "support_state": "partial", "source_hashes": {"assay_lexicon": "99e1195c7d6f"}, "confidence": 0.93, "evidence": ["cted with sh-NC were considered the control. Western blots were used to validate the cell transfection"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:12119", "id": "assay:7"}, {"role": "analysis", "definition_id": "survival_analysis", "definition_version": "f2132e96ae6c7a4e", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": ["cox_ph"], "support_state": "supported", "source_hashes": {"dsl_catalogue": "f2132e96ae6c7a4e"}, "confidence": 1.0, "evidence": ["Then, Lasso regression was used to solve the multicollinearity problem during regression analysis and reduce the number of genes in the risk model."], "order_basis": "consumes_earlier_output", "id": "assay:8"}]},"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":"2026-11-04T01:43:54+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}}}