{"data":{"sci_version": "1.2", "schema": "https://corpus.bntrg.co.uk/sci/1.0/sci.schema.json", "id": "pmid:36817451", "kind": "science-record", "revision": 3, "content_hash": "sha256:8965cf9dbad0b2fba9505ada51a829fa239cb8df7df9d7625e72abeab8a8571d", "created_at": "2026-11-01T19:01:24Z", "updated_at": "2026-11-01T22:08:51Z", "generator": {"name": "corpus-assay-engine", "run_id": "reading-sci-2026-11-01"}, "paper": {"state": "complete", "title": "Construction and comprehensive analysis of a novel prognostic signature associated with pyroptosis molecular subtypes in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.", "doi": "10.3389/fimmu.2023.1111494", "pmid": "36817451", "authors": ["Qian Huang", "Xingyu Peng", "Qingqing Li", "Jinfeng Zhu", "Ju Xue", "Hua Jiang"], "journal": "Frontiers in immunology", "year": 2023, "abstract": "Background: Treatment of cancer with pyroptosis is an emerging strategy. Molecular subtypes based on pyroptosis-related genes(PRGs) seem to be considered more conducive to individualized therapy. It is meaningful to construct a pyroptosis molecular subtypes-related prognostic signature (PMSRPS) to predict the overall survival (OS) of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma(PAAD) and guide treatment.\nMethods: Based on the transcriptome data of 23 PRGs, consensus clustering was applied to divide the TCGA and GSE102238 combined cohort into three PRGclusters. Prognosis-related differentially expressed genes(DEGs) among PRGclusters were subjected to LASSO Cox regression analysis to determine a PMSRPS. External cohort and in vitro experiments were conducted to verify this PMSRPS. The CIBERSORT algorithm, the ESTIMATE algorithm and the Immunophenoscore (IPS) were used to analyze the infiltrating abundance of immune cells, the tumor microenvironment (TME), and the response to immunotherapy, respectively. Wilcoxon analysis was used to compare tumor mutational burden (TMB) and RNA stemness scores (RNAss) between groups. RT-qPCR and in vitro functional experiments were used for evaluating the expression and function of SFTA2.\nResults: Based on three PRGclusters, 828 DEGs were obtained and a PMSRPS was subsequently constructed. In internal and external validation, patients in the high-risk group had significantly lower OS than those in the low-risk group and PMSRPS was confirmed to be an independent prognostic risk factor for patients with PAAD with good predictive performance. Immune cell infiltration abundance and TME scores indicate patients in the high-risk group have typical immunosuppressive microenvironment characteristics. Analysis of IPS suggests patients in the high-risk group responded better to novel immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) than PD1/CTLA4. The high-risk group had higher TMB and RNAss. In addition, 10 potential small-molecule compounds were screened out. Finally, we found that the mRNA expression of SFTA2 gene with the highest risk coefficient in PMSRPS was significantly higher in PAAD than in paracancerous tissues, and knockdown of it significantly delayed the progression of PAAD.\nConclusions: PMSRPS can well predict the prognosis, TME and immunotherapy response of patients with PAAD, identify potential drugs, and provide treatment guidance based on individual needs.", "claims": [{"id": "claim-method", "statement": "The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) Cox regression analysis was performed on PRDEGs in the training cohort to construct a refined prognostic signature (28).", "kind": "methodological", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:36817451", "locator": "sections[6] \"Establishment and identification of prognostic signature\" paragraph 2", "quote": "The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) Cox regression analysis was performed on PRDEGs in the training cohort to construct a refined prognostic signature (28)."}], "state": "complete"}, {"id": "claim-data-access", "statement": "Publicly available datasets were analyzed in this study. This data can be found here: The TCGA database can be found here: https://portal.gdc.cancer.gov/, the GEO database https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/, the ICGC database https://dcc.icgc.org/, the GTEx database https://xenabrowser.net/datapages/, and the original data for experimental validation are available through corresponding authors.", "kind": "methodological", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:36817451", "locator": "sections[29] \"Data availability statement\" paragraph 2", "quote": "Publicly available datasets were analyzed in this study. This data can be found here: The TCGA database can be found here: https://portal.gdc.cancer.gov/, the GEO database https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/, the ICGC database https://dcc.icgc.org/, the GTEx database https://xenabrowser.net/datapages/, and the original data for experimental validation are available through corresponding authors."}], "state": "complete"}, {"id": "claim-target-result", "statement": "The three-gene PMSRPS outperformed the Bai-Sig, Xiao-Sig, and Wu-Sig signatures when predicting 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival in patients with PAAD.", "kind": "qualitative", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:36817451", "locator": "sections[22] \"External cohort verification and performance comparison of PMSRPS\" paragraph 4", "quote": "The results showed that the AUCs of PMSRPS (0.676, 0.631, 0.600) for predicting the 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival of patients with PAAD were higher than those of Bai-Sig (0.609, 0.594, 0.542), Xiao-Sig (0.623, 0.614, 0.557) and Wu-Sig (0.667, 0.630, 0.551) ( Figures 7M–O )."}], "state": "complete"}], "gaps": []}, "experiment": {"state": "complete", "objective": "The three-gene PMSRPS outperformed the Bai-Sig, Xiao-Sig, and Wu-Sig signatures when predicting 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival in patients with PAAD.", "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:36817451"], "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:GSE102238"], "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:GSE102238"], "outputs": ["the replicated result and its comparison"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}], "materials": [], "instruments": [], "reagents": [], "conditions": {}, "gaps": []}, "data": {"state": "partial", "assets": [{"id": "source:pmid:36817451", "role": "manuscript", "format": "xml", "media_type": "application/xml", "uri": "https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2023.1111494", "sha256": "sha256:3220337f410c5eb69b56da28f31415fab62665b7f101ff87d7e57a9010533534", "bytes": 77655, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "10.3389/fimmu.2023.1111494", "version": null, "note": "Full article fetched from PMC; the checksum covers the rendered section body, not the original XML bytes.", "structure": {"pmcid": "PMC9935619", "source": "europe_pmc_fulltext", "coverage": "whole_body", "text_hash_scope": "rendered_section_body"}}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE102238", "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=GSE102238", "sha256": null, "bytes": null, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "GSE102238", "version": null, "note": "Publicly available datasets were analyzed in this study. This data can be found here: The TCGA database can be found here: https://portal.gdc.cancer.gov/, the GEO database https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/, the ICGC database https://dcc.icgc.org/, the GTEx database https://xenabrowser.net/datapages/, and the original data for experimental validation are available through corresponding authors.", "structure": {"repository": "GEO", "access_route": "GEO accession URL", "access_statement_verbatim": "Publicly available datasets were analyzed in this study. This data can be found here: The TCGA database can be found here: https://portal.gdc.cancer.gov/, the GEO database https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/, the ICGC database https://dcc.icgc.org/, the GTEx database https://xenabrowser.net/datapages/, and the original data for experimental validation are available through corresponding authors.", "access_statement_kind": "data_availability_statement", "sample_accessions": ["GSM2731543", "GSM2731544", "GSM2731545", "GSM2731546", "GSM2731547", "GSM2731548", "GSM2731549", "GSM2731550", "GSM2731551", "GSM2731552", "GSM2731553", "GSM2731554", "GSM2731555", "GSM2731556", "GSM2731557", "GSM2731558", "GSM2731559", "GSM2731560", "GSM2731561", "GSM2731562", "GSM2731563", "GSM2731564", "GSM2731565", "GSM2731566", "GSM2731567", "GSM2731568", "GSM2731569", "GSM2731570", "GSM2731571", "GSM2731572", "GSM2731573", "GSM2731574", "GSM2731575", "GSM2731576", "GSM2731577", "GSM2731578", "GSM2731579", "GSM2731580", "GSM2731581", "GSM2731582", "GSM2731583", "GSM2731584", "GSM2731585", "GSM2731586", "GSM2731587", "GSM2731588", "GSM2731589", "GSM2731590", "GSM2731591", "GSM2731592", "GSM2731593", "GSM2731594", "GSM2731595", "GSM2731596", "GSM2731597", "GSM2731598", "GSM2731599", "GSM2731600", "GSM2731601", "GSM2731602", "GSM2731603", "GSM2731604", "GSM2731605", "GSM2731606", "GSM2731607", "GSM2731608", "GSM2731609", "GSM2731610", "GSM2731611", "GSM2731612", "GSM2731613", "GSM2731614", "GSM2731615", "GSM2731616", "GSM2731617", "GSM2731618", "GSM2731619", "GSM2731620", "GSM2731621", "GSM2731622", "GSM2731623", "GSM2731624", "GSM2731625", "GSM2731626", "GSM2731627", "GSM2731628", "GSM2731629", "GSM2731630", "GSM2731631", "GSM2731632", "GSM2731633", "GSM2731634", "GSM2731635", "GSM2731636", "GSM2731637", "GSM2731638", "GSM2731639", "GSM2731640", "GSM2731641", "GSM2731642"], "sample_count": 100, "group_sizes": null, "group_sizes_basis": null, "platform": "19072", "taxon": "Homo sapiens", "title": "Gene expression signatures associated with Perineural Invasion in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma", "resolution_checked_at": "2026-11-01T15:39:54Z", "resolution_check": "identifier_resolution_only_no_download_no_licence_read", "downloaded": false, "licence_read": false}}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE57495", "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=GSE57495", "sha256": null, "bytes": null, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "GSE57495", "version": null, "note": "Publicly available datasets were analyzed in this study. This data can be found here: The TCGA database can be found here: https://portal.gdc.cancer.gov/, the GEO database https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/, the ICGC database https://dcc.icgc.org/, the GTEx database https://xenabrowser.net/datapages/, and the original data for experimental validation are available through corresponding authors.", "structure": {"repository": "GEO", "access_route": "GEO accession URL", "access_statement_verbatim": "Publicly available datasets were analyzed in this study. This data can be found here: The TCGA database can be found here: https://portal.gdc.cancer.gov/, the GEO database https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/, the ICGC database https://dcc.icgc.org/, the GTEx database https://xenabrowser.net/datapages/, and the original data for experimental validation are available through corresponding authors.", "access_statement_kind": "data_availability_statement", "sample_accessions": ["GSM1383778", "GSM1383779", "GSM1383780", "GSM1383781", "GSM1383782", "GSM1383783", "GSM1383784", "GSM1383785", "GSM1383786", "GSM1383787", "GSM1383788", "GSM1383789", "GSM1383790", "GSM1383791", "GSM1383792", "GSM1383793", "GSM1383794", "GSM1383795", "GSM1383796", "GSM1383797", "GSM1383798", "GSM1383799", "GSM1383800", "GSM1383801", "GSM1383802", "GSM1383803", "GSM1383804", "GSM1383805", "GSM1383806", "GSM1383807", "GSM1383808", "GSM1383809", "GSM1383810", "GSM1383811", "GSM1383812", "GSM1383813", "GSM1383814", "GSM1383815", "GSM1383816", "GSM1383817", "GSM1383818", "GSM1383819", "GSM1383820", "GSM1383821", "GSM1383822", "GSM1383823", "GSM1383824", "GSM1383825", "GSM1383826", "GSM1383827", "GSM1383828", "GSM1383829", "GSM1383830", "GSM1383831", "GSM1383832", "GSM1383833", "GSM1383834", "GSM1383835", "GSM1383836", "GSM1383837", "GSM1383838", "GSM1383839", "GSM1383840"], "sample_count": 63, "group_sizes": null, "group_sizes_basis": null, "platform": "15048", "taxon": "Homo sapiens", "title": "Development of a prognostic gene signature in pancreatic cancer", "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:GSE102238 not downloaded", "asset:data:geo:GSE102238 licence not read", "asset:data:geo:GSE57495 not downloaded", "asset:data:geo:GSE57495 licence not read"]}, "analysis": {"state": "partial", "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": "The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) Cox regression analysis was performed on PRDEGs in the training cohort to construct a refined prognostic signature (28)."}}, {"id": "method-2", "family": "group_comparison", "specific": "wilcoxon", "label": "Group comparison", "dsl_operations": [], "missing_operations": ["group_comparison_wilcoxon"], "expressible": false, "parameters": {}, "data_shapes": ["two_or_more_groups_continuous"], "evidence": {"score": 0.7, "band": "medium", "quote": "Wilcoxon"}}, {"id": "method-3", "family": "survival_analysis", "specific": "log_rank_test", "label": "Survival analysis", "dsl_operations": ["logrank_test"], "missing_operations": [], "expressible": true, "parameters": {}, "data_shapes": ["time_to_event_with_censoring"], "evidence": {"score": 0.8, "band": "high", "quote": "Log-rank"}}, {"id": "method-4", "family": "correlation_analysis", "specific": "spearman", "label": "Correlation analysis", "dsl_operations": ["spearman_rho"], "missing_operations": [], "expressible": true, "parameters": {}, "data_shapes": ["paired_numeric_columns"], "evidence": {"score": 0.8, "band": "high", "quote": "Spearman correlation"}}, {"id": "method-5", "family": "contingency_analysis", "specific": "chi_square", "label": "Categorical (contingency table) analysis", "dsl_operations": ["chi_square_test"], "missing_operations": [], "expressible": true, "parameters": {}, "data_shapes": ["categorical_cross_tabulation"], "evidence": {"score": 0.8, "band": "high", "quote": "chi-square"}}], "targets": [], "gaps": ["method.reader_differs_from_extractor"]}, "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": ["GSE102238", "GSE57495"], "resolved_accessions": ["GSE102238", "GSE57495"], "statements": ["Publicly available datasets were analyzed in this study. This data can be found here: The TCGA database can be found here: https://portal.gdc.cancer.gov/, the GEO database https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/, the ICGC database https://dcc.icgc.org/, the GTEx database https://xenabrowser.net/datapages/, and the original data for experimental validation are available through corresponding authors."], "basis": "The paper names GSE102238, GSE57495 in Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) 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:36817451", "data:geo:GSE102238"], "steps": ["run_analysis"]}, "must_build": {"dsl_operations": [], "converters": [], "readers": [], "capabilities": [], "data_gaps": ["data:geo:GSE102238"]}, "gaps": []}, "review": {"state": "partial", "machine_critique": {"kind": "extraction_review", "reader": {"model": "MiniMax-M3.1-Flash", "provider": "minimax", "provider_family": "minimax", "read_at": "2026-11-01T18:28:26Z", "independence": "single_reader"}, "evidence_check": {"method": "verbatim", "availability": "verbatim"}, "calls": 5, "usage": {"prompt_tokens": 21691, "completion_tokens": 2610, "cached_tokens": 128}}, "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:36817451", "type": "paper", "label": "pmid:36817451"}, {"id": "source:pmid:36817451", "type": "manuscript", "label": "PMID 36817451 full text"}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE102238", "type": "dataset", "label": "GEO GSE102238"}], "activities": [{"id": "activity-reading-sci-2026-11-01", "type": "classification", "used": [{"id": "pmid:36817451", "type": "paper", "label": "pmid:36817451"}, {"id": "source:pmid:36817451", "type": "manuscript", "label": "PMID 36817451 full text"}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE102238", "type": "dataset", "label": "GEO GSE102238"}], "agent": "agent:corpus-assay-engine"}, {"id": "activity-read-36817451", "type": "extraction", "used": ["source:pmid:36817451"], "agent": "agent:minimax-reader"}, {"id": "activity-resolve-GSE102238", "type": "accession_resolution", "used": ["data:geo:GSE102238"], "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:36817451", "parent_hash": "sha256:1508a4b087b8933f1d9ebd59f6c08ed4a098d938ef4bafd4aa66c113125bfb68", "fork_of": null, "generation": 2}, "gaps": ["asset:data:geo:GSE102238 licence not read", "asset:data:geo:GSE102238 not downloaded", "asset:data:geo:GSE57495 licence not read", "asset:data:geo:GSE57495 not downloaded", "execution.not_run", "method.reader_differs_from_extractor", "review.human_critique", "review.independent_reader", "review.machine_critique"], "assays": [{"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": ["RNA stemness scores (RNAss) between groups. RT-qPCR and in vitro functional experiments were use", "A stemness scores (RNAss) between groups. RT-qPCR and in vitro functional experiments were use", "ccording to standard guidelines. Samples and real-time quantitative PCR The tumor tissue and paired adjacent tissue", "respectively, and reverse transcription and real-time PCR were performed. The following primers used i"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:1246", "id": "assay:1"}, {"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": ["r in PAAD than in paracancerous tissues, and knockdown of it significantly delayed the progression", "Materials and methods Cell culture and transfection The human PAAD cell line CFPAC-1 was derived", "n Supplementary Table 3 . CFPAC-1 cells were transfected using Lipofectamine 3000 reagent (Invitrogen", "3), total RNA was extracted from tissues and transfected cells, respectively, and reverse transcripti"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:2286", "id": "assay:2"}, {"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": ["from Procell (CL-0059, Wuhan, China) and was cultured in a special medium (Procell, CM-0059) in a 37°"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:2681", "id": "assay:3"}, {"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": ["al-mesenchymal transformation, resistance to apoptosis and antitumor drugs, and propensity to sprea"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:6028", "id": "assay:4"}, {"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": ["The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) Cox regression analysis was performed on PRDEGs in the training cohort to construct a refined prognostic signature (28)."], "order_basis": "consumes_earlier_output", "id": "assay:5"}]},"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":"2026-11-04T03:11:03+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}}}