{"data":{"sci_version": "1.2", "schema": "https://corpus.bntrg.co.uk/sci/1.0/sci.schema.json", "id": "pmid:37404304", "kind": "science-record", "revision": 2, "content_hash": "sha256:4ae06f389ee1715467a497151df2149145b91f7c31fb21af0838908cd95ed2cb", "created_at": "2026-11-01T19:02:10Z", "updated_at": "2026-11-01T21:31:07Z", "generator": {"name": "corpus-assay-engine", "run_id": "reading-sci-2026-11-01"}, "paper": {"state": "complete", "title": "Machine learning-assisted analysis of epithelial mesenchymal transition pathway for prognostic stratification and immune infiltration assessment in ovarian cancer.", "doi": "10.3389/fendo.2023.1196094", "pmid": "37404304", "authors": ["Qian Li", "Xiyun Xiao", "Jing Feng", "Ruixue Yan", "Jie Xi"], "journal": "Frontiers in endocrinology", "year": 2023, "abstract": "Background: Ovarian cancer is the most lethal gynaecological malignancy, and serous ovarian cancer (SOC) is one of the more important pathological subtypes. Previous studies have reported a significant association of epithelial tomesenchymal transition (EMT) with invasive metastasis and immune modulation of SOC, however, there is a lack of prognostic and immune infiltration biomarkers reported for SOC based on EMT.\nMethods: Gene expression data for ovarian cancer and corresponding patient clinical data were collected from the TCGA database and the GEO database, and cell type annotation and spatial expression analysis were performed on single cell sequencing data from the GEO database. To understand the cell type distribution of EMT-related genes in SOC single-cell data and the enrichment relationships of biological pathways and tumour functions. In addition, GO functional annotation analysis and KEGG pathway enrichment analysis were performed on mRNAs predominantly expressed with EMT to predict the biological function of EMT in ovarian cancer. The major differential genes of EMT were screened to construct a prognostic risk prediction model for SOC patients. Data from 173 SOC patient samples obtained from the GSE53963 database were used to validate the prognostic risk prediction model for ovarian cancer. Here we also analysed the direct association between SOC immune infiltration and immune cell modulation and EMT risk score. and calculate drug sensitivity scores in the GDSC database.In addition, we assessed the specific relationship between GAS1 gene and SOC cell lines.\nResults: Single cell transcriptome analysis in the GEO database annotated the major cell types of SOC samples, including: T cell, Myeloid, Epithelial cell, Fibroblast, Endothelial cell, and Bcell. cellchat revealed several cell type interactions that were shown to be associated with EMT-mediated SOC invasion and metastasis. A prognostic stratification model for SOC was constructed based on EMT-related differential genes, and the Kapan-Meier test showed that this biomarker had significant prognostic stratification value for several independent SOC databases. The EMT risk score has good stratification and identification properties for drug sensitivity in the GDSC database.\nConclusions: This study constructed a prognostic stratification biomarker based on EMT-related risk genes for immune infiltration mechanisms and drug sensitivity analysis studies in SOC. This lays the foundation for in-depth clinical studies on the role of EMT in immune regulation and related pathway alterations in SOC. It is also hoped to provide effective potential solutions for early diagnosis and clinical treatment of ovarian cancer.", "claims": [{"id": "claim-method", "statement": "Multi-factorial Cox regression and LASSO analysis were performed on 50 prognosis-related EMT risk genes ( Figures 3A , B ), and 7 EMT risk genes with significant correlation with prognosis of ovarian cancer patients were obtained (P < 0.01), which constituted a prognostic prediction model for ovarian cancer.", "kind": "methodological", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:37404304", "locator": "sections[17] \"Construction of SOC prognostic biomarkers for EMT genetic risk model and functional assessment\" paragraph 2", "quote": "Multi-factorial Cox regression and LASSO analysis were performed on 50 prognosis-related EMT risk genes ( Figures 3A , B ), and 7 EMT risk genes with significant correlation with prognosis of ovarian cancer patients were obtained (P < 0.01), which constituted a prognostic prediction model for ovarian cancer."}], "state": "complete"}, {"id": "claim-data-access", "statement": "The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ Supplementary Material . Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.", "kind": "methodological", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:37404304", "locator": "sections[21] \"Data availability statement\" paragraph 2", "quote": "The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ Supplementary Material . Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author."}], "state": "complete"}, {"id": "claim-target-result", "statement": "The grouping curves based on EMT risk marker expression demonstrated significant prognostic stratification and survival predictive power.", "kind": "qualitative", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:37404304", "locator": "sections[17] \"Construction of SOC prognostic biomarkers for EMT genetic risk model and functional assessment\" paragraph 2", "quote": "Using the TCGA-OV cohort as the training group, the cohort selected 7 genes of prognostic significance from 22 genes according to Lasso regression and constructed prognostic models."}, {"asset": "source:pmid:37404304", "locator": "sections[17] \"Construction of SOC prognostic biomarkers for EMT genetic risk model and functional assessment\" paragraph 2", "quote": "The grouping curves based on EMT risk marker expression demonstrated significant prognostic stratification and survival predictive power."}], "state": "complete"}], "gaps": []}, "experiment": {"state": "complete", "objective": "The grouping curves based on EMT risk marker expression demonstrated significant prognostic stratification and survival predictive power.", "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:37404304"], "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:GSE154600"], "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:GSE154600"], "outputs": ["the replicated result and its comparison"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}], "materials": [], "instruments": [], "reagents": [], "conditions": {}, "gaps": []}, "data": {"state": "partial", "assets": [{"id": "source:pmid:37404304", "role": "manuscript", "format": "xml", "media_type": "application/xml", "uri": "https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2023.1196094", "sha256": "sha256:150354c3d5e645427d5273a4be294611cb3429d0509845340fa53684116a7dd0", "bytes": 58652, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "10.3389/fendo.2023.1196094", "version": null, "note": "Full article fetched from PMC; the checksum covers the rendered section body, not the original XML bytes.", "structure": {"pmcid": "PMC10317337", "source": "europe_pmc_fulltext", "coverage": "whole_body", "text_hash_scope": "rendered_section_body"}}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE154600", "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=GSE154600", "sha256": null, "bytes": null, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "GSE154600", "version": null, "note": "The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ Supplementary Material . Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.", "structure": {"repository": "GEO", "access_route": "GEO accession URL", "access_statement_verbatim": "The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ Supplementary Material . Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.", "access_statement_kind": "data_availability_statement", "sample_accessions": ["GSM4675273", "GSM4675274", "GSM4675275", "GSM4675276", "GSM4675277"], "sample_count": 5, "group_sizes": null, "group_sizes_basis": null, "platform": "16791", "taxon": "Homo sapiens", "title": "Multi-omic analysis of subtype evolution and heterogeneity in high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma", "resolution_checked_at": "2026-11-01T17:30:42Z", "resolution_check": "identifier_resolution_only_no_download_no_licence_read", "downloaded": false, "licence_read": false}}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE53963", "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=GSE53963", "sha256": null, "bytes": null, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "GSE53963", "version": null, "note": "The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ Supplementary Material . Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.", "structure": {"repository": "GEO", "access_route": "GEO accession URL", "access_statement_verbatim": "The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ Supplementary Material . Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.", "access_statement_kind": "data_availability_statement", "sample_accessions": ["GSM1304246", "GSM1304247", "GSM1304248", "GSM1304249", "GSM1304250", "GSM1304251", "GSM1304252", "GSM1304253", "GSM1304254", "GSM1304255", "GSM1304256", "GSM1304257", "GSM1304258", "GSM1304259", "GSM1304260", "GSM1304261", "GSM1304262", "GSM1304263", "GSM1304264", "GSM1304265", "GSM1304266", "GSM1304267", "GSM1304268", "GSM1304269", "GSM1304270", "GSM1304271", "GSM1304272", "GSM1304273", "GSM1304274", "GSM1304275", "GSM1304276", "GSM1304277", "GSM1304278", "GSM1304279", "GSM1304280", "GSM1304281", "GSM1304282", "GSM1304283", "GSM1304284", "GSM1304285", "GSM1304286", "GSM1304287", "GSM1304288", "GSM1304289", "GSM1304290", "GSM1304291", "GSM1304292", "GSM1304293", "GSM1304294", "GSM1304295", "GSM1304296", "GSM1304297", "GSM1304298", "GSM1304299", "GSM1304300", "GSM1304301", "GSM1304302", "GSM1304303", "GSM1304304", "GSM1304305", "GSM1304306", "GSM1304307", "GSM1304308", "GSM1304309", "GSM1304310", "GSM1304311", "GSM1304312", "GSM1304313", "GSM1304314", "GSM1304315", "GSM1304316", "GSM1304317", "GSM1304318", "GSM1304319", "GSM1304320", "GSM1304321", "GSM1304322", "GSM1304323", "GSM1304324", "GSM1304325", "GSM1304326", "GSM1304327", "GSM1304328", "GSM1304329", "GSM1304330", "GSM1304331", "GSM1304332", "GSM1304333", "GSM1304334", "GSM1304335", "GSM1304336", "GSM1304337", "GSM1304338", "GSM1304339", "GSM1304340", "GSM1304341", "GSM1304342", "GSM1304343", "GSM1304344", "GSM1304345", "GSM1304346", "GSM1304347", "GSM1304348", "GSM1304349", "GSM1304350", "GSM1304351", "GSM1304352", "GSM1304353", "GSM1304354", "GSM1304355", "GSM1304356", "GSM1304357", "GSM1304358", "GSM1304359", "GSM1304360", "GSM1304361", "GSM1304362", "GSM1304363", "GSM1304364", "GSM1304365", "GSM1304366", "GSM1304367", "GSM1304368", "GSM1304369", "GSM1304370", "GSM1304371", "GSM1304372", "GSM1304373", "GSM1304374", "GSM1304375", "GSM1304376", "GSM1304377", "GSM1304378", "GSM1304379", "GSM1304380", "GSM1304381", "GSM1304382", "GSM1304383", "GSM1304384", "GSM1304385", "GSM1304386", "GSM1304387", "GSM1304388", "GSM1304389", "GSM1304390", "GSM1304391", "GSM1304392", "GSM1304393", "GSM1304394", "GSM1304395", "GSM1304396", "GSM1304397", "GSM1304398", "GSM1304399", "GSM1304400", "GSM1304401", "GSM1304402", "GSM1304403", "GSM1304404", "GSM1304405", "GSM1304406", "GSM1304407", "GSM1304408", "GSM1304409", "GSM1304410", "GSM1304411", "GSM1304412", "GSM1304413", "GSM1304414", "GSM1304415", "GSM1304416", "GSM1304417", "GSM1304418", "GSM1304419"], "sample_count": 174, "group_sizes": null, "group_sizes_basis": null, "platform": "6480", "taxon": "Homo sapiens", "title": "Gene Expression Profiling of Human High-Grade Serous Ovarian Tumor Samples", "resolution_checked_at": "2026-11-01T17:30:42Z", "resolution_check": "identifier_resolution_only_no_download_no_licence_read", "downloaded": false, "licence_read": false}}], "gaps": ["asset:data:geo:GSE154600 not downloaded", "asset:data:geo:GSE154600 licence not read", "asset:data:geo:GSE53963 not downloaded", "asset:data:geo:GSE53963 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": "Multi-factorial Cox regression and LASSO analysis were performed on 50 prognosis-related EMT risk genes ( Figures 3A , B ), and 7 EMT risk genes with significant correlation with prognosis of ovarian cancer patients were obtained (P < 0.01), which constituted a prognostic prediction model for ovarian cancer."}}, {"id": "method-2", "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": 0.7, "band": "medium", "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": ["GSE53963", "GSE154600"], "resolved_accessions": ["GSE53963", "GSE154600"], "statements": ["The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ Supplementary Material . Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author."], "basis": "The paper names GSE53963, GSE154600 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:37404304", "data:geo:GSE154600"], "steps": ["run_analysis"]}, "must_build": {"dsl_operations": [], "converters": [], "readers": [], "capabilities": [], "data_gaps": ["data:geo:GSE154600"]}, "gaps": []}, "review": {"state": "partial", "machine_critique": {"kind": "extraction_review", "reader": {"model": "MiniMax-M3.1-Flash", "provider": "minimax", "provider_family": "minimax", "read_at": "2026-11-01T18:46:02Z", "independence": "single_reader"}, "evidence_check": {"method": "verbatim", "availability": "verbatim"}, "calls": 5, "usage": {"prompt_tokens": 14952, "completion_tokens": 2221, "cached_tokens": 0}}, "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:37404304", "type": "paper", "label": "pmid:37404304"}, {"id": "source:pmid:37404304", "type": "manuscript", "label": "PMID 37404304 full text"}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE154600", "type": "dataset", "label": "GEO GSE154600"}], "activities": [{"id": "activity-reading-sci-2026-11-01", "type": "classification", "used": [{"id": "pmid:37404304", "type": "paper", "label": "pmid:37404304"}, {"id": "source:pmid:37404304", "type": "manuscript", "label": "PMID 37404304 full text"}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE154600", "type": "dataset", "label": "GEO GSE154600"}], "agent": "agent:corpus-assay-engine"}, {"id": "activity-read-37404304", "type": "extraction", "used": ["source:pmid:37404304"], "agent": "agent:minimax-reader"}, {"id": "activity-resolve-GSE154600", "type": "accession_resolution", "used": ["data:geo:GSE154600"], "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:37404304", "parent_hash": "sha256:c01299b377443d5522bfe2fa1be8078f1f35a38dcd964d50ad6b3db1f055090b", "fork_of": null, "generation": 1}, "gaps": ["asset:data:geo:GSE154600 licence not read", "asset:data:geo:GSE154600 not downloaded", "asset:data:geo:GSE53963 licence not read", "asset:data:geo:GSE53963 not downloaded", "execution.not_run", "review.human_critique", "review.independent_reader", "review.machine_critique"], "assays": [{"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": ["ene and SOC cell lines. Results: Single cell transcriptome analysis in the GEO database annotated the m", "tion analysis, an analysis of microarray and RNA-seq data gene sets under parameter-free and unsu"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:1737", "id": "assay:1"}, {"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": ["l pre-processing and downscaling analysis by scRNA-seq of GSE154600, we sought to understand the in", "s of single cell samples from GSE154600. (A) scRNA-seq analysis of 4 soc samples from GSE154600, t-"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:3016", "id": "assay:2"}, {"role": "data_generation", "definition_id": "microarray", "definition_version": "99e1195c7d6f", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": [], "support_state": "partial", "source_hashes": {"assay_lexicon": "99e1195c7d6f"}, "confidence": 0.99, "evidence": ["gene set variation analysis, an analysis of microarray and RNA-seq data gene sets under parameter-f", "ix (GSVA converts a gene-sample data matrix (microarray data, FPKM, RPKM, etc.) into a gene-set-samp"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:4300", "id": "assay:3"}, {"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": ["ur samples and 10 paracancerous tissues. The qPCR technique was used to obtain the transcript", "1 gene in tumour tissues and normal tissues. qPCR experiments were performed in a similar way", "samples from ovarian cancer and paracancer, qPCR showed that GAS1 was significantly highly ex", "hymal transition at the cellular level. (A). qPCR analysis of GAS1 expression histograms in 10"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:6556", "id": "assay:4"}, {"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": ["or lentivirus generation, HEK293T cells were transfected with 4.05 µg of target plasmid, 0.45 µg of p", "ere set up as follows. Cell culture and gas1 knockdown validation SKOV3 as well as 3AO cell lines w", "bator at 37°C containing 5% CO2. GAS1 stable knockdown clones of both cell lines were obtained by u", "lines were obtained by using Mission shRNA (knockdown [KD]1: TRCN0000084044, KD2: TRCN0000294078,"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:6844", "id": "assay:5"}, {"role": "data_generation", "definition_id": "cell_culture", "definition_version": "99e1195c7d6f", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": [], "support_state": "partial", "source_hashes": {"assay_lexicon": "99e1195c7d6f"}, "confidence": 0.99, "evidence": ["ere obtained from the ATCC repository. All 2 cell lines were cultured in McCoy’s 5a medium supplemented with 10% f", "m the ATCC repository. All 2 cell lines were cultured in McCoy’s 5a medium supplemented with 10% feta"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:6943", "id": "assay:6"}, {"role": "data_generation", "definition_id": "flow_cytometry", "definition_version": "99e1195c7d6f", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": [], "support_state": "partial", "source_hashes": {"assay_lexicon": "99e1195c7d6f"}, "confidence": 0.99, "evidence": ["g red fluorescent protein (RFP), followed by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACSAria II, BD Biosciences, San Jose, CA)", "in (RFP), followed by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACSAria II, BD Biosciences, San Jose, CA)"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:8042", "id": "assay:7"}, {"role": "data_generation", "definition_id": "apoptosis_assay", "definition_version": "99e1195c7d6f", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": [], "support_state": "partial", "source_hashes": {"assay_lexicon": "99e1195c7d6f"}, "confidence": 0.99, "evidence": ["ion in control, SI-control, and SI-GAS1; (D) CCK8 experiments revealed cell survival of two SO", "ny assay. Figure 7D shows the results of the CCK-8 experiments at different time periods for th"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:16850", "id": "assay:8"}, {"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": ["Multi-factorial Cox regression and LASSO analysis were performed on 50 prognosis-related EMT risk genes ( Figures 3A , B ), and 7 EMT risk genes with significant correlation with prognosis of ovarian cancer patients were obtained (P < 0.01), which constituted a prognostic prediction model for ovarian cancer."], "order_basis": "consumes_earlier_output", "id": "assay:9"}]},"meta":{"api_version":"v1","automation_ladder_snapshot":"ba34b49490d9bfaf","automation_ladder_caveats":["Method extraction is rule-based and has no hand-judged accuracy sample. Evidence bands order textual support; method agreement intervals are null (n=0), never probabilities. Work-type validation does not validate methods.","Operation coverage describes only explicitly named methods. It does not prove a complete protocol, compatible parameters, successful compilation or re-execution. Unrecognised or ambiguous methods require review.","Data reachability is a textual accession or public-data statement. No dataset was downloaded or checked for access, completeness or licence.","Capabilities are planning states seeded from the dated equipment register. No bench ownership, completed quote or partner booking is inferred. Procurement counts are dependencies, not guaranteed replications or financial returns.","Tier and blocker counts are deterministic assessments of this corpus, not measured agreement. R3 is reserved for procurement; unresolved methods and data require human work (R4). The most restrictive axis wins, with capability, method, data as tie-breaks. Resolving one blocker can leave another at the same tier."],"engine":"corpus_engine","engine_provider":"rule_based_v1+lex99e1195c7d6f","run_id":"run-20261023T122449232913","source":"esearch","source_detail":"PubMed mirror biomed_pubmed (read-only)","run_status":"complete","imported_at":"2026-11-03T20:16:52+00:00","generated_at":"2026-11-04T02:12:32+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}}}