{"data":{"sci_version": "1.2", "schema": "https://corpus.bntrg.co.uk/sci/1.0/sci.schema.json", "id": "pmid:37632832", "kind": "science-record", "revision": 4, "content_hash": "sha256:6bde2685099e1e673107b66600cfb1bb30b6089daee821e7caffc73cca7688af", "created_at": "2026-11-01T19:02:25Z", "updated_at": "2026-11-01T22:52:35Z", "generator": {"name": "corpus-assay-engine", "run_id": "reading-sci-2026-11-01"}, "paper": {"state": "complete", "title": "Prognosis analysis and validation of lipid metabolism-associated lncRNAs and tumor immune microenvironment in bladder cancer.", "doi": "10.18632/aging.204975", "pmid": "37632832", "authors": ["Zhiyong Tan", "Shi Fu", "Jieming Zuo", "Jiansong Wang", "Haifeng Wang"], "journal": "Aging", "year": 2023, "abstract": "BACKGROUND: Numerous types of research revealed that long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) played a significant role in immune response and the tumor microenvironment of bladder cancer (BLCA). Dysregulated lipid metabolism is considered to be one of the major risk factors for BLCA, the study aimed to detect the lipid metabolism-related lncRNAs (LMRLs) along with their potential prognostic values and immune correlations in BLCA.\nMETHODS: We collected lipid metabolism-related genes, expression profiles, and clinical information on BLCA from the Molecular Signature Database (MSigDB) and the TCGA database, respectively. Differentially expressed lipid metabolism genes (DE-LMRGs) and differentially expressed long non-coding RNAs (DE-lncRNAs) were selected using the limma package. Spearman correlation analysis was employed to explore the correlations between DE-lncRNAs and DE-LMRGs and to further develop protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks and perform mutational analysis. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and univariate Cox analysis were then employed to construct a prognostic risk model. The performance of the model was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and consistency indices. In addition, we downloaded the GSE31684 dataset for external validation of the prognostic signature. Moreover, we explored the association of the risk model with immune cell infiltration and chemotherapy response analysis to reveal the tumor immune microenvironment of BLCA. Finally, RT-qPCR was utilized to validate the expression of prognostic genes.\nRESULTS: A total of 48 DE-LncRNAs and 33 DE-LMRGs were found to be robustly correlated, and were used to construct a lncRNA-mRNA co-expression network, in which ACACB, ACOX2, and BCHE showed high mutation rates. Then, a risk model based on three LMRLs (RP11-465B22.8, MIR100HG, and LINC00865) was constructed. The risk model effectively distinguished between the clinical outcomes of BLCA patients, with high-risk scores indicating a worse prognosis and with substantial prognostic prediction accuracy. The model's results were consistent in the GSE31684 dataset. In addition, a nomogram was constructed based on the risk score, age, pathological T-stage, and pathological N-stage, which showed robust predictive power. Immune landscape analysis indicated that the risk model was significantly associated with T-cell CD4 memory activation, M1 macrophage, M2 macrophage, dendritic cell activation, and T-cell regulatory. We predicted that 49 drugs would perform satisfactorily in the high-risk group. Additionally, we found five m6A regulators associated with the high- and low-risk groups, suggesting that upstream regulation of LncRNA could be a novel target for BLCA treatment. Finally, RT-qPCR showed that RP11-465B22.8 was highly expressed in BLCA, while MIR100HG and LINC00865 were downregulated in BLCA.\nCONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the three LMRLs may serve as potential prognostic and immunotherapeutic biomarkers in BLCA. In addition, our study provides new ideas for understanding the pathogenic mechanisms and developing therapeutic strategies for BLCA patients.", "claims": [{"id": "claim-method", "statement": "Spearman correlation analysis was employed to explore the correlations between DE-lncRNAs and DE-LMRGs and to further develop protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks and perform mutational analysis.", "kind": "methodological", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:37632832", "locator": "sections[0] \"Abstract\" paragraph 2", "quote": "Spearman correlation analysis was employed to explore the correlations between DE-lncRNAs and DE-LMRGs and to further develop protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks and perform mutational analysis."}], "state": "complete"}, {"id": "claim-data-access", "statement": "The analyzed datasets generated during the study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.", "kind": "methodological", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:37632832", "locator": "sections[14] \"Availability of data and materials\" paragraph 2", "quote": "The analyzed datasets generated during the study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request."}], "state": "complete"}, {"id": "claim-target-result", "statement": "A risk model based on three lipid metabolism-related lncRNAs effectively distinguished the clinical outcomes of BLCA patients, with high-risk scores indicating worse prognosis.", "kind": "qualitative", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:37632832", "locator": "sections[0] \"Abstract\" paragraph 3", "quote": "Then, a risk model based on three LMRLs (RP11-465B22.8, MIR100HG, and LINC00865) was constructed."}, {"asset": "source:pmid:37632832", "locator": "sections[0] \"Abstract\" paragraph 3", "quote": "The risk model effectively distinguished between the clinical outcomes of BLCA patients, with high-risk scores indicating a worse prognosis and with substantial prognostic prediction accuracy."}], "state": "complete"}], "gaps": []}, "experiment": {"state": "complete", "objective": "A risk model based on three lipid metabolism-related lncRNAs effectively distinguished the clinical outcomes of BLCA patients, with high-risk scores indicating worse prognosis.", "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:37632832"], "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:GSE31684"], "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:GSE31684"], "outputs": ["the replicated result and its comparison"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}], "materials": [], "instruments": [], "reagents": [], "conditions": {}, "gaps": []}, "data": {"state": "partial", "assets": [{"id": "source:pmid:37632832", "role": "manuscript", "format": "xml", "media_type": "application/xml", "uri": "https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.204975", "sha256": "sha256:a6dc1d0e48a6f9297abcf5a5f2c443beb79696824e9916c4e1a047698f763778", "bytes": 40638, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "10.18632/aging.204975", "version": null, "note": "Full article fetched from PMC; the checksum covers the rendered section body, not the original XML bytes.", "structure": {"pmcid": "PMC10496992", "source": "europe_pmc_fulltext", "coverage": "whole_body_without_references", "text_hash_scope": "rendered_section_body"}}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE31684", "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=GSE31684", "sha256": null, "bytes": null, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "GSE31684", "version": null, "note": "The analyzed datasets generated during the study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.", "structure": {"repository": "GEO", "access_route": "GEO accession URL", "access_statement_verbatim": "The analyzed datasets generated during the study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.", "access_statement_kind": "data_availability_statement", "sample_accessions": ["GSM786491", "GSM786492", "GSM786493", "GSM786494", "GSM786495", "GSM786496", "GSM786497", "GSM786498", "GSM786499", "GSM786500", "GSM786501", "GSM786502", "GSM786503", "GSM786504", "GSM786505", "GSM786506", "GSM786507", "GSM786508", "GSM786509", "GSM786510", "GSM786511", "GSM786512", "GSM786513", "GSM786514", "GSM786515", "GSM786516", "GSM786517", "GSM786518", "GSM786519", "GSM786520", "GSM786521", "GSM786522", "GSM786523", "GSM786524", "GSM786525", "GSM786526", "GSM786527", "GSM786528", "GSM786529", "GSM786530", "GSM786531", "GSM786532", "GSM786533", "GSM786534", "GSM786535", "GSM786536", "GSM786537", "GSM786538", "GSM786539", "GSM786540", "GSM786541", "GSM786542", "GSM786543", "GSM786544", "GSM786545", "GSM786546", "GSM786547", "GSM786548", "GSM786549", "GSM786550", "GSM786551", "GSM786552", "GSM786553", "GSM786554", "GSM786555", "GSM786556", "GSM786557", "GSM786558", "GSM786559", "GSM786560", "GSM786561", "GSM786562", "GSM786563", "GSM786564", "GSM786565", "GSM786566", "GSM786567", "GSM786568", "GSM786569", "GSM786570", "GSM786571", "GSM786572", "GSM786573", "GSM786574", "GSM786575", "GSM786576", "GSM786577", "GSM786578", "GSM786579", "GSM786580", "GSM786581", "GSM786582", "GSM786583"], "sample_count": 93, "group_sizes": null, "group_sizes_basis": null, "platform": "570", "taxon": "Homo sapiens", "title": "Combination of a novel gene expression signature with a clinical nomogram improves the prediction of survival in high-risk bladder 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:GSE31684 not downloaded", "asset:data:geo:GSE31684 licence not read"]}, "analysis": {"state": "partial", "methods": [{"id": "method-1", "family": "differential_expression", "specific": "limma_voom", "label": "Differential expression analysis", "dsl_operations": ["normalise_counts", "differential_expression_fit", "fdr_bh"], "missing_operations": [], "expressible": true, "parameters": {}, "data_shapes": ["count_matrix_with_condition"], "evidence": {"score": 1.0, "band": "verbatim", "quote": "Spearman correlation analysis was employed to explore the correlations between DE-lncRNAs and DE-LMRGs and to further develop protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks and perform mutational analysis."}}, {"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": 0.8, "band": "high", "quote": "Wilcoxon"}}, {"id": "method-3", "family": "survival_analysis", "specific": "kaplan_meier", "label": "Survival analysis", "dsl_operations": ["survival_km"], "missing_operations": [], "expressible": true, "parameters": {}, "data_shapes": ["time_to_event_with_censoring"], "evidence": {"score": 0.7, "band": "medium", "quote": "Kaplan-Meier"}}, {"id": "method-4", "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": "PCA"}}, {"id": "method-5", "family": "correlation_analysis", "specific": "pearson", "label": "Correlation analysis", "dsl_operations": ["pearson_r"], "missing_operations": [], "expressible": true, "parameters": {}, "data_shapes": ["paired_numeric_columns"], "evidence": {"score": 0.8, "band": "high", "quote": "Pearson correlation"}}, {"id": "method-6", "family": "correlation_analysis", "specific": "spearman", "label": "Correlation analysis", "dsl_operations": ["spearman_rho"], "missing_operations": [], "expressible": true, "parameters": {}, "data_shapes": ["paired_numeric_columns"], "evidence": {"score": 0.7, "band": "medium", "quote": "Spearman correlation"}}, {"id": "method-7", "family": "network_analysis", "specific": "ppi_network", "label": "Network / pathway analysis", "dsl_operations": ["build_graph", "centrality_scores", "pathway_enrich"], "missing_operations": [], "expressible": true, "parameters": {}, "data_shapes": ["edge_list"], "evidence": {"score": 0.7, "band": "medium", "quote": "protein-protein interaction"}}], "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": ["normalise_counts", "differential_expression_fit", "fdr_bh"], "missing_operations": [], "basis": "The paper names the method it used and the corpus's method extractor maps it onto the DSL catalogue: limma_voom."}, "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": ["GSE31684"], "resolved_accessions": ["GSE31684"], "statements": ["The analyzed datasets generated during the study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request."], "basis": "The paper names GSE31684 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": ["normalise_counts", "differential_expression_fit", "fdr_bh"], "assets": ["source:pmid:37632832", "data:geo:GSE31684"], "steps": ["run_analysis"]}, "must_build": {"dsl_operations": [], "converters": [], "readers": [], "capabilities": [], "data_gaps": ["data:geo:GSE31684"]}, "gaps": []}, "review": {"state": "partial", "machine_critique": {"kind": "extraction_review", "reader": {"model": "MiniMax-M3.1-Flash", "provider": "minimax", "provider_family": "minimax", "read_at": "2026-11-01T18:51:31Z", "independence": "single_reader"}, "evidence_check": {"method": "verbatim", "availability": "verbatim"}, "calls": 5, "usage": {"prompt_tokens": 11232, "completion_tokens": 2214, "cached_tokens": 256}}, "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:37632832", "type": "paper", "label": "pmid:37632832"}, {"id": "source:pmid:37632832", "type": "manuscript", "label": "PMID 37632832 full text"}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE31684", "type": "dataset", "label": "GEO GSE31684"}], "activities": [{"id": "activity-reading-sci-2026-11-01", "type": "classification", "used": [{"id": "pmid:37632832", "type": "paper", "label": "pmid:37632832"}, {"id": "source:pmid:37632832", "type": "manuscript", "label": "PMID 37632832 full text"}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE31684", "type": "dataset", "label": "GEO GSE31684"}], "agent": "agent:corpus-assay-engine"}, {"id": "activity-read-37632832", "type": "extraction", "used": ["source:pmid:37632832"], "agent": "agent:minimax-reader"}, {"id": "activity-resolve-GSE31684", "type": "accession_resolution", "used": ["data:geo:GSE31684"], "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:37632832", "parent_hash": "sha256:a8b52af5d22dc098f4334341251298be804229890dec45886ab61abba3956318", "fork_of": null, "generation": 3}, "gaps": ["asset:data:geo:GSE31684 licence not read", "asset:data:geo:GSE31684 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": ["or immune microenvironment of BLCA. Finally, RT-qPCR was utilized to validate the expression of p", "a novel target for BLCA treatment. Finally, RT-qPCR showed that RP11-465B22.8 was highly express", "immune microenvironment of BLCA. Finally, RT-qPCR was utilized to validate the expression of p", "novel target for BLCA treatment. Finally, RT-qPCR showed that RP11-465B22.8 was highly express"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:1643", "id": "assay:1"}, {"role": "analysis", "definition_id": "differential_expression", "definition_version": "f2132e96ae6c7a4e", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": ["normalise_counts", "differential_expression_fit", "fdr_bh"], "support_state": "supported", "source_hashes": {"dsl_catalogue": "f2132e96ae6c7a4e"}, "confidence": 1.0, "evidence": ["Spearman correlation analysis was employed to explore the correlations between DE-lncRNAs and DE-LMRGs and to further develop protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks and perform mutational analysis."], "order_basis": "consumes_earlier_output", "id": "assay:2"}]},"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":"2026-11-04T03:14:04+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}}}