{"data":{"sci_version": "1.2", "schema": "https://corpus.bntrg.co.uk/sci/1.0/sci.schema.json", "id": "pmid:39145060", "kind": "science-record", "revision": 2, "content_hash": "sha256:a65e45a292ff6eb741e29035a4f8256f8c744fc88509884f98c4b389d9d73773", "created_at": "2026-11-01T20:29:15Z", "updated_at": "2026-11-01T21:33:42Z", "generator": {"name": "corpus-assay-engine", "run_id": "reading-sci-2026-11-01"}, "paper": {"state": "complete", "title": "Dendritic cell-related hub genes in head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma: implications for prognosis and immunotherapy.", "doi": "10.21037/tcr-23-2360", "pmid": "39145060", "authors": ["Haiyong Jin", "Lei Zheng", "Jie Wang", "Bo Zheng"], "journal": "Translational cancer research", "year": 2024, "abstract": "Background: In the context of head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), dendritic cells (DCs) assume pivotal responsibilities, acting as architects of antigen presentation and conductors of immune checkpoint modulation. In this study, we aimed to identify hub genes associated with DCs in HNSCC and explore their prognostic significance and implications for immunotherapy.\nMethods: Integrated clinical datasets from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA)-HNSCC and GSE65858 cohorts underwent meticulous analysis. Employing weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA), we delineated candidate genes pertinent to DCs. Through the application of random survival forest and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) Cox's regression, we derived key genes of significance. Lisa (epigenetic Landscape In Silico deletion Analysis and the second descendent of MARGE) highlighted transcription factors, with Dual-luciferase assays confirming their regulatory role. Furthermore, immunotherapeutic sensitivity was assessed utilizing the Tumor Immune Dysfunction and Exclusion online tool.\nResults: This study illuminated the functional intricacies of HNSCC DC subsets to tailor innovative therapeutic strategies. We leveraged clinical data from the TCGA-HNSCC and GSE65858 cohorts. We subjected the data to advanced analysis, including WGCNA, which revealed 222 DC-related candidate genes. Following this, a discerning approach utilizing random survival forest analysis and LASSO Cox's regression unveiled seven genes associated with the prognostic impact of DCs, notably ACP2 and CPVL, associated with poor overall survival. Differential gene expression analysis between ACP2 + and ACP2 - DC cells revealed 208 differential expressed genes. Lisa analysis identified the top five significant transcription factors as STAT1, SPI1, SMAD1, CEBPB, and IRF1. The correlation between STAT1 and ACP2 was confirmed through quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and Dual-luciferase assays in HEK293T cells. Additionally, TP53 and FAT1 mutations were more common in high-risk DC subgroups. Importantly, the sensitivity to immunotherapy differed among the risk clusters. The low-risk cohorts were anticipated to exhibit favorable responses to immunotherapy, marked by heightened expressions of immune system-related markers. In contrast, the high-risk group displayed augmented proportions of immunosuppressive cells, suggesting a less conducive environment for immunotherapeutic interventions.\nConclusions: Our research may yield a robust DC-based prognostic system for HNSCC; this will aid personalized treatment and improve clinical outcomes as the battle against this challenging cancer continues.", "claims": [{"id": "claim-method", "statement": "We employed random survival forest analysis to identify significantly prognostic genes using the “randomForestSRC” and “randomSurvivalForest” packages of R software (24). The LASSO Cox’s regression method was utilized to construct a prognostic model for hub genes associated with DCs, employing the “glmnet” package within the R software (25).", "kind": "methodological", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:39145060", "locator": "sections[6] \"Random survival forest analysis, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) Cox’s regression model, and survival analysis\" paragraph 2", "quote": "We employed random survival forest analysis to identify significantly prognostic genes using the “randomForestSRC” and “randomSurvivalForest” packages of R software (24). The LASSO Cox’s regression method was utilized to construct a prognostic model for hub genes associated with DCs, employing the “glmnet” package within the R software (25)."}], "state": "complete"}, {"id": "claim-data-access", "statement": "In January 2023, we used the Genomic Data Commons (GDC) portal to acquire clinical and gene expression data from a The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA)-HNSCC cohort comprising 500 individuals.", "kind": "methodological", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:39145060", "locator": "sections[4] \"Acquisition of clinical and gene expression information\" paragraph 2", "quote": "In January 2023, we used the Genomic Data Commons (GDC) portal to acquire clinical and gene expression data from a The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA)-HNSCC cohort comprising 500 individuals."}], "state": "complete"}, {"id": "claim-target-result", "statement": "Following this, a discerning approach utilizing random survival forest analysis and LASSO Cox’s regression unveiled seven genes associated with the prognostic impact of DCs, notably ACP2 and CPVL, associated with poor overall survival.", "kind": "qualitative", "target": null, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:39145060", "locator": "sections[0] \"Abstract\" paragraph 3", "quote": "Following this, a discerning approach utilizing random survival forest analysis and LASSO Cox’s regression unveiled seven genes associated with the prognostic impact of DCs, notably ACP2 and CPVL, associated with poor overall survival."}], "state": "complete"}], "gaps": []}, "experiment": {"state": "complete", "objective": "Following this, a discerning approach utilizing random survival forest analysis and LASSO Cox’s regression unveiled seven genes associated with the prognostic impact of DCs, notably ACP2 and CPVL, associated with poor overall survival.", "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:39145060"], "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:GSE150430"], "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:GSE150430"], "outputs": ["the replicated result and its comparison"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}], "materials": [], "instruments": [], "reagents": [], "conditions": {}, "gaps": []}, "data": {"state": "partial", "assets": [{"id": "source:pmid:39145060", "role": "manuscript", "format": "xml", "media_type": "application/xml", "uri": "https://doi.org/10.21037/tcr-23-2360", "sha256": "sha256:c7de06d1268f73b8e89d0902c2524470dbfb668f7bc106073a3a6e2977bcef8b", "bytes": 37801, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "10.21037/tcr-23-2360", "version": null, "note": "Full article fetched from PMC; the checksum covers the rendered section body, not the original XML bytes.", "structure": {"pmcid": "PMC11319964", "source": "europe_pmc_fulltext", "coverage": "whole_body_without_references", "text_hash_scope": "rendered_section_body"}}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE150430", "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=GSE150430", "sha256": null, "bytes": null, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "GSE150430", "version": null, "note": "In January 2023, we used the Genomic Data Commons (GDC) portal to acquire clinical and gene expression data from a The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA)-HNSCC cohort comprising 500 individuals.", "structure": {"repository": "GEO", "access_route": "GEO accession URL", "access_statement_verbatim": "In January 2023, we used the Genomic Data Commons (GDC) portal to acquire clinical and gene expression data from a The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA)-HNSCC cohort comprising 500 individuals.", "access_statement_kind": "repository_route_statement", "sample_accessions": ["GSM4550464", "GSM4550465", "GSM4550466", "GSM4550467", "GSM4550468", "GSM4550469", "GSM4550470", "GSM4550471", "GSM4550472", "GSM4550473", "GSM4550474", "GSM4550475", "GSM4550476", "GSM4550477", "GSM4550478", "GSM4550479"], "sample_count": 16, "group_sizes": null, "group_sizes_basis": null, "platform": "20795", "taxon": "Homo sapiens", "title": "Single-cell transcriptomics reveals regulators underlying immune cell diversity and immune subtypes associated with prognosis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma", "resolution_checked_at": "2026-11-01T18:46:34Z", "resolution_check": "identifier_resolution_only_no_download_no_licence_read", "downloaded": false, "licence_read": false}}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE65858", "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=GSE65858", "sha256": null, "bytes": null, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "GSE65858", "version": null, "note": "In January 2023, we used the Genomic Data Commons (GDC) portal to acquire clinical and gene expression data from a The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA)-HNSCC cohort comprising 500 individuals.", "structure": {"repository": "GEO", "access_route": "GEO accession URL", "access_statement_verbatim": "In January 2023, we used the Genomic Data Commons (GDC) portal to acquire clinical and gene expression data from a The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA)-HNSCC cohort comprising 500 individuals.", "access_statement_kind": "repository_route_statement", "sample_accessions": ["GSM1607684", "GSM1607685", "GSM1607686", "GSM1607687", "GSM1607688", "GSM1607689", "GSM1607690", "GSM1607691", "GSM1607692", "GSM1607693", "GSM1607694", "GSM1607695", "GSM1607696", "GSM1607697", "GSM1607698", "GSM1607699", "GSM1607700", "GSM1607701", "GSM1607702", "GSM1607703", "GSM1607704", "GSM1607705", "GSM1607706", "GSM1607707", "GSM1607708", "GSM1607709", "GSM1607710", "GSM1607711", "GSM1607712", "GSM1607713", "GSM1607714", "GSM1607715", "GSM1607716", "GSM1607717", "GSM1607718", "GSM1607719", "GSM1607720", "GSM1607721", "GSM1607722", "GSM1607723", "GSM1607724", "GSM1607725", "GSM1607726", "GSM1607727", "GSM1607728", "GSM1607729", "GSM1607730", "GSM1607731", "GSM1607732", "GSM1607733", "GSM1607734", "GSM1607735", "GSM1607736", "GSM1607737", "GSM1607738", "GSM1607739", "GSM1607740", "GSM1607741", "GSM1607742", "GSM1607743", "GSM1607744", "GSM1607745", "GSM1607746", "GSM1607747", "GSM1607748", "GSM1607749", "GSM1607750", "GSM1607751", "GSM1607752", "GSM1607753", "GSM1607754", "GSM1607755", "GSM1607756", "GSM1607757", "GSM1607758", "GSM1607759", "GSM1607760", "GSM1607761", "GSM1607762", "GSM1607763", "GSM1607764", "GSM1607765", "GSM1607766", "GSM1607767", "GSM1607768", "GSM1607769", "GSM1607770", "GSM1607771", "GSM1607772", "GSM1607773", "GSM1607774", "GSM1607775", "GSM1607776", "GSM1607777", "GSM1607778", "GSM1607779", "GSM1607780", "GSM1607781", "GSM1607782", "GSM1607783", "GSM1607784", "GSM1607785", "GSM1607786", "GSM1607787", "GSM1607788", "GSM1607789", "GSM1607790", "GSM1607791", "GSM1607792", "GSM1607793", "GSM1607794", "GSM1607795", "GSM1607796", "GSM1607797", "GSM1607798", "GSM1607799", "GSM1607800", "GSM1607801", "GSM1607802", "GSM1607803", "GSM1607804", "GSM1607805", "GSM1607806", "GSM1607807", "GSM1607808", "GSM1607809", "GSM1607810", "GSM1607811", "GSM1607812", "GSM1607813", "GSM1607814", "GSM1607815", "GSM1607816", "GSM1607817", "GSM1607818", "GSM1607819", "GSM1607820", "GSM1607821", "GSM1607822", "GSM1607823", "GSM1607824", "GSM1607825", "GSM1607826", "GSM1607827", "GSM1607828", "GSM1607829", "GSM1607830", "GSM1607831", "GSM1607832", "GSM1607833", "GSM1607834", "GSM1607835", "GSM1607836", "GSM1607837", "GSM1607838", "GSM1607839", "GSM1607840", "GSM1607841", "GSM1607842", "GSM1607843", "GSM1607844", "GSM1607845", "GSM1607846", "GSM1607847", "GSM1607848", "GSM1607849", "GSM1607850", "GSM1607851", "GSM1607852", "GSM1607853", "GSM1607854", "GSM1607855", "GSM1607856", "GSM1607857", "GSM1607858", "GSM1607859", "GSM1607860", "GSM1607861", "GSM1607862", "GSM1607863", "GSM1607864", "GSM1607865", "GSM1607866", "GSM1607867", "GSM1607868", "GSM1607869", "GSM1607870", "GSM1607871", "GSM1607872", "GSM1607873", "GSM1607874", "GSM1607875", "GSM1607876", "GSM1607877", "GSM1607878", "GSM1607879", "GSM1607880", "GSM1607881", "GSM1607882", "GSM1607883", "GSM1607884", "GSM1607885", "GSM1607886", "GSM1607887", "GSM1607888", "GSM1607889", "GSM1607890", "GSM1607891", "GSM1607892", "GSM1607893", "GSM1607894", "GSM1607895", "GSM1607896", "GSM1607897", "GSM1607898", "GSM1607899", "GSM1607900", "GSM1607901", "GSM1607902", "GSM1607903", "GSM1607904", "GSM1607905", "GSM1607906", "GSM1607907", "GSM1607908", "GSM1607909", "GSM1607910", "GSM1607911", "GSM1607912", "GSM1607913", "GSM1607914", "GSM1607915", "GSM1607916", "GSM1607917", "GSM1607918", "GSM1607919", "GSM1607920", "GSM1607921", "GSM1607922", "GSM1607923", "GSM1607924", "GSM1607925", "GSM1607926", "GSM1607927", "GSM1607928", "GSM1607929", "GSM1607930", "GSM1607931", "GSM1607932", "GSM1607933", "GSM1607934", "GSM1607935", "GSM1607936", "GSM1607937", "GSM1607938", "GSM1607939", "GSM1607940", "GSM1607941", "GSM1607942", "GSM1607943", "GSM1607944", "GSM1607945", "GSM1607946", "GSM1607947", "GSM1607948", "GSM1607949", "GSM1607950", "GSM1607951", "GSM1607952", "GSM1607953"], "sample_count": 270, "group_sizes": null, "group_sizes_basis": null, "platform": "10558", "taxon": "Homo sapiens", "title": "Gene expression patterns and TP53 mutations are associated with HPV RNA status, lymph node metastasis, and survival in head and neck cancer", "resolution_checked_at": "2026-11-01T15:39:55Z", "resolution_check": "identifier_resolution_only_no_download_no_licence_read", "downloaded": false, "licence_read": false}}], "gaps": ["asset:data:geo:GSE150430 not downloaded", "asset:data:geo:GSE150430 licence not read", "asset:data:geo:GSE65858 not downloaded", "asset:data:geo:GSE65858 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": 0.7, "band": "medium", "quote": "Cox's regression"}}, {"id": "method-2", "family": null, "specific": null, "label": "WGCNA, random survival forest analysis, and LASSO Cox’s regression", "dsl_operations": [], "missing_operations": [], "expressible": null, "parameters": {}, "data_shapes": [], "evidence": {"score": 1.0, "band": "verbatim", "quote": "We employed random survival forest analysis to identify significantly prognostic genes using the “randomForestSRC” and “randomSurvivalForest” packages of R software (24). The LASSO Cox’s regression method was utilized to construct a prognostic model for hub genes associated with DCs, employing the “glmnet” package within the R software (25)."}}], "targets": [], "gaps": ["method.reader_named_unmapped"]}, "capability": {"state": "complete", "requirements": [{"capability_id": "capability:computational_analysis", "label": "Computational analysis platform", "assay_families": ["meta_analysis", "machine_learning", "survival_analysis", "statistical_regression", "pca", "molecular_docking", "network_analysis", "differential_expression", "gwas"], "availability_state": "owned", "tier_unlocked": "R1", "candidate": "Automated Assays Laravel application and simulated adapters"}], "gaps": []}, "readiness": {"state": "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": ["GSE65858", "GSE150430"], "resolved_accessions": ["GSE65858", "GSE150430"], "statements": ["In January 2023, we used the Genomic Data Commons (GDC) portal to acquire clinical and gene expression data from a The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA)-HNSCC cohort comprising 500 individuals."], "basis": "The paper names GSE65858, GSE150430 in Gene Expression Omnibus 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:39145060", "data:geo:GSE150430"], "steps": ["run_analysis"]}, "must_build": {"dsl_operations": [], "converters": [], "readers": [], "capabilities": [], "data_gaps": ["data:geo:GSE150430"]}, "gaps": []}, "review": {"state": "partial", "machine_critique": {"kind": "extraction_review", "reader": {"model": "MiniMax-M3.1-Flash", "provider": "minimax", "provider_family": "minimax", "read_at": "2026-11-01T19:28:23Z", "independence": "single_reader"}, "evidence_check": {"method": "verbatim", "availability": null}, "calls": 5, "usage": {"prompt_tokens": 10128, "completion_tokens": 1545, "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:39145060", "type": "paper", "label": "pmid:39145060"}, {"id": "source:pmid:39145060", "type": "manuscript", "label": "PMID 39145060 full text"}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE150430", "type": "dataset", "label": "GEO GSE150430"}], "activities": [{"id": "activity-reading-sci-2026-11-01", "type": "classification", "used": [{"id": "pmid:39145060", "type": "paper", "label": "pmid:39145060"}, {"id": "source:pmid:39145060", "type": "manuscript", "label": "PMID 39145060 full text"}, {"id": "data:geo:GSE150430", "type": "dataset", "label": "GEO GSE150430"}], "agent": "agent:corpus-assay-engine"}, {"id": "activity-read-39145060", "type": "extraction", "used": ["source:pmid:39145060"], "agent": "agent:minimax-reader"}, {"id": "activity-resolve-GSE150430", "type": "accession_resolution", "used": ["data:geo:GSE150430"], "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:39145060", "parent_hash": "sha256:6f86987f2fe1c645379fccd410c0cdfaa202a7b880d70455706f8c2b4ba6b97f", "fork_of": null, "generation": 1}, "gaps": ["asset:data:geo:GSE150430 licence not read", "asset:data:geo:GSE150430 not downloaded", "asset:data:geo:GSE65858 licence not read", "asset:data:geo:GSE65858 not downloaded", "execution.not_run", "method.reader_named_unmapped", "review.human_critique", "review.independent_reader", "review.machine_critique"], "assays": [{"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": 0.7, "evidence": ["Cox's regression"], "order_basis": "analysis_only", "id": "assay:1"}]},"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":"2026-11-04T02:52:13+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}}}