{"data":{"sci_version": "1.0", "schema": "https://corpus.bntrg.co.uk/sci/1.0/sci.schema.json", "id": "pmid:40832468", "kind": "science-record", "revision": 1, "content_hash": "sha256:fb9bdbf4d9faccd6e27c347fffdcb932ceafefa3a85101b57d34c400ced65e63", "created_at": "2026-11-01T10:25:52Z", "updated_at": "2026-11-01T10:25:52Z", "generator": {"name": "corpus-assay-engine", "converter": "sep_to_sci_v1", "source_package_schema": "urn:bntrg:sep:1.0.0"}, "paper": {"state": "partial", "title": "Identification of hypoxia-related diagnostic biomarkers and immune signatures in diminished ovarian reserve.", "doi": "10.3389/fgene.2025.1626992", "pmid": "40832468", "authors": null, "journal": "Frontiers in genetics", "year": 2025, "abstract": null, "claims": [{"id": "claim-1", "statement": "the headline numerical result the paper states for its main finding", "kind": "quantitative", "state": "complete", "target": {"value": 6.0, "unit": "hub genes", "tolerance": null, "source": "chars 7756-7878 of source sha256 7694c85f81eb98315e39554b4eebfbe708b72d94cca140f37fe7ebb0719844f5"}, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:40832468", "locator": "chars 7756-7878 of source sha256 7694c85f81eb98315e39554b4eebfbe708b72d94cca140f37fe7ebb0719844f5", "quote": "In summary, we identified six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR, namely, FANCI, KAT2A, TACC3, TPX2, VHL, and WSB1."}]}], "gaps": ["abstract", "authors"]}, "experiment": {"state": "partial", "objective": "the headline numerical result the paper states for its main finding", "steps": [{"id": "read_published_estimate", "order": 1, "name": "Read the published estimate and its interval from the source", "kind": "other", "state": "complete", "blocked_on": null, "description": "The number a replication must land on, and the sentence it came from.", "duration_hours": null, "parameters": {}, "inputs": ["source:pmid:40832468"], "outputs": ["the published estimate, its unit and its interval"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}, {"id": "obtain_source_data", "order": 2, "name": "Obtain the source data behind the published result", "kind": "data-preparation", "state": "blocked", "blocked_on": "data:not_downloaded", "description": "The published result cannot be recomputed without the data the paper analysed.", "duration_hours": null, "parameters": {}, "inputs": [], "outputs": ["the source data with its provenance"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}, {"id": "run_analysis", "order": 3, "name": "Run the analysis programme", "kind": "analysis", "state": "blocked", "blocked_on": "no owned computational capability is bound to this experiment", "description": "Re-run the paper's analysis on the source data and produce the registered result. | SEP input not carried into the asset list: materials:the source data behind the published result in pmid:40832468", "duration_hours": null, "parameters": {}, "inputs": [], "outputs": ["the registered result"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}], "materials": [], "instruments": [], "reagents": [], "conditions": {}, "gaps": ["step:obtain_source_data blocked on data:not_downloaded", "step:run_analysis blocked on no owned computational capability is bound to this experiment", "step:run_analysis input 'materials:the source data behind the published result in pmid:40832468' does not resolve to a declared asset"]}, "data": {"state": "partial", "assets": [{"id": "source:pmid:40832468", "role": "manuscript", "format": "xml", "media_type": "application/xml", "uri": "https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2025.1626992", "sha256": "sha256:7694c85f81eb98315e39554b4eebfbe708b72d94cca140f37fe7ebb0719844f5", "bytes": null, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "10.3389/fgene.2025.1626992", "version": null, "note": "Source read by the package builder: full_text.", "structure": {"access_state": "full_text"}}], "gaps": ["asset:source:pmid:40832468 not verified"]}, "analysis": {"state": "absent", "methods": [], "targets": [], "gaps": ["method", "targets"]}, "capability": {"state": "absent", "requirements": [], "gaps": ["capability"]}, "readiness": {"state": "partial", "tier": null, "blocking_axis": null, "blocked_on": null, "axes": {}, "can_run": {"dsl_operations": [], "assets": ["source:pmid:40832468"], "steps": ["read_published_estimate"]}, "must_build": {"dsl_operations": [], "converters": [], "readers": ["xml"], "capabilities": [], "data_gaps": ["source:pmid:40832468"]}, "gaps": ["corpus_record_absent"]}, "review": {"state": "partial", "machine_critique": {"status": "blocked", "providers": [{"provider": "minimax", "model": "MiniMax-M3.1-Flash", "prompt_version": "full-text-reading-v1", "prompt_hash": "6a1328da0e8bd0746d7e19c624b01bb499397ee8fc076537be0f0bbf754aac5c", "source_hash": "7694c85f81eb98315e39554b4eebfbe708b72d94cca140f37fe7ebb0719844f5", "raw_response_sha256": "sha256:880083794b92489060cbf204ab2b8df68a66e532f8853e43971b319d5f913c0a", "raw_response_chars": 5800}, {"provider": "minimax_alt", "model": "MiniMax-M3", "prompt_version": "full-text-reading-v1", "prompt_hash": "2a07a98bf38484bc3813a2e36c68ea8d9eba7a26c235d87337f1a179cde4f115", "source_hash": "7694c85f81eb98315e39554b4eebfbe708b72d94cca140f37fe7ebb0719844f5", "raw_response_sha256": "sha256:878f864e7a219409fa3bc0d143f13eaf1db014f817b725d150b3339b051af5db", "raw_response_chars": 78287}], "target_providers": [{"provider": "minimax", "model": "MiniMax-M3.1-Flash", "prompt_version": "replication-target-v2", "prompt_hash": "7de0918e7dbc2decc815dfa3da4f8a32a851bbab2d30b4068620ec1563464dee", "source_hash": "7694c85f81eb98315e39554b4eebfbe708b72d94cca140f37fe7ebb0719844f5", "raw_response": "{\"parent_value\":6,\"unit\":\"hub genes\",\"evidence\":\"In summary, we identified six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR, namely, FANCI, KAT2A, TACC3, TPX2, VHL, and WSB1.\",\"target_result\":\"Six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR: FANCI, KAT2A, TACC3, TPX2, VHL, and WSB1.\",\"number_stated\":true}", "reading": {"parent_value": 6, "unit": "hub genes", "evidence": "In summary, we identified six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR, namely, FANCI, KAT2A, TACC3, TPX2, VHL, and WSB1.", "target_result": "Six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR: FANCI, KAT2A, TACC3, TPX2, VHL, and WSB1.", "number_stated": true, "source_locator": "chars 7756-7878 of source sha256 7694c85f81eb98315e39554b4eebfbe708b72d94cca140f37fe7ebb0719844f5"}, "recorded_at": "2026-10-31T15:31:34.131471+00:00"}, {"provider": "minimax_alt", "model": "MiniMax-M3", "prompt_version": "replication-target-v2", "prompt_hash": "3b5d5034ce4144f04858e861d99a98c05d55d3a487f17ee606d0ff4e47881c72", "source_hash": "7694c85f81eb98315e39554b4eebfbe708b72d94cca140f37fe7ebb0719844f5", "raw_response": "<think>We need answer JSON only. Need interpret target \"headline numerical result paper states for its main finding\". Source gives multiple numbers: 12 hypoxia-related genes diff expressed, 17 linked, eight pathways, six hub genes, five pathways. Which single numerical result replication registered target has reproduce, headline numerical result for main finding. Likely six hub genes identified. Need report headline number only: value paper states for registered target, unit paper prints, exact contiguous quote contains number; when linked by wording, quote whole clause. The conclusion: \"In summary, we identified six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR, namely...\" This is headline numerical result main finding. Unit could \"hub genes\" perhaps unit printed? They ask headline number only, value and unit paper prints. Number is 6, unit perhaps \"hub genes\". Evidence exact clause. Maybe evidence needs exact contiguous quotation containing number, likely whole sentence: \"In summary, we identified six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR, namely, FANCI, KAT2A, TACC3, TPX2, VHL, and WSB1.\" It links six hub genes directly. parent_value 6; unit \"hub genes\". target_result maybe \"Six hub genes...\" They specifically \"Report the headline number only\" but schema target_result string. We need perhaps target_result describes. \"The paper identifies six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR...\" Yet headline number only likely parent value, target result perhaps statement. Need adhere.\n\nQuestion wording: \"Read supplied paper text and find the single numerical result that a replication of the registered target has to reproduce. Report the headline number only: the value the paper itself states for the registered target, not a value you calculated, converted, averaged or reconstructed. The unit must be the unit the paper prints.\" So likely parent_value 6, unit \"hub genes\", evidence quote. target_result likely \"Six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR were identified.\" number_stated true.\n\nCould headline be twelve hypoxia-related genes? Abstract results first sentence \"Twelve hypoxia-related genes were differentially expressed between low ovarian reserve (LOR) and high ovarian reserve (HOR), with 17 linked to DOR; eight pathways differed...\" But conclusion main finding emphasizes six hub genes. Registered target generic \"headline numerical result the paper states for its main finding\". Need infer intended singular target from title/abstract. Main finding = identification of biomarkers/immune signatures, headline count likely six hub genes. Conclusion explicitly \"we identified six hub genes\". Strong.\n\nExact evidence should maybe include whole sentence to validate attribution. Unit \"hub genes\" is not a formal unit but printed noun. Should unit perhaps \"genes\" only? \"unit must be unit the paper prints.\" Paper says \"six hub genes\". Use \"hub genes\". JSON valid, no markdown.\n\nCould parent_value number only as 6. target_result perhaps \"Six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR were identified.\" They request headline number only maybe don't list gene names? Evidence includes names because exact contiguous clause whole sentence needed to check attribution. Could quote only clause: \"we identified six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR\" This is exact contiguous quotation and contains attribution, without gene list. They say \"When that is how text links them, quote the whole clause so reader can check attribution.\" Full clause is sufficient. Need evidence exact quote from source. \"In summary, we identified six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR, namely, FANCI, KAT2A, TACC3, TPX2, VHL, and WSB1.\" is exact full sentence. It contains number. Good.\n\nMaybe target_result must only number? Schema says string. In these tasks likely expected a textual description. User says \"Report headline number only\" likely means not secondary numbers. Could target_result = \"Six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR were identified.\" This includes only headline number.\n\nLet's ensure no numerical mismatch: abstract says six hub genes. Conclusion same. No unit like \"genes\" explicitly numerical count. Yes.\n\nNeed output exact JSON object.</think>\n\n{\"parent_value\":6,\"unit\":\"hub genes\",\"evidence\":\"In summary, we identified six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR, namely, FANCI, KAT2A, TACC3, TPX2, VHL, and WSB1.\",\"target_result\":\"Six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR were identified.\",\"number_stated\":true}", "reading": {"parent_value": 6, "unit": "hub genes", "evidence": "In summary, we identified six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR, namely, FANCI, KAT2A, TACC3, TPX2, VHL, and WSB1.", "target_result": "Six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR were identified.", "number_stated": true, "source_locator": "chars 7756-7878 of source sha256 7694c85f81eb98315e39554b4eebfbe708b72d94cca140f37fe7ebb0719844f5"}, "recorded_at": "2026-10-31T15:31:35.138986+00:00"}], "agreement": false, "disagreements": {"target_result": {"minimax": "Twelve hypoxia-related genes were differentially expressed between low ovarian reserve and high ovarian reserve groups, 17 genes were linked to diminished ovarian reserve, eight pathways differed between the groups, and six hub genes—FANCI, KAT2A, TACC3, TPX2, VHL, and WSB1—were identified.", "minimax_alt": "In summary, we identified six hub genes associated with hypoxia and DOR, namely, FANCI, KAT2A, TACC3, TPX2, VHL, and WSB1. These genes were validated in the context of immune infiltration.", "decisive": false}, "physical_methods": {"minimax": ["Granulosa cell injury model using 4-hydroperoxycyclophosphamide (4-HC)", "Quantitative real-time PCR", "Western blot", "Cell Counting Kit-8 assay", "Flow cytometry"], "minimax_alt": ["Granulosa cell injury model created using 4-hydroperoxycyclophosphamide (4-HC)", "Quantitative real-time PCR for FANCI and KAT2A expression", "Western blot for FANCI and KAT2A expression", "Cell Counting Kit-8 assay for assessing cell proliferation and viability", "Flow cytometry for assessing apoptosis"], "decisive": false}, "analysis_methods": {"minimax": ["Common differentially expressed gene normalization", "GeneCards-based identification of hypoxia-related differentially expressed genes", "Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis", "STRING protein-protein interaction network analysis", "Cytoscape network visualization", "Gene Ontology (GO) enrichment analysis", "Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathway enrichment analysis", "Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA)", "Gene set variation analysis (GSVA)", "CIBERSORT immune cell infiltration analysis using the LM22 feature gene matrix", "Spearman correlation analysis"], "minimax_alt": ["Common differentially expressed gene (Co-DEG) normalization", "GeneCards-based identification of hypoxia-related differentially expressed genes (HRDEGs)", "Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis", "STRING and Cytoscape protein-protein interaction network analysis", "Gene Ontology (GO) and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) enrichment analysis", "Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) using clusterProfiler", "Gene set variation analysis (GSVA)", "CIBERSORT immune cell infiltration analysis using the LM22 feature gene matrix", "Spearman correlation analysis and hotspot-map visualization using ggplot2", "Wilcoxon rank-sum test for comparisons between groups"], "decisive": false}, "statistical_method": {"minimax": "Wilcoxon rank-sum test", "minimax_alt": "Wilcoxon rank-sum test for between-group comparisons and Spearman test for correlations, using p < 0.05 as the significance threshold", "decisive": true}}, "agreement_basis": {"policy": "decisive_fields", "decisive_fields": ["work_type", "number_stated", "parent_value", "unit"]}, "blinded": true}, "human_critique": {"status": "not_run", "reviewer": null, "signed_at": null, "conflict_checked": false, "commentary": null}, "stages": [{"key": "target_materials", "status": "pending", "reason": null, "evidence": null}, {"key": "independent_readings", "status": "blocked", "reason": "The independent readings are incomplete or disagree; the source evidence must resolve the difference.", "evidence": {"provider_errors": []}}, {"key": "source_resolution", "status": "pending", "reason": null, "evidence": null}, {"key": "protocol_reconstruction", "status": "pending", "reason": null, "evidence": null}, {"key": "control_execution", "status": "pending", "reason": null, "evidence": null}, {"key": "control_comparison", "status": "pending", "reason": null, "evidence": null}, {"key": "publication", "status": "pending", "reason": null, "evidence": null}], "gaps": ["review.human_critique", "review.machine_critique.blocked"]}, "execution": {"state": "absent", "status": "not_run", "mode": null, "runs": [], "gaps": ["execution.not_run"]}, "provenance": {"entities": [{"id": "package:f9e2a1f6de7e949e2a9d4b9fd323be4fdaddfa0834aed828a1cafd31b939f9bd", "type": "sep_package", "label": "SEP v1 package for pmid:40832468"}], "activities": [{"id": "activity:conversion:pmid:40832468", "type": "conversion", "used": ["package:f9e2a1f6de7e949e2a9d4b9fd323be4fdaddfa0834aed828a1cafd31b939f9bd"], "agent": "agent:corpus-assay-engine"}], "agents": [{"id": "agent:minimax", "type": "model", "label": "minimax"}, {"id": "agent:minimax_alt", "type": "model", "label": "minimax_alt"}, {"id": "agent:corpus-assay-engine", "type": "software", "label": "Corpus assay engine"}], "source_run_id": "run-20261023T122449232913", "dsl_catalogue_fingerprint": "343fb30756ba6ec3", "capability_table_fingerprint": "2cb3e42f047d2ecf", "snapshot_id": "ba34b49490d9bfaf"}, "lineage": {"parent_id": "08ddaed5-5f31-4d65-aa98-cb8adfcc4115", "parent_hash": "f9e2a1f6de7e949e2a9d4b9fd323be4fdaddfa0834aed828a1cafd31b939f9bd", "fork_of": null, "generation": 1}, "gaps": ["abstract", "asset:source:pmid:40832468 not verified", "authors", "capability", "corpus_record_absent", "execution.not_run", "method", "review.human_critique", "review.machine_critique.blocked", "step:obtain_source_data blocked on data:not_downloaded", "step:run_analysis blocked on no owned computational capability is bound to this experiment", "step:run_analysis input 'materials:the source data behind the published result in pmid:40832468' does not resolve to a declared asset", "targets"]},"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":"2026-11-04T02:16:49+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}}}