[
 {"id":"C1","text":"The conventional nominal 95% interval does not attain its nominal coverage: estimated coverage 0.844, more than three MC standard errors below 0.95.","results_keys":["coverage_conventional","conventional_ci_undercovers","mcse_at_nominal_095","undercoverage_threshold"],"status":"supported","caveat":"Specific to this fixed design, normal errors, R=2000 and seed 20261030."},
 {"id":"C2","text":"The HC1 interval covers better (0.902) than the conventional interval but still falls short of 95%.","results_keys":["coverage_hc1","mcse_coverage_hc1","coverage_conventional"],"status":"supported","caveat":"MC SE about 0.0067; HC1 known to be downward biased in small samples."},
 {"id":"C3","text":"The exact SD of the OLS slope is 0.2680, matched by the Monte Carlo SD 0.2696.","results_keys":["sd_beta_exact","sd_beta_mc"],"status":"supported","caveat":"Exact value is analytic; MC value has ~1.6% sampling error."},
 {"id":"C4","text":"The conventional SE is biased downward (mean 0.1903 vs true SD 0.2680), which explains the undercoverage.","results_keys":["mean_se_conventional","sd_beta_exact","rms_se_conventional_exact"],"status":"supported","caveat":"Mechanism attributed to heteroskedasticity concentrated at high-leverage x."}
]