1{2 "task_id": "F4-conf-04",3 "reference_checks": {4 "R1": {5 "title_matches": true,6 "year_matches": true,7 "finding_supported": true,8 "locator": "arxiv-2609.27732v1 | Table 6, row ATT (and SE row below), column 5 km; row % change; Section 6 text after Table 6; abstract",9 "note": "Table 6 (5 km) prints ATT -0.431** with SE (0.210) and -35.0%, the text states significance at 5%, and the abstract describes the staggered DiD on Swiss individual-level hospital records; all elements supported."10 },11 "R2": {12 "title_matches": true,13 "year_matches": true,14 "finding_supported": true,15 "locator": "arxiv-2606.14621v1 | Table 2, column 'Average treatment effect estimate', rows Wage, Reemployment, Weeks on UI; abstract (N, preregistered RCT)",16 "note": "Table 2 ATE column prints $1,153 (95% CI [166, 2,141]), 1.47 pp and -1.99 weeks, and the abstract states a preregistered RCT with N = 23,549 and annualized wages; all elements supported."17 },18 "R3": {19 "title_matches": false,20 "year_matches": false,21 "finding_supported": false,22 "locator": "arxiv-2603.03260v2 | Section 3.2 'Headline dynamic pattern' (stacked coefficients tau=0..5) and Table 3, row Clean-onset threshold-2, columns tau=4 / tau=5",23 "note": "The extract reports about 0.5% (0.005) at the event year rising gradually to 3.4-3.7% (0.037 at tau=4, 0.034 at tau=5) and says prices do not jump immediately, contradicting the cited jump in the entry year with no later appreciation; the entry's title and year (2024) also do not match the document (v1 Mar 2026, v2 Apr 2026)."24 },25 "R4": {26 "title_matches": true,27 "year_matches": true,28 "finding_supported": true,29 "locator": "arxiv-2505.04555v3 | Appendix A.1, Table 2, rows 'Employment elasticity w.r.t MW' and 'Emp. elasticity w.r.t affected wage' (estimate and SE rows); abstract (Japan's spot labor market)",30 "note": "Table 2 prints -0.388 (0.132) and -0.732 (0.091) and the abstract places the study in Japan's spot labor market; supported, with the year 2025 matching the v1 submission (7 May 2025)."31 },32 "R5": {33 "title_matches": true,34 "year_matches": true,35 "finding_supported": true,36 "locator": "arxiv-2510.03658v1 | Table 3, column (4), rows Treatment (estimate and SE), % Change, Mean Dep. Var.; Section 4.1 text on the preferred specification",37 "note": "Table 3 column (4), named the preferred specification in Section 4.1, prints -0.0962 (0.0129) and % Change -0.3685 (36.85% in text; -0.0962/0.261 = -0.3686); supported, although the abstract's headline (0.0855, 18.79%) refers to a different outcome."38 }39 },40 "unverifiable_references": [41 "R3"42 ],43 "n_verified": 4,44 "feasibility": "complete",45 "feasibility_reason": null,46 "data_issues": [47 {48 "issue": "arxiv-2609.27732v1: the same 5 km CS-DR ATT -0.431 has SE (0.210) in Table 6 but (0.218) in Table A19; Table A19 note says 640 never-treated regions while Tables 6, 7 and A19 rows say 608.",49 "handling": "Main-text Table 6 used as the decisive locator (the citation reproduces it); significance at 5% holds under either SE (0.431/0.218 > 1.96); inconsistency reported, not flagged against R1."50 },51 {52 "issue": "arxiv-2609.27732v1: abstract says fatal outcomes fall 35% and narcotics rise 'by a comparable amount', while Section 6.1 says about 30% and 47% (consistent with exp(-0.354)-1 and exp(0.390)-1).",53 "handling": "Not part of R1's cited finding; recorded only."54 },55 {56 "issue": "arxiv-2606.14621v1: rendering defect 'p ¡ 0.001' in Section 3; Tables 2-3 were re-set by the extract editor (declared in the header).",57 "handling": "Used the re-set tables as declared verbatim; the defect does not affect any cited value."58 },59 {60 "issue": "arxiv-2603.03260v2: Table 3 header row garbled in the HTML rendering.",61 "handling": "Column order taken from the extract editor's note (Specification | Treated-role LSOAs | Stacked p | Sun p | tau=4 | tau=5)."62 },63 {64 "issue": "arxiv-2505.04555v3: SE of the own-wage elasticity (0.091) is identical to the SE of 'Affected employment'; table note says 'about 4%' MW increase while '% MW changes' is 0.047.",65 "handling": "Cannot be resolved from the extract; the cited values are printed exactly as cited, so R4 is not flagged; recorded as a caveat."66 },67 {68 "issue": "arxiv-2510.03658v1: abstract headline (0.0855, 18.79%, mean 0.455, from omitted Table 2) differs from Table 3 preferred estimate (0.0962, 36.85%, mean 0.261); footnote 11 is garbled (three percentages for five wealth categories) and footnote markers render as '^9^9 9'.",69 "handling": "Treated as different outcomes (count vs binary indicator); R5 cites the Table 3 binary outcome and is checked against Table 3 column (4)."70 }71 ],72 "n_input_rows": {73 "README.md": 17,74 "reference_list.json": 5,75 "arxiv-2609.27732v1.txt": 134,76 "arxiv-2606.14621v1.txt": 58,77 "arxiv-2603.03260v2.txt": 107,78 "arxiv-2505.04555v3.txt": 66,79 "arxiv-2510.03658v1.txt": 9180 },81 "n_analysed": 5,82 "random_seed": null,83 "baseline_metadata_only_unverifiable": [84 "R3"85 ]86}