1{2 "task_id": "F4-conf-03",3 "harmonised": {4 "E1": {5 "value": -35.0141,6 "unit": "percent (relative change vs counterfactual rate)",7 "transformation": "100*(exp(b)-1) with b = -0.431** log points -> 100*(exp(-0.431)-1) = -35.0141%",8 "harmonisable": true,9 "missing_quantity": null,10 "locator": "arxiv-2609.27732v1 | Table 6 | row 'ATT' (line 36) | column '5 km': -0.431**; cross-check row '% change' (line 40) column '5 km': -35.0%"11 },12 "E2": {13 "value": 1.96,14 "unit": "percent (relative change vs control-group mean)",15 "transformation": "100*Delta/p with Delta = 1.47 pp, p = 75.0% -> 100*1.47/75.0 = 1.9600%",16 "harmonisable": true,17 "missing_quantity": null,18 "locator": "arxiv-2606.14621v1 | Table 2 | row 'Reemployment' (line 29) | column 'Average treatment effect estimate': 1.47 pp; column 'Control': 75.0%"19 },20 "E3": {21 "value": -1.8236,22 "unit": "percent (relative change in employment)",23 "transformation": "100*eta*g with eta = -0.388, g = 0.047 (proportional MW change) -> 100*(-0.388)*(0.047) = -1.8236%",24 "harmonisable": true,25 "missing_quantity": null,26 "locator": "arxiv-2505.04555v3 | Table 2 | row 'Employment elasticity w.r.t MW' (line 50) | column 'Estimate (SE)': -0.388; row '% MW changes' (line 60) | column 'Estimate (SE)': 0.047"27 },28 "E4": {29 "value": null,30 "unit": "hospitalisations per 100,000 inhabitants per year",31 "transformation": "Would require: Delta = Y0*(exp(b)-1) with b = -0.354** log points and Y0 the counterfactual fatal rate per 100,000 per year. Only the relative change 100*(exp(-0.354)-1) = -29.8125% is computable from the extract; Y0 is not printed.",32 "harmonisable": false,33 "missing_quantity": "the counterfactual (or pre-treatment / control-group mean) level of the fatal drug-related hospitalisation rate per 100,000 inhabitants per year for the 5 km treated regions (not printed in the extract; Tables 6, 7, A19 print only log-point ATTs, SEs and counts)",34 "locator": "arxiv-2609.27732v1 | Table 7 | row 'Drug-related (fatal)' (line 86) | column '5 km': -0.354**"35 },36 "E5": {37 "value": -9.62,38 "unit": "percentage points",39 "transformation": "100*beta with beta = -0.0962 (0-1 probability scale) -> 100*(-0.0962) = -9.6200 pp",40 "harmonisable": true,41 "missing_quantity": null,42 "locator": "arxiv-2510.03658v1 | Table 3 | row 'Treatment' (line 49) | column '(4)': -0.0962"43 }44 },45 "n_harmonised": 4,46 "n_not_harmonisable": 1,47 "feasibility": "complete",48 "feasibility_reason": null,49 "data_issues": [50 {51 "issue": "arxiv-2609.27732v1: abstract says fatal drug-related hospitalisations 'fall by 35%', but Table 7 (5 km) prints -0.354** log points, i.e. -29.8%; Section 6.1 says 'approximately 30%'.",52 "handling": "Table 7 value used for E4; abstract figure not used."53 },54 {55 "issue": "arxiv-2609.27732v1: Table A19 prints SE (0.218) for the CS-DR 5 km ATT -0.431, whereas Table 6 prints (0.210) for the same estimate; A19 note says 640 never-treated regions while the table body and Tables 6-7 say 608.",56 "handling": "Not used: no standard errors are propagated and region counts do not enter any transformation. Reported only."57 },58 {59 "issue": "arxiv-2609.27732v1: Table A19 '% change' for Synthetic DiD and Stacked DiD differ by 0.1 from 100*(exp(b)-1) on the printed coefficients (computed vs printed: {'CS-DR': (-35.0, '-35.0%'), 'Sun & Abraham': (-35.5, '-35.5%'), 'Synthetic DiD': (-30.4, '-30.3%'), 'Stacked DiD': (-13.8, '-13.9%')}).",60 "handling": "Not used (E1 uses Table 6, where printed -35.0% matches the computed value). Attributed to rounding of coefficients."61 },62 {63 "issue": "arxiv-2609.27732v1: no level (mean, baseline or counterfactual) of the fatal drug-related hospitalisation rate per 100,000 is printed, and the time unit of the panel ('per year') is not stated explicitly.",64 "handling": "E4 declared not harmonisable (value null); missing quantity named; no external value substituted."65 },66 {67 "issue": "arxiv-2505.04555v3: Table 2 note describes 'about 4% minimum wage increase' while the row '% MW changes' prints 0.047 (4.7%).",68 "handling": "Task instructs use of the size printed in the table: g = 0.047. With 0.04 the result would differ; noted in the report."69 },70 {71 "issue": "arxiv-2510.03658v1: abstract/text quote an effect of 0.0855 relative to a mean of 0.455 from 'table 2' (not in the extract); Table 3 col (4) '% Change' prints -0.3685 vs -0.3686 recomputed from printed coefficient and mean (rounding); footnote 11 text is garbled.",72 "handling": "Only Table 3, row Treatment, column (4) is used for E5, as specified in effects.json."73 },74 {75 "issue": "arxiv-2606.14621v1: rendering defect 'p ¡ 0.001' in the short-term results paragraph; the control mean (75.0%) is the raw aggregate control-group mean, whereas the ATE (1.47 pp) is block (randomisation-week) adjusted.",76 "handling": "Rendering defect irrelevant to E2. Control mean used as the counterfactual level p as the target definition requires; caveat stated."77 }78 ],79 "n_input_rows": {80 "effects.json": 5,81 "README.md": 16,82 "arxiv-2505.04555v3.txt": 66,83 "arxiv-2510.03658v1.txt": 91,84 "arxiv-2606.14621v1.txt": 58,85 "arxiv-2609.27732v1.txt": 13486 },87 "n_analysed": 5,88 "random_seed": null,89 "baseline_reported": {90 "E1": {91 "printed_value": "-0.431**",92 "printed_unit": "log points",93 "author_printed_conversion": "-35.0%"94 },95 "E2": {96 "printed_value": "1.47 pp",97 "printed_unit": "percentage points",98 "author_printed_conversion": null99 },100 "E3": {101 "printed_value": "-0.388",102 "printed_unit": "elasticity",103 "author_printed_conversion": null104 },105 "E4": {106 "printed_value": "-0.354**",107 "printed_unit": "log points",108 "author_printed_conversion": null,109 "computable_relative_change_percent": -29.8125110 },111 "E5": {112 "printed_value": "-0.0962",113 "printed_unit": "probability (0-1)",114 "author_printed_conversion": null115 }116 }117}