1# Contract (P0) — F4-conf-022**Question.** For each of six literature-review assertions (data/assertions.json), decide from the cited source extract alone whether it is supported / not_supported / not_assessable.3**Estimands.** Six categorical verdicts (A1–A6), each with one locator and a one-sentence reason. Meaningful only under the stated rules: every element (sign, magnitude, uncertainty, significance, population) must hold for "supported"; any contradicted element => not_supported; not_assessable only when the extract contains no bearing quantity. Conventions: % change = 100(exp(b)-1); 95% CI = b ± 1.96·SE (2.0 acceptable).4**Outputs.** out/results.json keys: verdicts, locators, reasons, n_supported, n_not_supported, n_not_assessable, task_id ("F4-conf-02"), feasibility, feasibility_reason, data_issues, n_input_rows, n_analysed, random_seed (null). out/report.md (Question; Data and exclusions; Method; Results; Uncertainty; Limitations and open issues). out/analysis.py (deterministic, reads data/ only, prints relied-on source lines). out/claims.json.5**Information rules.** Only the extracts are evidence; no memory of papers/other versions/outside knowledge.6**Invalidity.** Using outside knowledge; missing/unreadable extracts; verdicts not traceable to a locator.7