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 / column 5 km (SE row; % change row); Section 6 text (5% significance); abstract (staggered DiD, hospital records)",9 "note": "Table 6 (5 km) prints ATT -0.431** with SE (0.210) and -35.0%, matching every element (Table A19 prints SE (0.218) for the same estimate)."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 = 23,549, 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 gives a preregistered RCT with N = 23,549."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 by tau) and Table 3, row Clean-onset threshold-2, columns tau=4 / tau=5",23 "note": "The extract reports ~0.5% (0.005) at the event year rising gradually to 0.037/0.034 at tau=4/5 ('prices do not jump immediately'), contradicting a 3.4-3.7% event-year jump with no later appreciation; title and year (2024 vs 2026) also disagree."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 (SE) column); abstract (Japan's spot labor market)",30 "note": "Table 2 prints -0.388 (0.132) and -0.732 (0.091) for the two elasticities, and the abstract places the study in Japan's spot labor market."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 (coef, SE) and % Change; Section 4.1 (column (4) preferred, 36.85 percent)",37 "note": "Table 3 column (4) (stated preferred) prints -0.0962 (0.0129) and % Change -0.3685, i.e. 36.85% as stated in Section 4.1."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 5 km CS-DR ATT -0.431** has SE (0.210) in Table 6 but SE (0.218) in Table A19; the A19 note says 640 never-treated regions while Table 6/A19 bodies say 608; abstract says fatal outcomes fall 35% while Section 6.1 says ~30%; extract ends mid-sentence in the A19 note.",49 "handling": "R1 cites SE 0.210, which is exactly the main-results Table 6 value; it is judged supported, and 5% significance holds under either SE (stars ** printed in both tables). Inconsistency reported, not resolved."50 },51 {52 "issue": "arxiv-2606.14621v1: rendering defect 'p ¡ 0.001' in Section 3 (short-term weeks on UI); Tables 2-3 re-set by the extract editor.",53 "handling": "Read as p < 0.001 (Table 2 prints p<0.001); does not affect the R2 check, which relies on long-term rows of Table 2."54 },55 {56 "issue": "arxiv-2603.03260v2: Table 3 header garbled in the HTML rendering.",57 "handling": "Used the extract editor's column order (Specification | Treated-role LSOAs | Stacked p | Sun p | tau=4 | tau=5), which agrees with Section 3.2 text (0.037, 0.034)."58 },59 {60 "issue": "arxiv-2505.04555v3: Table 2 prints identical SE (0.091) for 'Affected employment' and for the own-wage elasticity (ratio -0.268/0.366 = -0.732), which is unusual for a ratio whose denominator has SE 0.171.",61 "handling": "Values taken exactly as printed; R4 cites the printed values, so the finding check passes; the oddity is flagged only."62 },63 {64 "issue": "arxiv-2510.03658v1: abstract/Section 4.1 headline (0.0855, 18.79%) comes from a Table 2 that is omitted from the extract; Table 3 % Change -0.3685 vs -0.0962/0.261 = -0.3686 (rounding of printed mean).",65 "handling": "R5 cites the Table 3 column (4) result, which is in the extract; rounding difference is immaterial."66 }67 ],68 "n_input_rows": {69 "README.md": 17,70 "reference_list.json": 5,71 "arxiv-2609.27732v1.txt": 134,72 "arxiv-2606.14621v1.txt": 58,73 "arxiv-2603.03260v2.txt": 107,74 "arxiv-2505.04555v3.txt": 66,75 "arxiv-2510.03658v1.txt": 9176 },77 "n_analysed": 5,78 "random_seed": null,79 "baseline_unverifiable_bibliographic_only": [80 "R3"81 ],82 "baseline_n_verified_bibliographic_only": 483}84