| 1 |
Delete results.json, re-run analysis.py; SHA-256 identical (e4686ab7…955c1b both runs) |
PASS |
| 2 |
unverifiable_references == refs failing >=1 of the three checks |
PASS |
| 3 |
n_verified (4) + len(unverifiable) (1) == 5 == n_analysed; exclusions: 5 − 0 = 5 |
PASS |
| 4 |
n_input_rows equals wc -l counts (README 17, sources 134/58/107/66/91) and JSON item count 5 |
PASS |
| 5 |
Source SHA-256 equal README values; data/ unmodified after runs |
PASS |
| 6 |
Every locator names source id and table/section |
PASS |
| 7 |
Year rule applied: R4 entry 2025 = v1 year (v3 2026) accepted; R3 2024 ∉ {2026, 2026} |
PASS |
| 8 |
Arithmetic: exp(−0.431)−1 = −35.0% (R1); −0.0962/0.261 = −0.3686 vs printed −0.3685 (printed-value rounding, consistent with 36.85%) (R5); −0.268/0.366 = −0.732 (R4) |
PASS |
| 9 |
Baseline (title+year only) flags {R3}; full check also flags only {R3} — consistent, finding check adds no extra flag |
PASS (noted) |
| 10 |
Source-internal inconsistencies (2609 SE 0.210 vs 0.218, 608 vs 640; 2505 SE 0.091 plausibility) |
Reported in data_issues, not silently ignored |
| No randomness; random_seed null. |
|
|