1[2 {"id":"C1","text":"11 of 27 (procedure, cell) pairs have coverage below 0.90: CR0 at G=5 and G=10 for all ICC, CR1 at G=5 with ICC 0.2 and 0.5, and WCB at G=5 for all ICC; no pair fails at G=30.","results_keys":["failure_cells","n_failure_cells","coverage"],"status":"supported","caveat":"CR0 (G=10, ICC=0), CR1 (G=5, ICC=0) and CR1 (G=5, ICC=0.2) are within 2 MC SE of the 0.90 threshold; their labels are not robust to MC error."},3 {"id":"C2","text":"CR0 underestimates Var(ybar) with few clusters (E[V]/Var = 0.48-0.66 at G=5, 0.76-0.86 at G=10, 0.93-0.94 at G=30); the CR1 correction reduces but does not remove the bias at G=5.","results_keys":["rel_bias_var","mc_se_rel_bias_var"],"status":"supported","caveat":"MC SE 0.007-0.016; confirmed against exact analytic expectation except one 2.5-SE deviation (C2)."},4 {"id":"C3","text":"At G=5, CR1 has the highest average coverage (0.8905) ahead of WCB (0.854) and CR0 (0.740).","results_keys":["best_procedure_small_G","mean_coverage_G5","coverage"],"status":"supported","caveat":"Specific to Rademacher unrestricted WCB-t and this cluster-size pattern."},5 {"id":"C4","text":"For G=10 and G=30 with ICC>0, WCB coverage (0.933-0.947) is closest to nominal; WCB is consistent with nominal coverage at G=30 for every ICC.","results_keys":["coverage","nominal_cells","mc_se_coverage"],"status":"supported","caveat":"Nominal-consistency is a 2-SE screen without multiplicity adjustment."},6 {"id":"C5","text":"Only 5 of 27 pairs are consistent with nominal 95% coverage; CR0 is never consistent with nominal, even at G=30.","results_keys":["nominal_cells","coverage","mc_se_coverage"],"status":"supported","caveat":"2-SE screen with R=2000."},7 {"id":"C6","text":"The naive iid interval that ignores clustering covers only 0.29-0.49 when ICC>0, far below all cluster-robust procedures.","results_keys":["baseline_iid_coverage","baseline_iid_mc_se"],"status":"supported","caveat":"Baseline only; not a required estimand."},8 {"id":"C7","text":"WCB coverage is insensitive to the empirical-quantile convention (changes of at most 0.003, failure set unchanged).","results_keys":["sensitivity_wcb_coverage_numpy_quantile","coverage"],"status":"supported","caveat":"Only two quantile conventions compared."}9]10