{
  "case": "microplastics-cardiovascular",
  "authoring_model": "Sol 6.1",
  "adversarial_reviewer": "Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic)",
  "date": "2026-10-14",
  "level_before": "Γ",
  "level_after": "Γ",
  "confidence_before": "Moderate",
  "confidence_after": "Moderate",
  "pmids_checked": 59,
  "pmids_failed": 0,
  "claims_spot_checked": 12,
  "validator": "PASS (0 fail, 0 warn, 30 pass)",
  "findings": [
    {
      "id": "MPCV-1",
      "severity": "Major",
      "location": "AT A GLANCE, Best-supported rival",
      "original": "Particles contribute to vascular injury",
      "corrected": "Disease-related trapping and barrier disruption — the highest-ranked model that is not the nominal hypothesis",
      "evidence": "Score card competing_models M1 has is_nominal=true, rank_in_tournament=1; the rank-1 non-nominal model is M2. Known renderer defect printing models_evaluated[0]."
    },
    {
      "id": "MPCV-2",
      "severity": "Major",
      "location": "Gamma hard-rule audit SC3 entry; scorecard gamma_hard_rules_considered",
      "original": "Not triggered literally for this assembled scoped case",
      "corrected": "Triggered literally for this assembled scoped case; it is the rubric cap recorded for SC3 in the cap audit",
      "evidence": "cap_rules_applied records the identical quoted rule for SC3 with triggered=true and resulting_ceiling=Γ; the two statements contradicted each other."
    },
    {
      "id": "MPCV-3",
      "severity": "Minor",
      "location": "scorecard final_score.confidence_rationale",
      "original": "density, heterogeneous controls and incomplete access set the confidence, not correctness",
      "corrected": "rationale rescoped to evidence density, replication and assay/methodological heterogeneity; explicitly not reviewer access",
      "evidence": "hsef-framework.md Confidence band: confidence reflects evidence density and reproducibility, not reviewer belief or access. Band remains Moderate; High text (extensive independent replication across labs, models and assay modalities) is not met."
    }
  ],
  "rejected_findings": [
    "Reference years off by one versus PubMed publication-date year (41352427, 41005896, 36243049, 30622063) — print vs e-pub convention.",
    "'257 of 304 enrolled' — matches the original abstract (304 enrolled, 257 completed ~33.7 months); the 312-screened body figure is consistent.",
    "Lifespan/healthspan field-valid definition blocks — frozen rubric literal text with the adaptation disclosed separately.",
    "Role of mechanism 'epiphenomenon' — derivation step 2 correctly applied, not taken from tournament rank.",
    "Primary-subclaim aggregation returning Γ from SC2 — SC2 is scope-matched; scope-matched sensitivity also Γ.",
    "Momentum 'Mechanistic only' — already correct; no 'Decisive work underway' boilerplate.",
    "Collective-author rendering defect — no consortium first author in this reference list.",
    "False-approval boilerplate ('earlier adversarial approval ... original edition') — string absent from this case.",
    "Rendering defects (missing numeral spacing, empty DOI fields, 'PMIDnot supplied') — none found."
  ],
  "residual_limitations": "Bounded access (2 partial-body, 57 abstract/status). Item [19] odds/fold ambiguity unresolvable without full text. Rubric adaptation (aging rubric applied to an environmental-cardiovascular claim) is disclosed but remains a judgement call.",
  "approval": "Approved as revised."
}