# Paper A Round 27 Review - v4 round 7

Reviewer: gpt-5.5  
Date: 2026-05-12  
Target: `paper/v4/paper_a_prose_v4_phase4.md` (Phase 4 prose v2 + abstract trim)  
Foundation checked: `paper/v4/paper_a_methodology_v4_section_iii.md` (§III v6) and `paper/v4/paper_a_results_v4_section_iv.md` (§IV v3.2)  
Prior rubric checked: `paper/codex_review_gpt55_v4_round6.md`

## Verdict

Minor Revision.

Phase 4 prose v2 closes the substantive round-26 overclaim cycle. The major technical-prose risks around independent-score language, Big-4 scope, K=3 operational status, full-dataset overread, and restored limitations are now aligned with §III v6 / §IV v3.2.

The remaining issues are packaging / copy-edit blockers, not empirical blockers: §II still marks [42]-[44] as placeholders and the reference list has not been extended past [41]; internal draft notes and the Phase 4 close-out checklist remain; and §V-F still uses "candidate classifiers" for K=3/reverse-anchor checks.

## Round-26 finding closure table

Note: the round-26 file contains 11 labelled Major rows and 15 labelled Minor rows; this table covers every labelled row. The prompt's 9 Major / 12 Minor tally appears to merge duplicate themes.

### Major findings

| # | Round-26 finding | v2 status | Round-27 note |
|---:|---|---|---|
| M1 | Abstract said "Three independent feature-derived scores" | CLOSED | Abstract now says "Three feature-derived scores" and adds "not statistically independent" (line 11). |
| M2 | §I overclaimed Big-4 scope by implying any single firm and full-dataset dip-test non-rejection | CLOSED | §I now says "narrower comparison scopes tested" and names only Script 32 scopes (line 31). |
| M3 | §I stale cross-reference to §III-D | CLOSED | Replaced with §III-G through §III-J plus §IV-D/E (line 29). |
| M4 | §I repeated independent-score error | CLOSED | §I now states the three scores are not statistically independent and frames convergence as internal consistency (line 35). |
| M5 | §II not submission-ready if inserted as written | PARTIAL | The v4 addition is real prose, but the file still contains a meta note and depends on master-file splicing of `paper/paper_a_related_work_v3.md` (lines 63-65). |
| M6 | §II unresolved citation placeholder | OPEN | Body cites Stone/Geisser/Vehtari as [42]-[44], but line 65 says these are placeholders; `paper/paper_a_references_v3.md` stops at [41]. |
| M7 | §V reified CPA mechanism labels | CLOSED | Wording now says per-CPA means are located in descriptor-plane regions, not that all signatures share a mechanism (line 79). |
| M8 | §V speculative within-CPA unimodality explanation | CLOSED | The causal claim was removed; v2 only states joint consistency and repeats the summary-statistic caveat (line 79). |
| M9 | §V limitations incomplete vs v3.20.0 | CLOSED | Restored inherited limitations: ImageNet transfer, HSV artifacts, longitudinal confounds, source-exemplar misattribution, legal/regulatory interpretation (lines 119-127). |
| M10 | §V scope limitation implied full-dataset dip-test evidence | CLOSED | v2 explicitly says full `n = 686` dip-test marginals and LOOO were not tested (line 105). |
| M11 | §VI overclaimed "cross-scope pipeline reproducibility" | CLOSED | Conclusion now limits the claim to K=3 + box-rule rank-convergence at full `n = 686` and excludes thresholds/LOOO/five-way/pixel checks (line 135). |

### Minor findings

| # | Round-26 finding | v2 status | Round-27 note |
|---:|---|---|---|
| m1 | Abstract "candidate classifiers" blurred operational status | CLOSED | Abstract no longer uses "candidate classifiers"; it names the five-way operational output first (line 11). |
| m2 | Abstract had no word-count margin | CLOSED | `wc -w` on line 11 returns 243 words, leaving 7 words of margin. |
| m3 | Abstract omitted primary operational output | CLOSED | Abstract now states the inherited five-way per-signature classifier with worst-case document aggregation (line 11). |
| m4 | Contribution 4 overclaimed "not at narrower scopes" | CLOSED | Now "narrower comparison scopes tested" (line 47). |
| m5 | Contribution 8 overclaimed full-dataset check | CLOSED | Now says only K=3 + box-rule rank-convergence reproduces and explicitly excludes other components (line 55). |
| m6 | Safeguards paragraph used "external validation" too broadly | CLOSED | The paragraph now uses "annotation-free validation against naturally-occurring anchor populations" and does not imply full external validation (line 25). |
| m7 | §II "calibration uncertainty band on operational rule" conflicted with classifier framing | CLOSED | Rewritten as "composition-sensitivity band on the candidate mixture boundary" and not a sufficiency claim for the five-way classifier (line 65). |
| m8 | §V "inherits and confirms" too strong for signature-level spectrum | CLOSED | Now "inherits this signature-level reading and remains consistent with it," with no-new-diagnostic caveat (line 77). |
| m9 | Firm A byte-level details needed provenance language | CLOSED | v2 marks 50 partners / 35 cross-year as inherited from v3.20.0 Script 28 and not regenerated in v4 spikes (line 83). |
| m10 | Firm A alone did not anchor §IV-H | CLOSED | v2 says the Big-4 byte-identical anchor pools all four firms (line 85). |
| m11 | "Published box rule" not traceable | CLOSED | Replaced with "inherited Paper A box rule" throughout. |
| m12 | "Same per-CPA ranking" too strong | CLOSED | v2 now says "broadly concordant" and reports the Firm D/Firm C residual disagreement (line 95). |
| m13 | §V repeated "candidate classifiers" wording | PARTIAL | Line 99 still says "all three candidate classifiers" for the inherited box rule, K=3 hard label, and reverse-anchor metric. Use "candidate checks" or "candidate scores/rules." |
| m14 | Future-work audit-quality contrast needed descriptive caveat | CLOSED | Future work now says the Firm A/Firm C contrast is descriptive, not mechanism-level, and not linked to audit-quality outcomes (line 137). |
| m15 | Conclusion underplayed operational output | CLOSED | Conclusion now names the inherited five-way per-signature classifier and worst-case document aggregation (line 133). |

### Round-26 next-step actions

| # | Action | v2 status | Note |
|---:|---|---|---|
| A1 | Replace independent-score language and preserve shared-feature caveat | CLOSED | Done in Abstract, §I, §V, §VI. |
| A2 | Rewrite Big-4 scope language | CLOSED | Done; no unsupported B/C/D single-firm or full-dataset dip-test claim remains in body prose. |
| A3 | Fix stale §III-D cross-reference | CLOSED | Done at line 29. |
| A4 | Turn §II into real revised Related Work and replace `[add citation]` | PARTIAL | The LOOO paragraph is drafted, but references [42]-[44] remain placeholders and absent from the reference list. |
| A5 | Rebuild §V-G limitations with still-valid v3 limitations | CLOSED | Done at lines 119-127. |
| A6 | Replace "published box rule" | CLOSED | Done. |
| A7 | Narrow full-dataset language | CLOSED | Done at lines 55, 105, and 135. |
| A8 | Strip internal notes/checklists before Phase 5 | OPEN | Draft note and close-out checklist remain (lines 3, 141-150); §III/§IV also retain internal notes/checklists. |

## Newly introduced issues

1. **Minor - §II citation-number gap and placeholder contradiction.** The v2 draft note says §II now has "a real citation," but line 65 says [42]-[44] are placeholders, line 147 still says `[add citation]`, and `paper/paper_a_references_v3.md` stops at [41]. This is the only remaining reviewer-visible blocker if the prose is packaged as manuscript text.

2. **Minor - stale close-out metadata.** The close-out checklist says the abstract is "approximately 235 words" (line 145), but `wc -w` returns 243 words on the abstract paragraph. The author's "244 words" note and the shell count differ by one tokenization unit; both satisfy IEEE Access, but the checklist should be updated or removed.

No newly introduced empirical inconsistency was found.

## Abstract word count verification + key v2 spot checks

Abstract count: `sed -n '11p' paper/v4/paper_a_prose_v4_phase4.md | wc -w` returns **243**. The abstract is one paragraph and under the 250-word IEEE Access target.

Spot-check 1: **Independent-score correction closed.** Lines 11, 35, 95, and 135 now say the scores are feature-derived / shared-input / not statistically independent. This matches §III-K's caveat and §IV-F's framing that the correlations are internal consistency, not external validation.

Spot-check 2: **Big-4 scope and full-dataset correction closed.** Lines 31, 47, 79, 105, and 135 now match §III-G/I and §IV-D/K: Big-4 is the smallest scope among tested comparison scopes; B/C/D single-firm dip tests and full-dataset dip tests were not run; full-dataset evidence is only the light K=3 + box-rule Spearman re-run at `n = 686`.

Spot-check 3: **Operational-vs-descriptive framing closed except line 99 wording.** Lines 11, 33, 55, 111, 133, and 135 reserve operational status for the inherited five-way classifier and keep K=3 descriptive. The only remaining wording leak is line 99's "candidate classifiers."

## Phase 5 readiness

Partial.

Substantively, §III + §IV + Phase 4 prose are converged. Phase 5 should not require new statistical work. It does require one copy-edit/reference pass before packaging: finalize §II citations and references, strip internal notes/checklists, and replace the residual "candidate classifiers" phrase.

## Recommended next-step actions

1. Replace line 99's "all three candidate classifiers" with "all three candidate checks" or "all three candidate scores/rules"; keep K=3 explicitly descriptive.

2. Finalize §II packaging: either splice the full v3.20.0 Related Work body plus the v4 LOOO paragraph into the master, or make this Phase 4 file contain the full §II block. Add real [42]-[44] reference entries and remove the "placeholders" sentence.

3. Strip the Phase 4 draft note and close-out checklist before manuscript assembly; do the same for §III/§IV internal notes and working checklists.

4. Update or remove the stale abstract-count note. The verified shell count is 243 words.

5. After the reference/cross-reference cleanup, run one final manuscript-level lint for unresolved placeholders, duplicate reference numbers, internal notes, and stale section/table references.
