gbanyan/pdf_signature_extraction
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Paper A v3.19.1: address codex partner-redpen audit residual ("upper bound" wording)

Browse Source 
Codex GPT-5.5 cross-verified the Gemini partner red-pen audit
(paper/codex_partner_redpen_audit_v3_19_0.md) and downgraded item (j) --
the BIC strict-3-component upper-bound framing -- from RESOLVED to
IMPROVED, because the "upper bound" wording the partner originally
red-circled in v3.17 still survived in two methodology sentences and one
Table VI row label, even though Section IV-D.3 had been retitled
"A Forced Fit" in v3.18.

This commit closes that residual:

- Methodology III-I.2: "the 2-component crossing should be treated as
  an upper bound rather than a definitive cut" -> "we report the
  resulting crossing only as a forced-fit descriptive reference and do
  not use it as an operational threshold".
- Methodology III-I.4: "should be read as an upper bound rather than a
  definitive cut" -> "reported only as a descriptive reference rather
  than as an operational threshold".
- Table VI row "0.973 (signature-level Beta/KDE upper bound)" relabelled
  to "0.973 (signature-level Beta/KDE forced-fit reference)" to match
  the IV-D.3 "Forced Fit" framing.
- reference_verification_v3.md header updated so the [5] entry reads as
  an audit trail of a fix already applied (v3.18 reference list reflects
  every correction) rather than as an active major problem.
- Rebuild Paper_A_IEEE_Access_Draft_v3.docx.

Also commits the codex partner-redpen audit artifact so the disagreement
trail with Gemini is preserved.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
gbanyan
2026-04-27 23:05:39 +08:00
parent dbe2f676bf
commit 623eb4cd4b
5 changed files with 55 additions and 9 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
paper/reference_verification_v3.md
+9 -6
View File
@@ -1,14 +1,17 @@
# Reference Verification — Paper A v3 (41 refs)
Date: 2026-04-27
Date: 2026-04-27 (initial audit); v3.18 reference list updated to incorporate every fix recorded below.
Method: WebSearch + WebFetch verification of each citation against authoritative sources (publisher pages, DOIs, arXiv, IEEE Xplore, Project Euclid, etc.).
## Summary
- Verified correct: 35/41
- Minor discrepancies (typos, page numbers, year on early-access vs. issue): 5/41
- MAJOR PROBLEMS (does not exist, wrong author, wrong title, wrong venue): 1/41
## Summary (audit history)
- Verified correct on first audit: 35/41
- Minor discrepancies (typos, page numbers, year on early-access vs. issue): 5/41 — all fixed in v3.18
- MAJOR PROBLEMS (wrong author): 1/41 — `[5]` Hadjadj et al. → Kao and Wen, fixed in v3.18
The single major problem is **[5]**, where the paper at the cited venue/article number is real, but the cited authors ("Hadjadj et al.") are wrong — the actual authors are Kao and Wen. None of the statistical-method refs [37]–[41] flagged by the partner are fabricated; all five are bibliographically correct.
The current `paper_a_references_v3.md` reflects every correction listed below. The detailed findings are retained as an audit trail; the live reference list no longer carries any of the recorded errors.
The single major problem at the time of the audit was **[5]**, where the paper at the cited venue/article number is real, but the cited authors ("Hadjadj et al.") were wrong — the actual authors are Kao and Wen. None of the statistical-method refs [37]–[41] flagged by the partner are fabricated; all five are bibliographically correct.
## Detailed findings