Commit Graph
2 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
gbanyanandClaude Opus 4.8 6781c00d5b Paper A v13 rev9.2: firm-key unification + canonical-number reconciliation (rev9.1 review R1-R6)
Resolve the Firm C/D "two-snapshot" inconsistency from the co-author rev9.1 review.
Root cause was NOT stale data but two live firm-assignment keys (assigned_accountant->
registry firm vs the excel_firm column) used inconsistently across tables; standardize
on the registry key, which the headline Table IV/II-b already use. Sole difference = 379
signatures with excel_firm=C but registry firm=D; A and B identical under both keys.

Numbers (all DB-verified, registry key, n=150,442):
- Table II-c Firm C/D recomputed (was mixing keys within firm C across periods, which
  manufactured the spurious "third value" 38,934); now C 22,449+16,164=38,613,
  D 9,945+7,188=17,133, all four firms reconcile.
- Table VI C/D counts + S III-B prose + Fig 3/6 captions -> 150,442.
- S V-B HC-rate text -> Firm C 21.6->26.7%, Firm D 22.0->28.0%.

Note on R4: the reviewer (PDF-only) asked to change S IV-C to 26.5/28.5 to match Table
II-c; DB verification showed the reverse - S IV-C's 26.7/28.0 are correct and Table II-c
was the stale outlier, so II-c was aligned to S IV-C (data-correct, opposite to the
literal instruction).

Accountant counts (R2 reviewer "179>171 impossible" = false positive; three distinct,
all-reproducible universes): Table I + S III-B -> 457 (>=2 sig, owns the 150,442
signatures); Table III documented as the 437 with >=10 signatures (K=3 GMM subset,
reproduces A=82.5/B=0.0/C=1.0/D=1.9% exactly); bootstrap 179/280 unchanged
(accountant_id key, correct and invariant to the A-vs-BCD contrast).

R3 (corpus scope): S III-B reworded - corpus = all retrievable reports, Big-4 as the
primary analysis sample (removes the "corpus = four firms" vs "non-Big-4 in robustness"
contradiction); per-firm counts now explicitly labelled A/B/C/D.
R5 (spelling): unify to American (artefact->artifact x11, centred->centered,
behaviour->behavior, analyse(d)->analyze(d), favours->favors).
R6: delete non-standard "(+)" marker in S IV-C.

Figures regenerated under the registry key: make_fig3_density.py and
make_fig6_sensitivity.py switched to the assigned_accountant join (fig3/fig6 n=150,442);
fig4/fig5 refreshed. FE/LOYO/bootstrap re-validated exactly (ORs 0.116/0.061/0.070,
LOYO 53.1-54.9pp, full 53.7pp).

Add CANONICAL_NUMBERS_rev9.1.md with full provenance, the analyzable/GMM definitions,
and the firm-key root cause.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01K35dXhb9XEM1mnYz6SSHpU
2026-06-30 15:19:18 +08:00
gbanyanandClaude Opus 4.8 66c9194fcf Paper A v13: filled submission draft (rev7) + reproducible build bundle
Fill all 18 placeholders in the condensed v13 submission draft with
data verified against the analysis DB and LOCKED canonical scripts;
close 12/13 co-author review items (only #8b protocol first-run open).

Key changes (need co-author sign-off; see handoff doc):
- Firm A out-of-sample HC 0.01% -> 0.42% (buggy 0.0001 from Script 49
  same-pair bug, propagated v4.2->v13; never reuse 0.0001)
- §III-D empty cell ~=0 -> 7,681 honest reframe (not degenerate crops)
- low cosine cut 0.837 -> 0.8547 primary (BCD 2013-2019 closed-world,
  held-out discipline; 0.8489 confirmed = BCD all-period); HC/MC/HSC
  unchanged, UN/LH move <=0.4pp

Adds Figures 1-5 (real-data plots + schematics), full references,
Appendix A/B, UN/HSC ICCR, n-reconciliation, #13 MOPS-metadata
survival verification, "參" set-level feasibility probe (negative).
Two codex (gpt-5.5) adversarial rounds applied; no fabrication found.

Bundle: paper/v13_build/ (markdown source, harvest/figure scripts,
figures) for reproducibility. Handoff note for co-author included.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-06-15 03:24:50 +08:00