gbanyan
9e68f2e1d3
Resolved Codex review (gpt-5.5 xhigh) findings against b6913d2.
BLOCKERS:
- Appendix B reference mismatch: rewrote all main-text "Appendix B" references
to "supplementary materials" since Appendix B is now a redirect stub. Affected
the SSIM design-argument pointer, threshold provenance, byte-level
decomposition, MC band capture-rate, and backbone-ablation table references
across §III-F / §III-H.1 / §III-H.2 / §III-K / §III-L.4 / §III-M / §IV-F /
§IV-J / §IV-K / §IV-L / §V-C / §V-H.
- Table rendering: un-commented Tables I-IV (Dataset Summary, YOLO Detection,
Extraction Results, Cosine Distribution Statistics) which were inside HTML
comment blocks and would not have rendered in the submission.
- Table numbering out of order: Table XIX appeared before Tables XVI-XVIII.
Renumbered XIX -> XVI (document-level worst-case counts), XVI -> XVII (Firm x
K=3 cross-tab), XVII -> XVIII (K=3 component comparison), XVIII -> XIX
(Spearman correlation). Cross-references updated in §IV-J / §IV-K and §V-C.
- Table V mis-citation: §IV-C said "KDE crossover ... (Table V)" but Table V is
the dip test. Dropped the (Table V) tag; crossover is a textual finding.
- Submission cleanup: wrapped the archived Impact Statement section heading and
body inside the existing HTML comment (was rendering). Funding placeholder
wrapped in HTML comment with a TO-DO note (won't render but is preserved as
reminder).
MAJORS:
- Line 1077 numerical conflation: rewrote the §V-C / §III-L.4 paragraph that
labelled Firm A's per-document HC+MC inter-CPA proxy ICCR of 0.6201 as a rate
"on real same-CPA pools." 0.6201 is a counterfactual proxy under inter-CPA
candidate-pool replacement, not the observed rate. Added explicit disambig:
the corresponding observed rate from Table XVI (formerly XIX) is 97.5%
HC+MC for Firm A; the proxy and observed rates measure different quantities.
- Residual "validation" language softened: "Dual-descriptor verification" ->
"Dual-descriptor similarity"; "we validate the backbone choice" -> "we
support the backbone choice"; "pixel-identity validation" -> "pixel-identity
positive-anchor check"; "## M. Validation Strategy and Limitations under
Unsupervised Setting" -> "## M. Unsupervised Diagnostic Strategy and Limits".
- "Specificity behaviour" overclaim: "characterises the cosine threshold's
specificity behaviour" -> "specificity-proxy behaviour" (methodology §III-L.0
and discussion §V-F).
- "Prior published / prior calibration" ambiguity: replaced "prior published
per-comparison rate" with "the corpus-wide rate reported in §IV-I"; replaced
"(prior published operating point)" with "(alternative operating point from
supplementary calibration evidence)" in Tables XXI; replaced "prior reporting
and the existing literature" with "the existing literature and the
supplementary calibration evidence."
MINORS:
- Line 116 Bayes-optimal qualifier: "the local density minimum ... is the
Bayes-optimal decision boundary under equal priors" -> "In idealized
two-class mixture settings with equal priors and equal misclassification
costs, the local density minimum ... coincides with the Bayes-optimal
decision boundary."
- Stale section refs: §V-G for the fine-tuning caveat retargeted to §V-H
Engineering-level caveats (where it lives after the §V-H reorganisation);
§III-L for the worst-case rule retargeted to §III-H.1; "Section IV-D.2"
(nonexistent) retargeted to "Section IV-D Table VI."
- Abstract / Introduction "after pool-size adjustment": separated the
document-level D2 proxy ICCR claim from the per-signature logistic regression
claim. Now: "Per-document D2 inter-CPA proxy ICCRs differ by an order of
magnitude across firms ... a per-signature logistic regression confirms the
firm gap persists after pool-size control."
NIT:
- Related Work HTML comment "(see paper_a_references_v3.md for full list)"
-> "(full list in the References section)"; removes the version-coded
filename reference from the source.
Artefacts:
- Combined manuscript regenerated: paper_a_v4_combined.md, 1312 lines.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
735 B
735 B
Declarations
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest with Firm A, Firm B, Firm C, or Firm D, or with any other entity referenced in this work.
Data availability. All audit reports analysed in this study were obtained from the Market Observation Post System (MOPS) operated by the Taiwan Stock Exchange Corporation, a publicly accessible regulatory disclosure platform. The CPA registry used to map signatures to certifying CPAs is publicly available. Signature images, model weights, and reproducibility scripts are available in the supplementary materials.