eduevidence 5.2.0 → 6.2.0

package/examples/spaced-retrieval-practice/skeptic.json

@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
+{
+  "search_performed": true,
+  "method": "derived from evidence corpus directions (demo/test mode)",
+  "skeptic_findings": [
+    {
+      "check": "1_null_result",
+      "status": "found",
+      "detail": "derived from the evidence corpus in demo/test mode",
+      "related_evidence_ids": [
+        "E-005"
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "check": "2_negative_result",
+      "status": "not_found",
+      "detail": "derived from the evidence corpus in demo/test mode",
+      "related_evidence_ids": []
+    },
+    {
+      "check": "3_contradictory_evidence",
+      "status": "not_found",
+      "detail": "derived from the evidence corpus in demo/test mode",
+      "related_evidence_ids": []
+    },
+    {
+      "check": "4_alternative_explanation",
+      "status": "found",
+      "detail": "derived from the evidence corpus in demo/test mode",
+      "related_evidence_ids": []
+    },
+    {
+      "check": "5_measurement_mismatch",
+      "status": "not_found",
+      "detail": "derived from the evidence corpus in demo/test mode",
+      "related_evidence_ids": []
+    },
+    {
+      "check": "6_sampling_bias",
+      "status": "not_found",
+      "detail": "derived from the evidence corpus in demo/test mode",
+      "related_evidence_ids": []
+    },
+    {
+      "check": "7_novelty_effect",
+      "status": "not_found",
+      "detail": "derived from the evidence corpus in demo/test mode",
+      "related_evidence_ids": []
+    },
+    {
+      "check": "8_ai_dependency",
+      "status": "not_found",
+      "detail": "derived from the evidence corpus in demo/test mode",
+      "related_evidence_ids": []
+    },
+    {
+      "check": "9_scope_overreach",
+      "status": "not_found",
+      "detail": "derived from the evidence corpus in demo/test mode",
+      "related_evidence_ids": []
+    }
+  ],
+  "contradictory_evidence_found": false,
+  "no_contradictory_evidence_statement": "NO CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE FOUND",
+  "threats_to_validity": [
+    "materials differ across experiments",
+    "sample of convenience",
+    "short retention interval",
+    "single institution"
+  ]
+}

package/examples/spaced-retrieval-practice/sources.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+{"source_id": "S-KARPICKE-EXPANDING-RETRIEVAL-PRACTICE", "title": "Expanding retrieval practice promotes short-term retention, but equally spaced retrieval enhances long-term retention.", "authors": ["Jeffrey D. Karpicke", "Henry L. Roediger"], "year": 2007, "doi": "10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.704", "canonical_url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.704", "source_type": "journal_article", "authority_level": "tier1_paper_doi", "discovered_by": "search", "discovery_provider": "sciverse", "fetch": {"fetch_status": "FETCH_VALID", "fetch_provider": "sciverse_content", "fetched_at": "2026-09-12T00:00:00+00:00", "doc_id": "e069d8f2e9492d57305fc1d8477ba042e93074fcb1bc3319faef7f3d0e0cad33", "offset": 0, "extensions": {"sciverse": {"doc_id": "e069d8f2e9492d57305fc1d8477ba042e93074fcb1bc3319faef7f3d0e0cad33", "offset": 0}}}, "content_hash": "", "dedupe_keys": {"canonical_url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.704", "doi": "10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.704", "title_fingerprint": "expandingretrievalpracticepromotesshorttermretentionbutequallysp", "content_hash": ""}, "status": "DISCOVERED"}
+{"source_id": "S-SMITH-COVERT-RETRIEVAL-PRACTICE", "title": "Covert retrieval practice benefits retention as much as overt retrieval practice.", "authors": ["Megan A. Smith", "Henry L. Roediger", "Jeffrey D. Karpicke"], "year": 2013, "doi": "10.1037/a0033569", "canonical_url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033569", "source_type": "journal_article", "authority_level": "tier1_paper_doi", "discovered_by": "search", "discovery_provider": "sciverse", "fetch": {"fetch_status": "FETCH_VALID", "fetch_provider": "sciverse_content", "fetched_at": "2026-09-12T00:00:00+00:00", "doc_id": "902842a9906c39fc7f033576871741049c44b7bb1fc1e0d35a0d9c9bff7829e4", "offset": 0, "extensions": {"sciverse": {"doc_id": "902842a9906c39fc7f033576871741049c44b7bb1fc1e0d35a0d9c9bff7829e4", "offset": 0}}}, "content_hash": "", "dedupe_keys": {"canonical_url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033569", "doi": "10.1037/a0033569", "title_fingerprint": "covertretrievalpracticebenefitsretentionasmuchasovertretrievalpr", "content_hash": ""}, "status": "DISCOVERED"}
+{"source_id": "S-HOPKINS-SPACED-RETRIEVAL-PRACTICE", "title": "Spaced Retrieval Practice Increases College Students’ Short- and Long-Term Retention of Mathematics Knowledge", "authors": ["Robin F. Hopkins", "Keith B. Lyle", "Jeff L. Hieb", "Patricia Ralston"], "year": 2016, "doi": "10.1007/s10648-015-9349-8", "canonical_url": "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9349-8", "source_type": "journal_article", "authority_level": "tier1_paper_doi", "discovered_by": "search", "discovery_provider": "sciverse", "fetch": {"fetch_status": "FETCH_VALID", "fetch_provider": "sciverse_content", "fetched_at": "2026-09-12T00:00:00+00:00", "doc_id": "6dc15a82805e8edf16c8b1856860c07941368e51d1ce1a6de0c205686401ed10", "offset": 0, "extensions": {"sciverse": {"doc_id": "6dc15a82805e8edf16c8b1856860c07941368e51d1ce1a6de0c205686401ed10", "offset": 0}}}, "content_hash": "", "dedupe_keys": {"canonical_url": "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9349-8", "doi": "10.1007/s10648-015-9349-8", "title_fingerprint": "spacedretrievalpracticeincreasescollegestudentsshortandlongtermr", "content_hash": ""}, "status": "DISCOVERED"}
+{"source_id": "S-MORANO-RETRIEVAL-PRACTICE-RETENTION", "title": "Retrieval Practice for Retention and Transfer", "authors": ["Stephanie Morano"], "year": 2019, "doi": "10.1177/0040059919847210", "canonical_url": "https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059919847210", "source_type": "journal_article", "authority_level": "tier1_paper_doi", "discovered_by": "search", "discovery_provider": "sciverse", "fetch": {"fetch_status": "FETCH_VALID", "fetch_provider": "sciverse_content", "fetched_at": "2026-09-12T00:00:00+00:00", "doc_id": "1ff36b02b69d64e3cf2efd92680b3407b81c728ed26a85fb124a2731b3d458de", "offset": 0, "extensions": {"sciverse": {"doc_id": "1ff36b02b69d64e3cf2efd92680b3407b81c728ed26a85fb124a2731b3d458de", "offset": 0}}}, "content_hash": "", "dedupe_keys": {"canonical_url": "https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059919847210", "doi": "10.1177/0040059919847210", "title_fingerprint": "retrievalpracticeforretentionandtransfer", "content_hash": ""}, "status": "DISCOVERED"}
+{"source_id": "S-AZZAM-RETRIEVAL-PRACTICE-IMPROVING", "title": "Retrieval Practice for Improving Long-Term Retention in Anatomical Education: A Quasi-Experimental Study", "authors": ["Mohammad Azzam", "Ronald Easteal"], "year": 2021, "doi": "10.1007/s40670-021-01298-8", "canonical_url": "https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-021-01298-8", "source_type": "journal_article", "authority_level": "tier1_paper_doi", "discovered_by": "search", "discovery_provider": "sciverse", "fetch": {"fetch_status": "FETCH_VALID", "fetch_provider": "sciverse_content", "fetched_at": "2026-09-12T00:00:00+00:00", "doc_id": "9804661dd92756cf27bcda2ea2bf01055fec4dd376b7b8ace356b42082c1c2d3", "offset": 0, "extensions": {"sciverse": {"doc_id": "9804661dd92756cf27bcda2ea2bf01055fec4dd376b7b8ace356b42082c1c2d3", "offset": 0}}}, "content_hash": "", "dedupe_keys": {"canonical_url": "https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-021-01298-8", "doi": "10.1007/s40670-021-01298-8", "title_fingerprint": "retrievalpracticeforimprovinglongtermretentioninanatomicaleducat", "content_hash": ""}, "status": "DISCOVERED"}
+{"source_id": "S-ROWLAND-MNEMONIC-BENEFITS-RETRIEVAL", "title": "Mnemonic benefits of retrieval practice at short retention intervals", "authors": ["Christopher A. Rowland", "Edward L. DeLosh"], "year": 2015, "doi": "10.1080/09658211.2014.889710", "canonical_url": "https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2014.889710", "source_type": "journal_article", "authority_level": "tier1_paper_doi", "discovered_by": "search", "discovery_provider": "sciverse", "fetch": {"fetch_status": "FETCH_VALID", "fetch_provider": "sciverse_content", "fetched_at": "2026-09-12T00:00:00+00:00", "doc_id": "e63f7407d2277c2de899b647c3f9e9fbc949ddab83d8af1900e31872804c9e50", "offset": 0, "extensions": {"sciverse": {"doc_id": "e63f7407d2277c2de899b647c3f9e9fbc949ddab83d8af1900e31872804c9e50", "offset": 0}}}, "content_hash": "", "dedupe_keys": {"canonical_url": "https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2014.889710", "doi": "10.1080/09658211.2014.889710", "title_fingerprint": "mnemonicbenefitsofretrievalpracticeatshortretentionintervals", "content_hash": ""}, "status": "DISCOVERED"}
+{"source_id": "S-ZHENG-PRACTICING-MORE-RETRIEVAL", "title": "Practicing more retrieval routes leads to greater memory retention", "authors": ["Jun Zheng", "Wei Zhang", "Tongtong Li", "Zhaomin Liu", "Liang Luo"], "year": 2016, "doi": "10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.05.014", "canonical_url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.05.014", "source_type": "journal_article", "authority_level": "tier1_paper_doi", "discovered_by": "search", "discovery_provider": "sciverse", "fetch": {"fetch_status": "FETCH_VALID", "fetch_provider": "sciverse_content", "fetched_at": "2026-09-12T00:00:00+00:00", "doc_id": "a6f7a317cc0a21e068fdaaf076a3f4b525a4652137dc818853e58789943bcef4", "offset": 0, "extensions": {"sciverse": {"doc_id": "a6f7a317cc0a21e068fdaaf076a3f4b525a4652137dc818853e58789943bcef4", "offset": 0}}}, "content_hash": "", "dedupe_keys": {"canonical_url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.05.014", "doi": "10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.05.014", "title_fingerprint": "practicingmoreretrievalroutesleadstogreatermemoryretention", "content_hash": ""}, "status": "DISCOVERED"}

package/examples/spaced-retrieval-practice/verdict.json

@@ -0,0 +1,93 @@
+{
+  "decision_question": "是否应该用间隔重复与检索练习替代传统集中式复习？",
+  "target_population": "大学程序设计入门课程的一年级学生",
+  "target_context": "16 周讲授 + 实验课，大班教学，有助教支持，线下",
+  "supported_claims": [
+    "间隔检索练习在延迟保持上稳定优于集中复习（多项随机对照与元分析一致）—— E-001、E-002、E-003、E-004。",
+    "隐式检索与显式检索的收益相当，实施形式可以灵活 —— E-002。",
+    "增加检索路径数量可提升迁移表现，价值不限于记忆本身 —— E-006。"
+  ],
+  "uncertain_claims": [
+    "程序设计课程内的直接现场证据少于心理学实验室证据 [无直接证据]。",
+    "收益幅度受材料难度与反馈设计调节，最佳间隔尚未确定 —— E-004、E-005。"
+  ],
+  "contradicted_claims": [],
+  "reason_for_disagreement": "实验室证据与课程现场证据的生态效度差异，而非方向冲突。",
+  "methodology_summary": "纳入研究以随机对照与元分析为主，多数设有延迟后测；现场研究数量有限。",
+  "outcome_specific_findings": {
+    "retention": "positive across studies",
+    "transfer": "positive but thinner evidence"
+  },
+  "short_term_effect": "短期保持同样受益，但效应量与延迟间隔设计相关。",
+  "long_term_effect": "长期保持是证据最一致的受益结果。",
+  "transfer_effect": "迁移有正向证据，但研究数量少于保持。",
+  "risk_effect": "未发现显著风险；需注意练习设计不当可能增加认知负荷。",
+  "applicability": {
+    "suitable_for": "有固定课时的入门编程课程，教师能稳定安排每周短练习",
+    "not_suitable_for": "没有固定复习环节的课程，或无法保证延迟测评的场景",
+    "required_conditions": [
+      "每周固定短时检索练习",
+      "统一的延迟后测口径"
+    ]
+  },
+  "confidence": "High",
+  "confidence_breakdown": {
+    "score": 0.893,
+    "evidence_quality": 0.755,
+    "consistency": 1.0,
+    "directness": 0.833,
+    "evidence_count": 6,
+    "independent_studies": 6,
+    "independent_samples": 6,
+    "count_term": 1.0,
+    "conflict_penalty": 0.0,
+    "unsupported_penalty": 0.0
+  },
+  "recommended_action": "adopt",
+  "decision_rationale": "延迟保持与迁移两个主要结果上都有直接且一致的证据（多项随机对照与元分析，直接性记为 2），实施成本低、风险可控，因此支持在课程内采用。最佳间隔安排与课程现场证据的厚度仍是记录在案的不确定性，纳入采用后的持续监测，而不是阻止采用。",
+  "strongest_support": "间隔检索练习在延迟保持上稳定优于集中复习，多项随机对照与元分析结论一致。",
+  "key_uncertainty": "程序设计课程内的直接现场证据少于心理学实验室证据，最佳间隔设计尚未确定。",
+  "main_risk": "练习设计不当可能增加认知负荷，且收益幅度受材料难度与反馈方式调节。",
+  "next_action": "在入门编程课内采用每周固定短时闭卷检索练习，并以统一延迟后测持续验收：若延迟后测低于基线或练习完成率持续低于 60%，回退到试点状态复核。",
+  "missing_evidence": [
+    "程序设计课程内的随机对照现场研究",
+    "不同间隔安排的直接比较"
+  ],
+  "what_can_be_claimed": [
+    "在延迟保持上，间隔检索练习优于集中复习",
+    "实施形式可以从隐式到显式灵活选择"
+  ],
+  "what_cannot_be_claimed": [
+    "具体到某门程序设计课程一定产生同等幅度收益",
+    "存在唯一最优的间隔安排"
+  ],
+  "exceeds_evidence_boundary": [],
+  "confidence_score": 0.893,
+  "confidence_policy_version": "2026-08-12.v3",
+  "independent_studies": 6,
+  "independent_samples": 6,
+  "extensions": {
+    "action_enforcement": {
+      "policy": "engine/decision_policy.py",
+      "gate": "pre_verdict_gate.decision_action_consistency",
+      "action_before": "pilot",
+      "action_after": "adopt",
+      "basis": "confidence High (>=0.72), decisive support_adoption studies present, and direct evidence (directness=2) on a primary outcome (retention/transfer)",
+      "note": "The earlier pilot label came from hand-written verdict text plus a migration that flattened link directness to 1; the corpus itself meets the ADOPT gate."
+    }
+  },
+  "raw_model_confidence": "Moderate",
+  "raw_model_confidence_breakdown": {
+    "score": 0.893,
+    "evidence_quality": 0.755,
+    "consistency": 1.0,
+    "directness": 0.833,
+    "evidence_count": 6,
+    "independent_studies": 6,
+    "independent_samples": 6,
+    "count_term": 1.0,
+    "conflict_penalty": 0.0,
+    "unsupported_penalty": 0.0,
+    "note": "Adjudicator-stated confidence before the deterministic override; the adjudicator called the band Moderate while the recomputation reaches High."
+  }
+}

package/examples/workplace-ai-assistant/artifact_manifest.json

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+{
+  "result_sha256": "c26e7e1d60d3cf94bcba29233fbda453626aed47f77ea35b425c2535185316e7",
+  "result_zh_sha256": "65376ba253660d3fb6909f8d292ce1bd00ef92478dfa771f59ee95e9a2fc776b",
+  "renderer_version": "1.0.0",
+  "git_commit": "56f5dc3edc6e805c2614767208a83009b0f0a097",
+  "evidence_count": 4,
+  "source_count": 3,
+  "themes": [
+    "claude",
+    "academic",
+    "datalab",
+    "datalab-dark",
+    "presentation"
+  ]
+}

package/examples/workplace-ai-assistant/claims.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+{"claim_id": "C-001", "claim": "AI assistance can shorten customer chat handling in a bounded support setting; throughput is a separate outcome.", "outcome_type": "policy_effectiveness", "evidence_ids": ["E-001"], "status": "SUPPORTED", "pooled_effect_g": null}
+{"claim_id": "C-002", "claim": "ChatGPT reduced time on short professional writing tasks; this is indirect evidence for customer support.", "outcome_type": "policy_effectiveness", "evidence_ids": ["E-002"], "status": "SUPPORTED", "pooled_effect_g": null}
+{"claim_id": "C-003", "claim": "AI can reduce correctness on tasks outside its capability frontier; consulting evidence is indirect for support.", "outcome_type": "implementation_risk", "evidence_ids": ["E-003"], "status": "SUPPORTED", "pooled_effect_g": null}
+{"claim_id": "C-004", "claim": "Experienced, high-skill support staff need separate quality monitoring rather than assumed uniform benefits.", "outcome_type": "implementation_risk", "evidence_ids": ["E-004"], "status": "SUPPORTED", "pooled_effect_g": null}

package/examples/workplace-ai-assistant/evaluation.json

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+{
+  "research_question": "Should an enterprise customer-support team introduce a generative AI assistant?",
+  "groups": {
+    "treatment": "Eligible teams randomly assigned to supervised assistant access, stratified by tenure and baseline performance.",
+    "comparison": "Concurrent teams retaining the existing workflow; document contamination."
+  },
+  "baseline": "Record resolution rate, paid hours, repeat contacts, blinded quality and review costs before allocation.",
+  "post_test": "Assess the same outcomes at pilot end; separately audit privacy and unsafe commitments.",
+  "analysis_plan": "Preregister an intention-to-treat comparison with team-clustered uncertainty and subgroup estimates. Set sample size and noninferiority margins from local baseline variance and operational priorities before enrollment.",
+  "success_threshold": "Expand only if quality is noninferior, verified resolutions per paid hour improve, net cost is acceptable and no serious unresolved safety incident remains; thresholds require local agreement.",
+  "stop_conditions": [
+    "Pause immediately after a verified privacy leak or a serious unsafe or unauthorized customer commitment; investigate before resuming.",
+    "Pause expansion if blinded quality review crosses a pre-agreed noninferiority margin, including within experience strata."
+  ],
+  "extensions": {
+    "gap_id": "G-001",
+    "status": "proposed_not_executed"
+  }
+}

package/examples/workplace-ai-assistant/evidence.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+{"evidence_id": "E-001", "source_id": "S-001", "study_id": "ST-001", "sample_id": "SAMPLE-support-all", "claim_id": "C-001", "title": "Generative AI at Work", "year": 2025, "study_type": "quasi_experimental", "population": "Customer-support agents", "sample_size": 5172, "outcome_type": "policy_effectiveness", "outcome_measure": "Chat handling time; separate throughput summary: about 15% more issues resolved per hour.", "claim": "AI assistance can shorten customer chat handling in a bounded support setting; throughput is a separate outcome.", "direction": "support", "relation_to_claim": "support", "effect_direction": "positive", "decision_relation": "conditional", "source_location": "https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/140/2/889/7990658", "limitations": ["One firm, one tool and a staggered nonrandom rollout; causal interpretation depends on identification assumptions."], "status": "SUPPORTED", "quality_dimensions": {"D1_study_design": 1, "D2_sample_quality": 2, "D3_measurement_validity": 2, "D4_temporal_strength": 2, "D5_directness": 2}, "quality_score": 9.0, "extensions": {"domain": "policy", "policy_outcome": "policy_effectiveness", "teaching_neutral_outcome_token": "completion_time", "directness": "direct", "raw_result": {"metric": "issues_resolved_per_hour_relative_change", "value": 15, "unit": "percent", "role": "separate_throughput_measure_not_completion_time", "ci_lower": null, "ci_upper": null, "p_value": null, "uncertainty_status": "not_extracted_for_this_summary_estimand"}, "standardized_effect": null, "study_total_n": 5172, "note": "Row-specific sample; study_total_n must not replace the analyzed sample. E-004 shares the S-001 cohort and is not separately counted."}}
+{"evidence_id": "E-002", "source_id": "S-002", "study_id": "ST-002", "sample_id": "SAMPLE-writing", "claim_id": "C-002", "title": "Experimental evidence on the productivity effects of generative artificial intelligence", "year": 2023, "study_type": "rct", "population": "College-educated working professionals", "sample_size": 453, "outcome_type": "policy_effectiveness", "outcome_measure": "Self-reported task time: approximately 40% lower; assessed writing quality approximately 18% higher is a separate measure.", "claim": "ChatGPT reduced time on short professional writing tasks; this is indirect evidence for customer support.", "direction": "support", "relation_to_claim": "support", "effect_direction": "positive", "decision_relation": "conditional", "source_location": "https://shakkednoy.com/Noy%20Zhang%20NBER%20SI.pdf", "limitations": ["Indirect evidence, not directly generalizable: brief incentivized writing tasks did not demand precise factual accuracy or customer-specific context."], "status": "SUPPORTED", "quality_dimensions": {"D1_study_design": 2, "D2_sample_quality": 2, "D3_measurement_validity": 1, "D4_temporal_strength": 1, "D5_directness": 1}, "quality_score": 7.0, "extensions": {"domain": "policy", "policy_outcome": "policy_effectiveness", "teaching_neutral_outcome_token": "completion_time", "directness": "indirect", "raw_result": {"metric": "task_time_relative_change", "value": -40, "unit": "percent", "ci_lower": null, "ci_upper": null, "p_value": null, "uncertainty_status": "not_extracted_for_this_summary_estimand"}, "standardized_effect": null, "study_total_n": 453, "note": "Row-specific sample; study_total_n must not replace the analyzed sample. E-004 shares the S-001 cohort and is not separately counted."}}
+{"evidence_id": "E-003", "source_id": "S-003", "study_id": "ST-003", "sample_id": "SAMPLE-consulting-outside", "claim_id": "C-003", "title": "Navigating the Jagged Technological Frontier: Field Experimental Evidence of the Effects of Artificial Intelligence on Knowledge Worker Productivity and Quality", "year": 2026, "study_type": "rct", "population": "BCG consultants in the outside-frontier experiment", "sample_size": 373, "outcome_type": "implementation_risk", "outcome_measure": "Correct business recommendation: about 19 percentage points lower across AI arms; Table 7 has 373 participants, not 758.", "claim": "AI can reduce correctness on tasks outside its capability frontier; consulting evidence is indirect for support.", "direction": "support", "relation_to_claim": "support", "effect_direction": "negative", "decision_relation": "conditional", "source_location": "https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/orsc.2025.21838", "limitations": ["Indirect evidence, not directly generalizable: consultants solving an experimental business case, not live customer tickets."], "status": "SUPPORTED", "quality_dimensions": {"D1_study_design": 2, "D2_sample_quality": 2, "D3_measurement_validity": 2, "D4_temporal_strength": 1, "D5_directness": 1}, "quality_score": 8.0, "extensions": {"domain": "policy", "policy_outcome": "implementation_risk", "teaching_neutral_outcome_token": "accuracy", "directness": "indirect", "raw_result": {"metric": "correctness_absolute_change", "value": -19, "unit": "percentage_points", "ci_lower": null, "ci_upper": null, "p_value": null, "uncertainty_status": "not_extracted_for_this_summary_estimand"}, "standardized_effect": null, "study_total_n": 758, "note": "Row-specific sample; study_total_n must not replace the analyzed sample. E-004 shares the S-001 cohort and is not separately counted."}}
+{"evidence_id": "E-004", "source_id": "S-001", "study_id": "ST-001", "sample_id": "SAMPLE-support-all", "claim_id": "C-004", "title": "Generative AI at Work", "year": 2025, "study_type": "quasi_experimental", "population": "Experienced and high-skill customer-support agents", "sample_size": null, "outcome_type": "implementation_risk", "outcome_measure": "Small quality declines among the most experienced and highest-skilled support staff.", "claim": "Experienced, high-skill support staff need separate quality monitoring rather than assumed uniform benefits.", "direction": "support", "relation_to_claim": "support", "effect_direction": "negative", "decision_relation": "conditional", "source_location": "https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/140/2/889/7990658", "limitations": ["Same study as E-001; subgroup sample size was not extracted. This is not an independent replication."], "status": "SUPPORTED", "quality_dimensions": {"D1_study_design": 1, "D2_sample_quality": 1, "D3_measurement_validity": 2, "D4_temporal_strength": 2, "D5_directness": 2}, "quality_score": 8.0, "extensions": {"domain": "policy", "policy_outcome": "implementation_risk", "teaching_neutral_outcome_token": "accuracy", "directness": "direct", "raw_result": {"metric": "experienced_staff_quality", "value": null, "unit": "not_extracted", "ci_lower": null, "ci_upper": null, "p_value": null, "uncertainty_status": "not_extracted_for_this_summary_estimand"}, "standardized_effect": null, "study_total_n": 5172, "note": "Row-specific sample; study_total_n must not replace the analyzed sample. E-004 shares the S-001 cohort and is not separately counted."}}