# COMPLETE: COMPLETE

> Living preprint · as of 2026-10-25 · map node X-036 (experiment) · interim record, not a final result.

<!-- lint:exempt:start -->
- [X-036] COMPLETE · COMPLETE · question: Does a completeness instruction (120-220 words, max tokens 700) on the deep35 reader with gold R450 contexts raise the judge ratio vs the identical DEEPREAD run (short-answer prompt) without losing correctness? · result: −0.014 (−0.055…+0.024); confident-wrong 7 → 15. · set v0.1 EN 57, judge Claude Opus, n 57 (v0.1 EN), seeds 1 (seed 42), CI −0.055…+0.024 · verdict: closed (closed: NO by the frozen rule (ratio 0.620 < 0.700; correctness 3.10 vs >= 3.80; confident-wrong 7 → 15 vs allowed +2))

<!-- lint:exempt:end -->
## Outgoing

- ruled out: [G-facts-table] FACTS table (a completeness prompt cost correctness) → https://r4topunk.github.io/boar-research/map/g-facts-table.md

Read chapter 6, The deep tier: https://r4topunk.github.io/boar-research/research/deep-tier.md

## Facts cited {#facts}

Resolve every [F-…] marker in https://r4topunk.github.io/boar-research/data/facts.json. Each line gives the claim, the number with its metric family, set and status, judge, n, seeds, CI, date and caveat.

<!-- lint:exempt:start -->
- [F-517] R8 Completeness instruction: deep reader + gold passages. −0.014 (−0.055…+0.024); confident-wrong 7 → 15 · set UNKNOWN (status UNKNOWN) · judge UNKNOWN · n UNKNOWN · seeds UNKNOWN · CI not computed · caveat: why closed: mechanism raises wrong claims
- [F-653] Completeness prompt on the 35B (COMPLETE): 120–220 words → correctness −0.79, CW 7 → 15 (prompting buys completeness with errors)

<!-- lint:exempt:end -->
---

Cite as: r4to, independent researcher. RatLab — A Boar Research (2026), research record 1.0, as of 2026-10-25. Text and data CC BY 4.0. Fact ids or a link must travel with a quote. How to cite: https://r4topunk.github.io/boar-research/cite/ · https://r4topunk.github.io/boar-research/CITATION.cff.

AI-reviewed, not clinically reviewed. Nothing here is medical advice.