Experiment ·
FACTS-r6
Does asset coverage expansion (1,036 -> 4,233 entities) plus 5 trigger fixes on r5 reach >=85% recall on blind set 4 with 0 false positives?
From the record
- What was tested
- FACTS-r6
- Result
- recall 70 % < 75 % bar
- Verdict
- closed: rule failed, CI excluded the hoped-for gain, a step-0 gate failed, or the mechanism was falsified
- Detail
- closed: FAIL on blind set 4 (recall 70 % < 75 %); r6 kept as head by coordinator and shipped in cut 7 via CUT7 (0 fires on v0.2/V-para)
- Set
- recall-set-4.jsonl (FACTS blind set 4); nearmiss-lc2.jsonl (blind adversarial lowercase); recall sets 1-3 (dev); nearmiss-lc (dev)
- Judge
- none (deterministic gate)
- n
- set 4: 60 (40 fact + 20 near-miss); nearmiss-lc2 40; dev sets 1-3
- Seeds
- deterministic
- Pre-registered
- yes, sha256-frozen
- Reopen if
- recall axis only: see FACTS-RECALL.md and LCRELAX-PROBE.md
Linked facts · 1
- R9 FACTS instant tier: Wikidata table r1–r6R9 FACTS instant tier: Wikidata table r1–r6recall 70 % < 75 % barKinda record, not a measurement (set, status, judge, n, seeds, date: not recorded)Caveatwhy closed: FAIL by frozen rule; shipped by decisionSourceresearch record
reports/CLOSED.md:24Open the data file