Release 0.4.1 / 20 October 2026

Independent review and publication status

A concrete source packet and a public status record for the actions that editing a website cannot complete.

Current external status

ItemStatusNext verifiable action
Public repositoryPrepared; not published from an authenticated project account.Publish the research bundle, retain its release tag and record the public URL.
Archived release DOINo project DOI issued.Deposit the final research archive from the project account; add the issued DOI only after publication.
Founder ORCIDNot supplied or identity-verified.Christopher must register or identify his own ORCID; a same-name search is insufficient.
Protocol registrationUnregistered draft.Complete pilot-based decisions, then timestamp the frozen protocol before confirmatory collection.
Independent human reviewNo completed review recorded.A separate reviewer must disclose identity, scope, methods and potential conflicts.

What an independent reviewer receives

Source, data, expected outputs, licenses and metadata

  1. Check the archive checksum and read the scope statements.
  2. Run python verification/reproduce.py using Python 3.9 or later. Node.js is needed only for the optional JavaScript comparison.
  3. Record the environment, exact release, commands, failed checks and differences. Expected-output agreement is reproducibility; inspect the equations and controls separately.
  4. Review claim/source roles, observation models and statistical assumptions. Identify any result whose stated scope exceeds what was tested.
  5. Return the report with permission for publication and attribution. A successful publisher rerun is never relabeled as independent review.

Identity and publishing packet

The source bundle contains a CITATION.cff, codemeta.json, a deposit description, an independence report template and scoped licenses. DOI, ORCID and repository fields stay absent until real values are verified. Publication is not a scientific endorsement.