| # Codebook: what decided the claim (blind coding) |
|
|
| Context. Each packet is one AI investigation of a simulated magnet powder. The agent had to either NOMINATE a |
| processing route, claiming that three magnets made by it from a NEW batch ("preparation") would ALL meet |
| Hci >= 10 kOe and (BH)max >= 11 MGOe with probability >= 0.95, or RESTRICT, claiming no route does. Magnetic loop |
| readings carry a stated 2% log reading error; magnets of one batch share a batch effect; magnets and pieces also differ. |
| "Body" = magnet. You see the agent's decision rationale, its stated next action, and late reasoning excerpts. You do |
| not see which model it was or whether it was right. Do not try to find out: read only your batch file. |
|
|
| ## Primary code: the argument that decided the final claim (exactly one) |
| - V Variation to next batch. The deciding argument takes differences the agent itself OBSERVED among its measured |
| magnets, batches or readings (scatter, spread, a replicate that came out much lower or higher, a decomposition of |
| reading error versus magnet or batch variation) and turns them into a judgment about whether three magnets from a |
| new batch would all pass. The observed variation must do work in the decision, not just be mentioned. |
| - R Results. The deciding argument rests on whether measured magnets passed and/or by how much (counts of passes, |
| "both passed with margin", "too close to the limit", "best reading"), without turning observed variation into a |
| next-batch judgment. |
| - M Model. The deciding argument is a probability or exclusion from the supplied or fitted physics model / posterior, |
| not anchored on variation the agent observed among its own magnets. |
| - N No pass. No measured magnet on any route passed both limits; the claim rests on failing results (with or without |
| a model). |
| Tie-breaks: if observed variation enters the decisive calculation or sentence, code V even if a model is also used. |
| If the agent mentions scatter but decides on counts or margin, code R. If unclear, pick the best fit and set |
| confidence "low". |
| |
| ## Secondary codes |
| - noise_in_requirement: "Y" if the agent treats the 2% reading error as part of whether the requirement is met |
| (computes pass probability on noisy readings), "N" if it separates reading error from magnet/batch variation or |
| treats the requirement as true magnet values, "U" if not discussed. |
| - one_pass_insufficient: "Y" if the agent states that one or a few passing magnets do not establish the requirement, |
| else "N". |
|
|
| ## Output |
| One JSON object per packet, one per line, nothing else: |
| {"pid": "P01", "primary": "V|R|M|N", "confidence": "high|low", "noise_in_requirement": "Y|N|U", |
| "one_pass_insufficient": "Y|N", "quote": "<=40 words copied verbatim from the packet that best shows the primary code"} |
|
|
