cases/case06/grading_rubric.json

{
  "case_id": "Case06",
  "title": "Case06 — Theory of dipole moment reconstruction by attosecond transient absorption spectroscopy",
  "atoms": [
    {
      "criterion_id": "F1",
      "dimension": "F",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Establish the specified three-level TDSE, initial state, coupling topology and real physical dipole; equivalent representations require consistent phase/sign mapping.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "The initial state, three-level TDSE and allowed XUV g-a/IR a-f couplings yield a real physical dipole under consistent phases and signs."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: No fixed upstream prerequisite; judge this scientific obligation on its own evidence.",
        "Preserve all other independently valid work; no additional unlisted hard dependency or duplicate deduction is implied."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article p.063121-3, Eq.(11) and coupling paragraph: three-level g-a-f topology, energy gaps and transition moments; coherent physical dipole follows the stated basis convention."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: central physical object. Trigger: the material physical identity is absent or invalid. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "F2",
      "dimension": "F",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Construct a computable positive-frequency-absorption -> real causal response -> finite-XUV-waveform convolution -> reconstructed-dipole chain; mathematically equivalent Kramers-Kronig/transform implementations are accepted.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "Positive-frequency absorption determines a real causal response which is convolved with the actual finite XUV waveform; equivalent KK/transform routes preserve that chain."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: No fixed upstream prerequisite; judge this scientific obligation on its own evidence.",
        "Preserve all other independently valid work; no additional unlisted hard dependency or duplicate deduction is implied."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article pp.063121-1-2, Eqs.(1)-(4), p.063121-3 Eq.(12) and p.063121-5 Appendix A Eqs.(A1)-(A5): absorption, even frequency extension and real causal response."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: central physical object. Trigger: the material physical identity is absent or invalid. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "F3",
      "dimension": "F",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Apply the specified 50 fs decay to the real physical dipole after propagation and before transformation, avoiding Hamiltonian, amplitude or population damping and any extra Fourier window.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "The stipulated 50 fs decay acts on the real physical dipole after propagation and before transformation, with no Hamiltonian/population damping or extra Fourier window."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: No fixed upstream prerequisite; judge this scientific obligation on its own evidence.",
        "Preserve all other independently valid work; no additional unlisted hard dependency or duplicate deduction is implied."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article p.063121-4, Fig.2 caption specifies 50 fs decoherence scale. Applying it to the real dipole after propagation and using no extra Fourier window are explicit task conventions, not an added Hamiltonian relaxation law."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: no independent closure role. Trigger: no independent closure trigger. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "O4",
      "dimension": "O",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Present reconstructible computational evidence distinguishing full finite-XUV convolution from impulse-response-only interpretation, exposing at least one material early/late-time difference and its direction across 100/300/500 as; common figures, differences/residuals, interventions and functionally equivalent organizations are accepted.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "A valid computational comparison distinguishes convolution from impulse-only interpretation and exposes at least one material early/late difference and its direction across durations.",
        "Record object_valid, presentation_adequate and claim_adequate separately; all three must hold for this 0.5-point Output award. Examiner reconstruction cannot supply omitted candidate presentation or reasoning."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: No fixed upstream prerequisite; judge this scientific obligation on its own evidence.",
        "Preserve independently valid work in O1, O2, O3. Propagate only a failure of the actual necessary physical premise, not a composite atom's unrelated missing branch or display defect."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article pp.063121-2-4, Eqs.(2),(7),(10), Fig.3(b-d): finite waveform convolution differs from the impulse response and the distinction grows with probe duration. Eq.(7) is an explanatory approximation, not a substitute for the stated reconstruction."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: no independent closure role. Trigger: no independent closure trigger. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure. Inadequate presentation or unsupported claim alone does not establish that an otherwise valid object is absent or physically invalid."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "O1",
      "dimension": "O",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Present valid, reconstructible, adequately exposed direct and absorption-derived finite-pulse reconstructed dipoles for 100 as, with short-time and claim-sufficient long-time motion auditable and correct duration binding.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "Direct and absorption-derived finite-waveform reconstructed dipoles at 100 as are reconstructible and expose short and claim-sufficient long times with correct duration binding.",
        "Record object_valid, presentation_adequate and claim_adequate separately; all three must hold for this 0.5-point Output award. Examiner reconstruction cannot supply omitted candidate presentation or reasoning."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: all of: F1 (Establish the specified three-level TDSE, initial state, coupling topology and real physical dipole; equivalent representations require consistent phase/sign mapping.); F2 (Construct a computable positive-frequency-absorption -> real causal response -> finite-XUV-waveform convolution -> reconstructed-dipole chain; mathematically equivalent Kramers-Kronig/transform implementations are accepted.); F3 (Apply the specified 50 fs decay to the real physical dipole after propagation and before transformation, avoiding Hamiltonian, amplitude or population damping and any extra Fourier window.)",
        "Preserve independently valid work in O2, O3. Propagate only a failure of the actual necessary physical premise, not a composite atom's unrelated missing branch or display defect."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article p.063121-4, Fig.3(b), caption and adjacent onset/long-time discussion: 100 as direct and convolved dipoles versus impulse response."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: indispensable material component. Trigger: the required output object is absent or physically invalid. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure. Inadequate presentation or unsupported claim alone does not establish that an otherwise valid object is absent or physically invalid."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "O2",
      "dimension": "O",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Present valid, reconstructible, adequately exposed direct and absorption-derived finite-pulse reconstructed dipoles for 300 as, with short-time and claim-sufficient long-time motion auditable and correct duration binding.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "The 300 as direct and reconstructed dipoles are valid and exposed over claim-sufficient long records, not prematurely erased by transform truncation.",
        "Record object_valid, presentation_adequate and claim_adequate separately; all three must hold for this 0.5-point Output award. Examiner reconstruction cannot supply omitted candidate presentation or reasoning."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: all of: F1 (Establish the specified three-level TDSE, initial state, coupling topology and real physical dipole; equivalent representations require consistent phase/sign mapping.); F2 (Construct a computable positive-frequency-absorption -> real causal response -> finite-XUV-waveform convolution -> reconstructed-dipole chain; mathematically equivalent Kramers-Kronig/transform implementations are accepted.); F3 (Apply the specified 50 fs decay to the real physical dipole after propagation and before transformation, avoiding Hamiltonian, amplitude or population damping and any extra Fourier window.)",
        "Preserve independently valid work in O1, O3. Propagate only a failure of the actual necessary physical premise, not a composite atom's unrelated missing branch or display defect."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article p.063121-4, Fig.2(b,c) for the 300 as case and Fig.3(c): persistent long-time direct/reconstructed agreement; record-truncation rejection follows the task numerical-evidence boundary."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: indispensable material component. Trigger: the required output object is absent or physically invalid. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure. Inadequate presentation or unsupported claim alone does not establish that an otherwise valid object is absent or physically invalid."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "O3",
      "dimension": "O",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Present valid, reconstructible, adequately exposed direct and absorption-derived finite-pulse reconstructed dipoles for 500 as, with short-time and claim-sufficient long-time motion auditable and correct duration binding.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "The 500 as direct/reconstructed signals expose timing, phase, envelope and long-time motion with correct finite-probe identity.",
        "Record object_valid, presentation_adequate and claim_adequate separately; all three must hold for this 0.5-point Output award. Examiner reconstruction cannot supply omitted candidate presentation or reasoning."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: all of: F1 (Establish the specified three-level TDSE, initial state, coupling topology and real physical dipole; equivalent representations require consistent phase/sign mapping.); F2 (Construct a computable positive-frequency-absorption -> real causal response -> finite-XUV-waveform convolution -> reconstructed-dipole chain; mathematically equivalent Kramers-Kronig/transform implementations are accepted.); F3 (Apply the specified 50 fs decay to the real physical dipole after propagation and before transformation, avoiding Hamiltonian, amplitude or population damping and any extra Fourier window.)",
        "Preserve independently valid work in O1, O2. Propagate only a failure of the actual necessary physical premise, not a composite atom's unrelated missing branch or display defect."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article p.063121-4, Fig.3(d): 500 as finite-probe difference from impulse response, including late-time structure; full convolution remains faithful."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: indispensable material component. Trigger: the required output object is absent or physically invalid. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure. Inadequate presentation or unsupported claim alone does not establish that an otherwise valid object is absent or physically invalid."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "I1",
      "dimension": "I",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Identify in the submitted 100 as output onset timing, phase, envelope and long-lived oscillation agreement and local differences between direct and reconstructed dipoles.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "The candidate identifies onset, phase, envelope and long-lived agreement or actual local differences in the 100 as evidence."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: O1 (Present valid, reconstructible, adequately exposed direct and absorption-derived finite-pulse reconstructed dipoles for 100 as, with short-time and claim-sufficient long-time motion auditable and correct duration binding.)",
        "Preserve independently valid work in I2, I3. Propagate only a failure of the actual necessary physical premise, not a composite atom's unrelated missing branch or display defect."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article p.063121-4, Fig.3(b), caption and adjacent onset/long-time discussion: 100 as direct and convolved dipoles versus impulse response."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: no independent closure role. Trigger: no independent closure trigger. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "I2",
      "dimension": "I",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Identify short-time agreement and persistent long-time phase/envelope agreement or actual differences in the 300 as output; premature disappearance is not a physical result.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "The candidate identifies 300 as short-time and persistent long-time behavior, not a spurious disappearing trace."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: O2 (Present valid, reconstructible, adequately exposed direct and absorption-derived finite-pulse reconstructed dipoles for 300 as, with short-time and claim-sufficient long-time motion auditable and correct duration binding.)",
        "Preserve independently valid work in I1, I3. Propagate only a failure of the actual necessary physical premise, not a composite atom's unrelated missing branch or display defect."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article p.063121-4, Fig.2(b,c) for the 300 as case and Fig.3(c): persistent long-time direct/reconstructed agreement; record-truncation rejection follows the task numerical-evidence boundary."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: no independent closure role. Trigger: no independent closure trigger. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "I3",
      "dimension": "I",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Identify timing, phase, envelope and more visible finite-pulse departures in the 500 as output, including their long-time visibility.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "The candidate identifies timing, phase/envelope and more visible finite-probe departures in the 500 as evidence, including late times."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: O3 (Present valid, reconstructible, adequately exposed direct and absorption-derived finite-pulse reconstructed dipoles for 500 as, with short-time and claim-sufficient long-time motion auditable and correct duration binding.)",
        "Preserve independently valid work in I1, I2. Propagate only a failure of the actual necessary physical premise, not a composite atom's unrelated missing branch or display defect."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article p.063121-4, Fig.3(d): 500 as finite-probe difference from impulse response, including late-time structure; full convolution remains faithful."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: no independent closure role. Trigger: no independent closure trigger. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "I4",
      "dimension": "I",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Explicitly distinguish impulse response from the finite-waveform reconstructed dipole in the submitted calculation and identify the increasing difference with probe duration.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "The candidate distinguishes the impulse response from the finite-waveform reconstructed dipole and identifies increasing difference with probe duration."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: O4 (Present reconstructible computational evidence distinguishing full finite-XUV convolution from impulse-response-only interpretation, exposing at least one material early/late-time difference and its direction across 100/300/500 as; common figures, differences/residuals, interventions and functionally equivalent organizations are accepted.)",
        "Preserve independently valid work in I1, I2, I3. Propagate only a failure of the actual necessary physical premise, not a composite atom's unrelated missing branch or display defect."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article pp.063121-2-4, Eqs.(2),(7),(10), Fig.3(b-d): finite waveform convolution differs from the impulse response and the distinction grows with probe duration. Eq.(7) is an explanatory approximation, not a substitute for the stated reconstruction."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: no independent closure role. Trigger: no independent closure trigger. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "M1",
      "dimension": "M",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Explain from derivation and submitted evidence how positive-frequency absorption retains the information required for a real causal time-domain response, not merely reciting Kramers-Kronig relations.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "The derivation and evidence explain why absorption plus causality retain the information needed for a real time-domain response."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: No fixed upstream prerequisite; judge this scientific obligation on its own evidence.",
        "Preserve all other independently valid work; no additional unlisted hard dependency or duplicate deduction is implied."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article pp.063121-1-2, Eqs.(1)-(4), p.063121-3 Eq.(12) and p.063121-5 Appendix A Eqs.(A1)-(A5): absorption, even frequency extension and real causal response."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: no independent closure role. Trigger: no independent closure trigger. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "M2",
      "dimension": "M",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Explain why convolution of a finite XUV waveform with the causal response differs from the impulse response and connect that explanation to the identified signal.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "Finite-waveform convolution, rather than an impulse-only picture, explains the identified temporal difference."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: I4 (Explicitly distinguish impulse response from the finite-waveform reconstructed dipole in the submitted calculation and identify the increasing difference with probe duration.)",
        "Preserve independently valid work in M1, M3. Propagate only a failure of the actual necessary physical premise, not a composite atom's unrelated missing branch or display defect."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article pp.063121-2-4, Eqs.(2),(7),(10), Fig.3(b-d): finite waveform convolution differs from the impulse response and the distinction grows with probe duration. Eq.(7) is an explanatory approximation, not a substitute for the stated reconstruction."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: principal mechanism or commissioned conclusion. Trigger: the principal physical mechanism is absent or wrong. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "M3",
      "dimension": "M",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Explain the finite-probe dependence across 100/300/500 as using feature-level evidence from all three calculations and the correct direction.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "Feature-level evidence from all three calculations supports the correct finite-probe-duration trend."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: I4 (Explicitly distinguish impulse response from the finite-waveform reconstructed dipole in the submitted calculation and identify the increasing difference with probe duration.)",
        "Preserve independently valid work in M2, M5, M6. Propagate only a failure of the actual necessary physical premise, not a composite atom's unrelated missing branch or display defect."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article pp.063121-2-4, Eqs.(2),(7),(10), Fig.3(b-d): finite waveform convolution differs from the impulse response and the distinction grows with probe duration. Eq.(7) is an explanatory approximation, not a substitute for the stated reconstruction."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: principal mechanism or commissioned conclusion. Trigger: the principal physical mechanism is absent or wrong. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "M4",
      "dimension": "M",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Determine the fidelity supported at all three durations by synthesizing timing, phase, envelope, short/long-time motion and finite-probe differences, with claim strength commensurate with evidence.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "The candidate synthesizes onset, phase, envelope and early/late behavior to assess supported reconstruction fidelity at every duration."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: all of: I1 (Identify in the submitted 100 as output onset timing, phase, envelope and long-lived oscillation agreement and local differences between direct and reconstructed dipoles.); I2 (Identify short-time agreement and persistent long-time phase/envelope agreement or actual differences in the 300 as output; premature disappearance is not a physical result.); I3 (Identify timing, phase, envelope and more visible finite-pulse departures in the 500 as output, including their long-time visibility.); I4 (Explicitly distinguish impulse response from the finite-waveform reconstructed dipole in the submitted calculation and identify the increasing difference with probe duration.)",
        "Preserve independently valid work in M1, M2, M3. Propagate only a failure of the actual necessary physical premise, not a composite atom's unrelated missing branch or display defect."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article pp.063121-4-5, Fig.4, Eq.(13) and Sec.IV: linear-response/probe-duration fidelity boundary. Actual long-record evidence, processing safeguards and triggered alternative tests are task-defined; no exact correlation value is required."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: principal mechanism or commissioned conclusion. Trigger: the commissioned scientific conclusion is absent or wrong. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "M5",
      "dimension": "M",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Explain near-probe-centre onset timing and phase/envelope agreement from the 100 as signal rather than a context-free similarity metric.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "The 100 as evidence grounds the near-centre onset and phase/envelope explanation rather than an isolated similarity metric."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: I1 (Identify in the submitted 100 as output onset timing, phase, envelope and long-lived oscillation agreement and local differences between direct and reconstructed dipoles.)",
        "Preserve independently valid work in M6. Propagate only a failure of the actual necessary physical premise, not a composite atom's unrelated missing branch or display defect."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article p.063121-4, Fig.3(b), caption and adjacent onset/long-time discussion: 100 as direct and convolved dipoles versus impulse response."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: no independent closure role. Trigger: no independent closure trigger. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "M6",
      "dimension": "M",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Use the submitted 300 as long-time signal to assess continued reconstruction reliability and distinguish physical decay from premature record-truncation/transform disappearance.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "The 300 as long-time evidence distinguishes continued fidelity and physical decay from processing/truncation loss."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: I2 (Identify short-time agreement and persistent long-time phase/envelope agreement or actual differences in the 300 as output; premature disappearance is not a physical result.)",
        "Preserve independently valid work in M5. Propagate only a failure of the actual necessary physical premise, not a composite atom's unrelated missing branch or display defect."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article p.063121-4, Fig.2(b,c) for the 300 as case and Fig.3(c): persistent long-time direct/reconstructed agreement; record-truncation rejection follows the task numerical-evidence boundary."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: no independent closure role. Trigger: no independent closure trigger. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "M7",
      "dimension": "M",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Positively establish with actual long records, feature comparisons or equivalent evidence that claimed time-domain fidelity is not manufactured by truncation, transform processing or display selection; reconcile representations only where an actual disagreement exists.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "Actual long records and feature comparisons establish that fidelity is not manufactured by truncation, processing or selective display; actual conflicts are reconciled."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This scientific obligation applies to an assessable submission; it is not a risk-triggered N/A item."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: at least one of: O1 (Present valid, reconstructible, adequately exposed direct and absorption-derived finite-pulse reconstructed dipoles for 100 as, with short-time and claim-sufficient long-time motion auditable and correct duration binding.); O2 (Present valid, reconstructible, adequately exposed direct and absorption-derived finite-pulse reconstructed dipoles for 300 as, with short-time and claim-sufficient long-time motion auditable and correct duration binding.); O3 (Present valid, reconstructible, adequately exposed direct and absorption-derived finite-pulse reconstructed dipoles for 500 as, with short-time and claim-sufficient long-time motion auditable and correct duration binding.)",
        "Preserve independently valid work in M2, M3. Propagate only a failure of the actual necessary physical premise, not a composite atom's unrelated missing branch or display defect."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article pp.063121-4-5, Fig.4, Eq.(13) and Sec.IV: linear-response/probe-duration fidelity boundary. Actual long-record evidence, processing safeguards and triggered alternative tests are task-defined; no exact correlation value is required."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: no independent closure role. Trigger: no independent closure trigger. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "V1",
      "dimension": "V",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Positively state that the conclusion concerns the specified weak-probe causal linear-response three-level model and the three calculated probe durations.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "The candidate positively limits the conclusion to the specified weak-probe causal linear-response three-level model and three probe durations."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "This positive scientific scope/evidence duty is unconditional; N/A is not permitted."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: No fixed upstream prerequisite; judge this scientific obligation on its own evidence.",
        "Preserve all other independently valid work; no additional unlisted hard dependency or duplicate deduction is implied."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article pp.063121-4-5, Fig.4, Eq.(13) and Sec.IV: linear-response/probe-duration fidelity boundary. Actual long-record evidence, processing safeguards and triggered alternative tests are task-defined; no exact correlation value is required."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: no independent closure role. Trigger: no independent closure trigger. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure."
    },
    {
      "criterion_id": "V2",
      "dimension": "V",
      "points": 0.5,
      "scientific_requirement": "Only when the submitted method, data, anomaly or claim triggers a concrete material risk, exclude it with discriminating evidence or narrow the threatened conclusion.",
      "award_conditions": [
        "A concrete triggered processing/model/claim risk is addressed with capable evidence or narrowed claims; otherwise the item is N/A."
      ],
      "applicability_and_na": [
        "Applicable only when a concrete material risk arises from the submitted method, data, anomaly or claim and threatens a retained conclusion.",
        "If untriggered in an assessable attempt, record N/A with fixed 0.5-point contribution, exclude it from applicable functional-completion counts, make no positive validation-evidence claim and do not block RC4."
      ],
      "dependencies": [
        "Necessary scientific premise: No fixed upstream prerequisite; judge this scientific obligation on its own evidence.",
        "Preserve all other independently valid work; no additional unlisted hard dependency or duplicate deduction is implied."
      ],
      "equivalent_evidence": [
        "Global Fourier, dipole-sign, time-origin and positive display-scale conventions are accepted after physical alignment.",
        "At the stated weak-XUV parameters a clearly justified g-a-only readout is equivalent for the absorption/reconstruction structures; adding a g-f transition or changing coherent preparation is not.",
        "A mathematically equivalent causal Kramers-Kronig or transform reconstruction is accepted. A filter or fit mapping the known direct dipole onto itself is not absorption-derived reconstruction.",
        "Finite-probe/impulse discrimination need not be a separately named figure. Any submitted calculation with the same causal discriminating function is accepted."
      ],
      "source_support": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article pp.063121-4-5, Fig.4, Eq.(13) and Sec.IV: linear-response/probe-duration fidelity boundary. Actual long-record evidence, processing safeguards and triggered alternative tests are task-defined; no exact correlation value is required."
      ],
      "rc_relation": "Role: material validation/scope. Trigger: a triggered, conclusion-threatening material validation/scope risk remains unresolved. Assess the substantive role condition independently of the atomic award; an atom receiving zero does not automatically establish a closure failure."
    }
  ],
  "case_scientific_rules": [
    "Each of the exact twenty criteria is worth 0 or 0.5 points; the sum is Atomic Score on 0-10. Judge the essential scientific core: an immaterial notation or display imperfection alone does not remove credit. Do not interpolate or inherit numerical partial-credit ranges.",
    "Object existence, candidate presentation, candidate identification and physical inference are distinct evidence acts. Examiner-generated plots, slices, fits or diagnostics may verify an object but cannot supply omitted candidate presentation, identification, mechanism or validation.",
    "For every Output atom separately establish object_valid, presentation_adequate and claim_adequate. Credit requires all three. Assess physical identity, global pattern and important secondary structure, not a single superficial resemblance.",
    "Apply only scientifically necessary dependencies, branch-locally. A composite prerequisite failing for an unrelated part does not erase independently established evidence. Identify the exact failed premise and why the downstream argument cannot stand independently; do not turn a half-point result into a mechanical gate.",
    "Risk-triggered validation is applicable only to a concrete threat arising from the submitted method, data, anomaly or claim. In an assessable attempt, an untriggered criterion is N/A and contributes its fixed 0.5 points, but supplies no positive validation evidence and does not block RC4.",
    "Positive model/scope duties are unconditional where specified. Merely omitting an examiner-preferred convergence procedure, control or plot does not create a material risk. A valid run with no assessable scientific work is 0 and RC0 before atom summation; N/A cannot create credit for it.",
    "Research Closure is descriptive and independent of Atomic Score and criterion awards. Evaluate scientific role conditions against their specified facts, not zero-valued atoms; choose the lowest applicable level across required roles of all indispensable/co-primary claims. Supporting claims alone do not determine overall RC.",
    "Numerical defects matter where they damage a physical object or make a scientific conclusion false/unsupported; do not deduct the same defect again as generic incompleteness, missing convergence or validation. A fluent interpretation does not rescue a materially incorrect signal.",
    "Accept physically valid equivalent methods and representations after aligning identity, units, gauge/basis, normalization, signs, support and component relations as applicable. Do not invent a tolerance when the evidence cannot distinguish equivalence from error; retain a bounded issue for review.",
    "Reference verification is required when a material decision depends on resolution, fine structure, component completeness, formula identity or representational equivalence, including nonstandard projections, cropping or reconstruction used for full Output credit. Consult the applicable scientific source and appropriately scoped validated references after establishing observable, case/component and convention mapping. It cannot complete missing candidate reasoning.",
    "A provisional Atomic Score of at least 9.0 or provisional RC4 requires examiner-side focused verification of one central output and one principal-mechanism link against applicable scientific references, checking identity, sign, ordering and overall pattern. This is not an additional candidate deliverable or pixel-matching requirement.",
    "The direct dipole begins slightly before probe-centred zero. Full finite-pulse reconstruction follows timing, phase, envelope and long-lived oscillation; the impulse response alone differs during the first hundreds of attoseconds, increasingly at longer probe duration.",
    "For 300 as, long-time evidence can support persistent agreement over approximately 0-150 fs; a prematurely vanished reconstructed trace is an implementation failure, not a source-physical result. Exact correlation value or evaluation window is not required.",
    "M7 can be established by any one actually used valid duration output with sufficient long-record/feature evidence; it is not hard-gated by success of every duration. Missing cases remain separately assessed.",
    "No absolute vertical scale, fixed source crop, solver, extra Fourier window or named convergence check is a target.",
    "For the interaction-picture state",
    "$$\n|\\psi(t)\\rangle=\\sum_{j\\in\\{g,a,f\\}}C_j(t)e^{-iE_jt}|j\\rangle,\n$$",
    "the standard three-level TDSE contains only the stated $g\\leftrightarrow a$ XUV and $a\\leftrightarrow f$ IR couplings. A canonical full allowed dipole is",
    "$$\nd_0(t)=2\\operatorname{Re}\\!\\left[\n\\mu_{ga}C_g^*C_a e^{-i(E_a-E_g)t}\n+\\mu_{af}C_a^*C_f e^{-i(E_f-E_a)t}\n\\right].\n$$",
    "At the stated weak-XUV parameters, a clearly justified $g$-$a$ readout is numerically equivalent for the graded absorption/reconstruction structures and is acceptable. Adding a $g$-$f$ transition or changing the coherent preparation is not equivalent.",
    "The author decay is applied to the real physical dipole after propagation and before any transform. It is not a Hamiltonian, Lindblad, amplitude-damping or population-damping term. No additional Fourier window is permitted.",
    "With a self-consistent Fourier convention, the canonical source route obtains the positive-frequency absorption from the physical dipole and XUV field, uses the physical even continuation of the cross section, recovers the causal IR-dressed response and folds that response with the finite XUV waveform. In the source convention,",
    "$$\n\\sigma(\\omega)=-4\\pi\\alpha\\omega\\operatorname{Im}\n\\left[\\frac{\\widetilde d_{\\mathrm{phys}}(\\omega)}\n{\\widetilde E_X(\\omega)}\\right],\\qquad \\omega>0,\n$$",
    "$$\n\\sigma(-\\omega)=\\sigma(\\omega),\\qquad\n\\chi_{\\mathrm{IR}}(t)=\\mathcal F^{-1}\\!\\left[\n-i\\frac{\\sigma(\\omega)}{2\\pi\\alpha\\omega}\\right](t),\\quad t>0,\n$$",
    "$$\nd_{\\mathrm{rec}}(t)=\\frac{1}{\\sqrt{2\\pi}}\n\\int_0^\\infty\\chi_{\\mathrm{IR}}(s)E_X(t-s)\\,ds.\n$$",
    "A mathematically equivalent Kramers-Kronig or transform implementation earns full credit. An arbitrary filter or fit that maps the known direct dipole onto itself is not an absorption-based reconstruction.",
    "In all three finite-pulse cases, the directly calculated dipole begins slightly before the probe-centred plotted zero. The full finite-pulse reconstruction closely follows its timing, phase, envelope and long-lived oscillation.",
    "The recovered impulse response alone is not identical to the finite-pulse dipole during the first few hundred attoseconds. The distinction grows with probe duration; for 500 as it is also visible in the later oscillation.",
    "For the 300 as case, direct and reconstructed dipoles remain closely aligned over the long source interval of approximately 0-150 fs. A reconstructed trace that disappears partway through this interval is an implementation failure, not a physical source result.",
    "A correlation coefficient may support the comparison but does not replace feature-level evidence. No exact value or evaluation window is required.",
    "The conclusion is limited to the supplied weak-probe, causal linear-response three-level model and stated fields. The shown cases do not establish arbitrary probe duration, stronger nonlinear probes or general atomic structure.",
    "The reconstruction formulas correspond to article pp.063121-2-3, Eqs.(2)-(4),(11),(12). With the source symmetric Fourier convention $\\widetilde f=(2\\pi)^{-1/2}\\int f(t)e^{-i\\omega t}dt$, the real-dipole identity requires $\\widetilde d(-\\omega)=\\widetilde d(\\omega)^*$ and the physical continuation $\\sigma(-\\omega)=\\sigma(\\omega)$. The causal inverse transform is retained only for $t>0$ before folding with the finite probe. A global convention change is accepted only when absorption sign, time direction, phases and normalization transform consistently. The 50 fs task decay is post-propagation readout processing, not a relaxation term in Eq.(11)."
  ],
  "closure_requirements": {
    "RC0": [
      "The central physical object is absent or materially invalid, or a valid run contains no assessable scientific work. This is a scientific fact determination, not a low-score rule.",
      "Required indispensable claim CL1, central physical object: all of: F1 (Establish the specified three-level TDSE, initial state, coupling topology and real physical dipole; equivalent representations require consistent phase/sign mapping.); F2 (Construct a computable positive-frequency-absorption -> real causal response -> finite-XUV-waveform convolution -> reconstructed-dipole chain; mathematically equivalent Kramers-Kronig/transform implementations are accepted.). Judge the role-specific failure facts, not the corresponding atom scores."
    ],
    "RC1": [
      "With a valid central object, an indispensable material component needed for the commissioned research question is absent or invalid. Presentation or claim inadequacy alone does not establish object absence/invalidity.",
      "Required co primary claim CL2, indispensable material component: O1 (Present valid, reconstructible, adequately exposed direct and absorption-derived finite-pulse reconstructed dipoles for 100 as, with short-time and claim-sufficient long-time motion auditable and correct duration binding.). Judge the role-specific failure facts, not the corresponding atom scores.",
      "Required co primary claim CL3, indispensable material component: O2 (Present valid, reconstructible, adequately exposed direct and absorption-derived finite-pulse reconstructed dipoles for 300 as, with short-time and claim-sufficient long-time motion auditable and correct duration binding.). Judge the role-specific failure facts, not the corresponding atom scores.",
      "Required co primary claim CL4, indispensable material component: O3 (Present valid, reconstructible, adequately exposed direct and absorption-derived finite-pulse reconstructed dipoles for 500 as, with short-time and claim-sufficient long-time motion auditable and correct duration binding.). Judge the role-specific failure facts, not the corresponding atom scores."
    ],
    "RC2": [
      "With the central object and indispensable components present, a required principal mechanism, state-dependence account or commissioned conclusion remains absent or wrong.",
      "Required co primary claim CL5, principal mechanism or commissioned conclusion: all of: M2 (Explain why convolution of a finite XUV waveform with the causal response differs from the impulse response and connect that explanation to the identified signal.); M3 (Explain the finite-probe dependence across 100/300/500 as using feature-level evidence from all three calculations and the correct direction.); M4 (Determine the fidelity supported at all three durations by synthesizing timing, phase, envelope, short/long-time motion and finite-probe differences, with claim strength commensurate with evidence.). Judge the role-specific failure facts, not the corresponding atom scores."
    ],
    "RC3": [
      "With the central object, indispensable components and principal mechanism established, a concrete material validation/scope risk remains unresolved and threatens a central conclusion. It is not triggered by omission of a preferred named check.",
      "Before assigning RC3, establish all six elements: 1. Identify the concrete unexcluded failure mode. 2. Explain its origin in the submitted method, data or conclusion. 3. Identify a fair basis in the task or standard scientific reasoning for recognizing this risk. 4. Identify the threatened central conclusion. 5. Explain why submitted evidence cannot expose/exclude the failure; naming it alone does not resolve it. 6. Give examples of functionally equivalent remedies without prescribing one method.",
      "Required co primary claim CL5, material validation/scope: V2 (Only when the submitted method, data, anomaly or claim triggers a concrete material risk, exclude it with discriminating evidence or narrow the threatened conclusion.). Judge the role-specific failure facts, not the corresponding atom scores."
    ],
    "RC4": [
      "All required scientific roles of every indispensable and co-primary claim close, including applicable material-risk treatment and evidence-bounded scope. Supporting claims do not independently determine RC; untriggered risk N/A does not block RC4.",
      "Choose the lowest applicable level when required role failures coexist. RC has no score cap, floor or multiplier and cannot be inferred mechanically from criterion awards. A scope restriction removes unsupported breadth but cannot repair a wrong signal, absent component or missing principal mechanism.",
      "Close CL1 central physical object: all of: F1 (Establish the specified three-level TDSE, initial state, coupling topology and real physical dipole; equivalent representations require consistent phase/sign mapping.); F2 (Construct a computable positive-frequency-absorption -> real causal response -> finite-XUV-waveform convolution -> reconstructed-dipole chain; mathematically equivalent Kramers-Kronig/transform implementations are accepted.).",
      "Close CL2 indispensable material component: O1 (Present valid, reconstructible, adequately exposed direct and absorption-derived finite-pulse reconstructed dipoles for 100 as, with short-time and claim-sufficient long-time motion auditable and correct duration binding.).",
      "Close CL3 indispensable material component: O2 (Present valid, reconstructible, adequately exposed direct and absorption-derived finite-pulse reconstructed dipoles for 300 as, with short-time and claim-sufficient long-time motion auditable and correct duration binding.).",
      "Close CL4 indispensable material component: O3 (Present valid, reconstructible, adequately exposed direct and absorption-derived finite-pulse reconstructed dipoles for 500 as, with short-time and claim-sufficient long-time motion auditable and correct duration binding.).",
      "Close CL5 principal mechanism or commissioned conclusion: all of: M2 (Explain why convolution of a finite XUV waveform with the causal response differs from the impulse response and connect that explanation to the identified signal.); M3 (Explain the finite-probe dependence across 100/300/500 as using feature-level evidence from all three calculations and the correct direction.); M4 (Determine the fidelity supported at all three durations by synthesizing timing, phase, envelope, short/long-time motion and finite-probe differences, with claim strength commensurate with evidence.).",
      "Close CL5 material validation/scope: V2 (Only when the submitted method, data, anomaly or claim triggers a concrete material risk, exclude it with discriminating evidence or narrow the threatened conclusion.).",
      "Supporting claim CL6 is separately scored but does not determine overall closure: Positively state that the conclusion concerns the specified weak-probe causal linear-response three-level model and the three calculated probe durations."
    ]
  },
  "references": [
    {
      "citation": "Xiaoxia Wu, Linxuan Zhang, Shaofeng Zhang, and Difa Ye. 2021. *Theory of dipole moment reconstruction by attosecond transient absorption spectroscopy*. *Physical Review A*, 104, 063121.",
      "url": "https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.104.063121",
      "scientific_scope": "Theory of dipole moment reconstruction by attosecond transient absorption spectroscopy",
      "anchors": [
        "Wu et al. (2021), article p.063121-3, Eq.(11) and coupling paragraph: three-level g-a-f topology, energy gaps and transition moments; coherent physical dipole follows the stated basis convention.",
        "Wu et al. (2021), article pp.063121-1-2, Eqs.(1)-(4), p.063121-3 Eq.(12) and p.063121-5 Appendix A Eqs.(A1)-(A5): absorption, even frequency extension and real causal response.",
        "Wu et al. (2021), article p.063121-4, Fig.2 caption specifies 50 fs decoherence scale. Applying it to the real dipole after propagation and using no extra Fourier window are explicit task conventions, not an added Hamiltonian relaxation law.",
        "Wu et al. (2021), article p.063121-4, Fig.3(b), caption and adjacent onset/long-time discussion: 100 as direct and convolved dipoles versus impulse response.",
        "Wu et al. (2021), article p.063121-4, Fig.2(b,c) for the 300 as case and Fig.3(c): persistent long-time direct/reconstructed agreement; record-truncation rejection follows the task numerical-evidence boundary.",
        "Wu et al. (2021), article p.063121-4, Fig.3(d): 500 as finite-probe difference from impulse response, including late-time structure; full convolution remains faithful.",
        "Wu et al. (2021), article pp.063121-2-4, Eqs.(2),(7),(10), Fig.3(b-d): finite waveform convolution differs from the impulse response and the distinction grows with probe duration. Eq.(7) is an explanatory approximation, not a substitute for the stated reconstruction.",
        "Wu et al. (2021), article pp.063121-4-5, Fig.4, Eq.(13) and Sec.IV: linear-response/probe-duration fidelity boundary. Actual long-record evidence, processing safeguards and triggered alternative tests are task-defined; no exact correlation value is required."
      ]
    }
  ]
}