Author mail: the receipt no longer calls the audit log tamper-evident; the Zenodo-community comments send a disputed point to help@ instead of inviting a cover note or a reply to the thread
No author names or real submission events in code, comments, the panel prompt or test fixtures: synthetic names and a synthetic code package; comments describe a submission by month, not by ID
Before the next submission: a revised version links only under the same verified ORCID; a DOI is dead only when doi.org has no such DOI (an outage or another registration agency is "unchecked", never a finding); the authors' surnames are blinded wherever the panel reads them; the per-reference citation lines sit inside the untrusted submission block and the RQC evidence block is declared untrusted; "unanimous" names the reviewers' shared vote; the code digest fetches at most 60 files in 180 s; a forced re-draft keeps the first decision time and the audit log records a draft, never a send.
Decision letter: the blind-review disclosure lists what was removed, item by item, and says what stayed visible to the panel; a failed preprocessing step is disclosed without naming the tool. Public Review Quality Control shows only the dimensions the audit scored.
Open review record: the consensus label comes from the reviewers' recommendations (unanimous / majority / split) and the score spread is stated separately
Revise letter: the new version goes through the same form and gets a new ID, nothing else; a disputed finding goes to help@ with the ID, and a finding we got wrong is withdrawn. No cover note in the abstract field (that field is the deposited abstract).
Revert "Revised versions: the previous submission ID and the author's note travel with a resubmission; the revise letter says so and invites disagreement"
Panel quorum counts two models served by the same HF upstream as two reviewers, not one; OpenRouter reviews get room to finish reasoning before the JSON
register --live accepts the Institute's own Zenodo community inclusion for the archive copy it publishes; never fatal, reported in the curator ping, retried on a re-run
Publish gate: the /publications registry, public review and push refuse without the curator's approval; register --live carries it, every other path saves the entry as ready to publish and tells the curator once; no author is told a held paper is live
Live registration never records a skipped landing page as pushed: it stops with the resume instruction and a re-run resumes at the page step; register-doi.sh names the website checkout; the code/data suite tells founding papers from intake papers
Zenodo archive copy of an ICSAC-registered work takes the type of its Crossref record: a Persistence article is a journal article in Persistence with its volume, whatever the form's resource type
Crossref journal title DOI: journal_metadata carries doi_data when CROSSREF_JOURNAL_DOI is set, as Crossref requires of a journal without an ISSN; unset leaves the deposit unchanged
Crossref deposit links the author's code and data archive: isSupplementedBy, as a DOI for a doi.org link and a URI otherwise, beside hasPreprint in the relations program; regression suite validates every variant against the 5.4.0 schema
Submit signature v2: the signature covers the verified ORCID, name and test-tier headers as well as the body, so a signed request cannot be replayed under another identity or tier; the body-only form is refused on submit unless the deploy-window switch is on; smoke scripts sign v2; regression suite
Reviewer self-identification screen: model or seat named in panel or RQC prose is rewritten to neutral wording, or the sentence is dropped and the curator is told; quotations from the paper pass; regression suite
Pipeline guards: no reprocessing of decided papers, decisions only on papers awaiting one, register --live needs a delivered notice, retries on registry outages, atomic state writes, honest attachment lines
Intake hardening: one value per identity field, bounded lists, a byte ceiling on arXiv downloads, text-only substitutions in mail, sponsor writes need a live subscription
arXiv within its limits: metadata comes from DataCite first (title, authors, abstract, date, licence, and the journal DOI once published), so arXiv's API is not touched; every remaining API call goes through one door (one connection, one request every three seconds for the whole host, Retry-After honoured, a ten-minute cool-off after a refusal or stall so a bad hour cannot stretch a panel run); the citation title search waits its turn or is skipped; the DOI route refuses a preprint already published in a journal, as the upload route does
DOI route: the author chooses the published article's licence (CC BY 4.0, CC BY-SA 4.0 or CC0), validated before anything is written; the worker keeps the choice when it resolves the preprint and records the preprint's own licence beside it (arXiv reports none); the curator summary shows both; a record without a choice behaves as before
Preprints from any server: the upload form takes a preprint DOI, checked against Crossref and DataCite when submitted (a published article, a preprint already published, or a DOI that does not exist is refused; an unreachable registry fails open and the curation team is told), and the Persistence DOI is linked to it; the DOI route sends other servers to the upload form with the DOI; the exclusivity confirmation is stored on both routes (it never was); the acceptance email says it only when it was confirmed
DOI route: an accepted paper submitted by its preprint DOI becomes a Persistence article with its own DOI under the Institute prefix, linked to the preprint by a hasPreprint relation; it gets the author response window, the site hosts the version of record at registration, and the emails name the preprint instead of claiming no other DOI
Stats count every review on record: the published copies of the reviews from before the public flip, the new score-table heading and the old dimension label; a record in both places counts once
The curation team decides and hears appeals: README note to authors, the legacy acceptance comments and the RQC status line; the intake README lists every field the form now collects
Audit 2026-09-28 (evening): a late author response is never overwritten by the window check, an accept waits for a panel report, a review of a paper that studies models passes the redaction gate, a data sentence does not take back a code claim, the stats snapshot never shrinks
Say open review, not peer review: the AI panel with a human curator is not peer review as journals and indexers define it; the share text, README and the cover stamp change, and the cover tool honours ICSAC_WEBSITE_REPO
A paper that says it has code or data must link it: the submit form asks where, a paper with no link anywhere is held for revise and resubmit before the panel, and the published page shows the author's link
