id stringlengths 21 21 | kind stringclasses 3
values | options listlengths 2 6 | target listlengths 2 6 | state stringlengths 164 250 | question stringclasses 7
values | domain stringclasses 1
value | family stringclasses 1
value | source stringclasses 1
value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
v3_39091cbf8dc9bf1c_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.13,
0.36,
0.22,
0.26,
0.02,
0.01
] | A conference submission exceeds the journal scope but is sound; additionally replicates the key finding with an independent cohort. Context: for a top-tier venue, while legacy systems are still active. Reported by the operator. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_d9df7eb228c32eaf_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.32,
0.68
] | A preprint includes raw data and analysis code; additionally reports only the significant subgroup. Context: under the preprint policy, during a scheduled maintenance window. Reported by the monitoring system. | Is this scenario one where: the conclusions exceed the data? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_6587f2ac8d82f85e_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0.03,
0.58,
0.32,
0.07,
0
] | A conference submission addresses the known confound explicitly; additionally has a methods section that cannot be reproduced. Context: in a fast-track review, during normal operations. Reported by the supervisor. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_356246156b2480b4_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.15,
0.32,
0.2,
0.29,
0.03,
0.01
] | A conference submission replicates the key finding with an independent cohort; additionally uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics. Context: under the preprint policy, under reduced staffing. Reported by the automated check. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_430fb718fae719e1_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0.02,
0.31,
0.66,
0.01,
0
] | A conference submission exceeds the journal scope but is sound; additionally reports n=12 with no power analysis. Context: under the preprint policy, during the morning shift. Reported by the automated check. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_f8646ec2348284f0_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.68,
0.32
] | A manuscript includes raw data and analysis code; additionally exceeds the journal scope but is sound. Context: under the preprint policy, while legacy systems are still active. Reported by the monitoring system. | Is this scenario one where: publication is warranted? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_ca9213f9f32295f8_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0.02,
0.11,
0.79,
0.08,
0
] | A grant application cites 3 works from the authors themselves only; additionally claims a breakthrough from a single anecdote. Context: under the preprint policy, during normal operations. Reported by the operator. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_8355ac8315037598_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.1,
0.32,
0.34,
0.2,
0.03,
0.01
] | A preprint cites 3 works from the authors themselves only; additionally uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics. Context: under the preprint policy, during peak load. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_3bc5d3b5760a6122_c | choice | [
"statistics",
"methods",
"novelty",
"framing"
] | [
0.76,
0.05,
0,
0.19
] | A grant application reports only the significant subgroup; additionally exceeds the journal scope but is sound. Context: in a fast-track review, at the end of the fiscal period. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Primary flaw for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_f5d3f3ee78c0ae66_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.63,
0.37
] | A preprint reports n=12 with no power analysis; additionally exceeds the journal scope but is sound. Context: for a top-tier venue, following a recent audit. Reported by the operator. | Is this scenario one where: the conclusions exceed the data? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_243cb6136cddd589_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.51,
0.49
] | A conference submission uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics; additionally replicates the key finding with an independent cohort. Context: in a fast-track review, mid-incident. Reported by the supervisor. | Is this scenario one where: the methods section is reproducible? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_cf6d35dd806ee4f2_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.38,
0.62
] | A manuscript exceeds the journal scope but is sound; additionally replicates the key finding with an independent cohort. Context: for a top-tier venue, during a scheduled maintenance window. Reported by the supervisor. | Is this scenario one where: the methods section is reproducible? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_f39d5d6ce2f409b3_c | choice | [
"statistics",
"methods",
"novelty",
"framing"
] | [
0.18,
0.36,
0.12,
0.34
] | A conference submission claims a breakthrough from a single anecdote; additionally replicates the key finding with an independent cohort. Context: at revision 2, during the holiday freeze. Reported by the monitoring system. | Primary flaw for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_925d768597475078_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0,
0,
0.16,
0.84
] | A grant application exceeds the journal scope but is sound; additionally has a methods section that cannot be reproduced. Context: under the preprint policy, during normal operations. Reported by the automated check. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_f21aca03fbe60337_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.77,
0.23
] | A grant application has a methods section that cannot be reproduced; additionally uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics. Context: under the preprint policy, immediately after go-live. Reported by the review queue. | Is this scenario one where: publication is warranted? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_1b8249df49f58df7_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0.01,
0.02,
0.58,
0.39
] | A preprint addresses the known confound explicitly; additionally has a methods section that cannot be reproduced. Context: in a fast-track review, during peak load. Reported by the monitoring system. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_3d03d2be493af8cb_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.01,
0.08,
0.37,
0.5,
0.04,
0
] | A preprint addresses the known confound explicitly; additionally reports n=12 with no power analysis. Context: for a top-tier venue, during the quarterly review. Reported by the review queue. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_f7c8cca285beca1d_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.78,
0.22
] | A preprint addresses the known confound explicitly; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: at revision 2, during an external partner integration. Reported by the operator. | Is this scenario one where: the conclusions exceed the data? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_47d6719bf1f82281_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.55,
0.45
] | A manuscript uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics; additionally addresses the known confound explicitly. Context: at revision 2, while on-call rotation changed. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Is this scenario one where: the methods section is reproducible? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_a85bb3be566e0a52_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.01,
0.1,
0.29,
0.56,
0.04,
0
] | A conference submission claims a breakthrough from a single anecdote; additionally exceeds the journal scope but is sound. Context: at revision 2, as part of a compliance sweep. Reported by the operator. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_b4623f84529ce9b7_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.02,
0.1,
0.43,
0.33,
0.11,
0.01
] | A preprint has a methods section that cannot be reproduced; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: under the preprint policy, immediately after go-live. Reported by the automated check. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_931b753e757df192_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0,
0.01,
0.45,
0.54
] | A manuscript reports n=12 with no power analysis; additionally reports only the significant subgroup. Context: at revision 2, with staffing at reduced levels. Reported by the monitoring system. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_9c5f31b29ac97cc0_c | choice | [
"statistics",
"methods",
"novelty",
"framing"
] | [
0.11,
0.23,
0.13,
0.53
] | A preprint uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics; additionally replicates the key finding with an independent cohort. Context: at revision 2, under an active deadline. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Primary flaw for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_607fb091f273b656_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0,
0.02,
0.29,
0.69
] | A grant application exceeds the journal scope but is sound; additionally reports n=12 with no power analysis. Context: in a fast-track review, mid-incident. Reported by the automated check. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_e1989e489ce67b2c_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.04,
0.02,
0.07,
0.62,
0.25,
0
] | A grant application claims a breakthrough from a single anecdote; additionally reports n=12 with no power analysis. Context: at revision 2, during the morning shift. Reported by the operator. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_fe1132e8f0d7e636_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.68,
0.32
] | A conference submission reports n=12 with no power analysis; additionally replicates the key finding with an independent cohort. Context: at revision 2, during peak load. Reported by the monitoring system. | Is this scenario one where: the methods section is reproducible? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_189a63f6c7ad0779_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0,
0,
0.18,
0.8,
0.02
] | A grant application has a methods section that cannot be reproduced; additionally reports only the significant subgroup. Context: at revision 2, with a new vendor onboarded. Reported by the monitoring system. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_e008ff8b30588715_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.01,
0.05,
0.18,
0.63,
0.12,
0.01
] | A conference submission cites 3 works from the authors themselves only; additionally exceeds the journal scope but is sound. Context: at revision 2, immediately after go-live. Reported by the monitoring system. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_eb5f2c7a7af1f079_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.09,
0.91
] | A conference submission includes raw data and analysis code; additionally claims a breakthrough from a single anecdote. Context: for a top-tier venue, during normal operations. Reported by the review queue. | Is this scenario one where: the conclusions exceed the data? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_73bb92a0d9bb38a2_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.49,
0.51
] | A manuscript addresses the known confound explicitly; additionally uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics. Context: at revision 2, during the holiday freeze. Reported by the operator. | Is this scenario one where: the methods section is reproducible? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_21891ddb25aec69a_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0.05,
0.39,
0.53,
0.03,
0
] | A preprint claims a breakthrough from a single anecdote; additionally uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics. Context: under the preprint policy, during peak load. Reported by the supervisor. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_676b881bd91a838d_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0.05,
0.57,
0.34,
0.03,
0.01
] | A manuscript reports n=12 with no power analysis; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: in a fast-track review, during the morning shift. Reported by the monitoring system. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_b5516b03ca3cb20c_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0.01,
0.03,
0.53,
0.43
] | A manuscript replicates the key finding with an independent cohort; additionally reports only the significant subgroup. Context: for a top-tier venue, shortly after a software update. Reported by the monitoring system. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_85440eecec40572b_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.8,
0.2
] | A grant application reports n=12 with no power analysis; additionally cites 3 works from the authors themselves only. Context: under the preprint policy, while on-call rotation changed. Reported by the supervisor. | Is this scenario one where: publication is warranted? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_9d709b771bcb1705_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0.01,
0.27,
0.62,
0.1,
0
] | A preprint uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics; additionally reports only the significant subgroup. Context: in a fast-track review, shortly after a software update. Reported by the supervisor. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_ad5adec7578933fc_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0.09,
0.43,
0.46,
0.02,
0
] | A preprint cites 3 works from the authors themselves only; additionally replicates the key finding with an independent cohort. Context: for a top-tier venue, while on-call rotation changed. Reported by the operator. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_791f8a2b105100ca_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.74,
0.26
] | A preprint includes raw data and analysis code; additionally uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics. Context: at revision 2, immediately after go-live. Reported by the review queue. | Is this scenario one where: the conclusions exceed the data? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_cf79a3a064472994_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.01,
0.03,
0.22,
0.55,
0.19,
0
] | A preprint reports only the significant subgroup; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: in a fast-track review, with a new vendor onboarded. Reported by the operator. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_785168cfc32751f4_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0.14,
0.11,
0.55,
0.2
] | A grant application has a methods section that cannot be reproduced; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: under the preprint policy, during peak load. Reported by the supervisor. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_5f0ae8376fd7f7ff_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.01,
0.09,
0.29,
0.55,
0.06,
0
] | A manuscript claims a breakthrough from a single anecdote; additionally replicates the key finding with an independent cohort. Context: under the preprint policy, during the holiday freeze. Reported by the supervisor. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_4d367f6434a7811f_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0.05,
0.03,
0.14,
0.78
] | A preprint exceeds the journal scope but is sound; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: for a top-tier venue, under reduced staffing. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_72f3cc6ac35dea6d_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.01,
0.04,
0.15,
0.56,
0.23,
0.01
] | A preprint reports only the significant subgroup; additionally replicates the key finding with an independent cohort. Context: at revision 2, shortly after a software update. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_c109cf8e0a42b08a_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.0202,
0.2323,
0.5455,
0.202,
0,
0
] | A preprint reports n=12 with no power analysis; additionally replicates the key finding with an independent cohort. Context: at revision 2, during normal operations. Reported by the automated check. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_3f91d78491bd5f5f_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.38,
0.36,
0.1,
0.15,
0.01,
0
] | A manuscript includes raw data and analysis code; additionally uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics. Context: at revision 2, during the quarterly review. Reported by the operator. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_7c8ae80208790b7e_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.83,
0.17
] | A preprint claims a breakthrough from a single anecdote; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: for a top-tier venue, with a new vendor onboarded. Reported by the automated check. | Is this scenario one where: publication is warranted? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_8e6ffbfc1abb396b_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.11,
0.43,
0.09,
0.22,
0.08,
0.07
] | A conference submission addresses the known confound explicitly; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: at revision 2, during a scheduled maintenance window. Reported by the operator. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_ef47ff9dd4342510_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.22,
0.78
] | A grant application reports n=12 with no power analysis; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: at revision 2, shortly after a software update. Reported by the operator. | Is this scenario one where: the methods section is reproducible? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_9e07690387f43c0d_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.21,
0.28,
0.16,
0.24,
0.09,
0.02
] | A grant application includes raw data and analysis code; additionally uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics. Context: at revision 2, under an active deadline. Reported by the monitoring system. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_f88a4af3859939a7_c | choice | [
"statistics",
"methods",
"novelty",
"framing"
] | [
0.75,
0.15,
0.01,
0.09
] | A manuscript cites 3 works from the authors themselves only; additionally reports only the significant subgroup. Context: in a fast-track review, with staffing at reduced levels. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Primary flaw for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_1be099d0d586e001_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.86,
0.14
] | A conference submission uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics; additionally has a methods section that cannot be reproduced. Context: in a fast-track review, during normal operations. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Is this scenario one where: publication is warranted? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_a067719f3cc22bd6_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.63,
0.37
] | A preprint addresses the known confound explicitly; additionally cites 3 works from the authors themselves only. Context: in a fast-track review, while legacy systems are still active. Reported by the review queue. | Is this scenario one where: the methods section is reproducible? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_f9c1802e08bbcf6a_c | choice | [
"statistics",
"methods",
"novelty",
"framing"
] | [
0.92,
0.06,
0,
0.02
] | A grant application claims a breakthrough from a single anecdote; additionally reports only the significant subgroup. Context: under the preprint policy, during peak load. Reported by the supervisor. | Primary flaw for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_c968465d2f9a9ca3_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.67,
0.33
] | A conference submission cites 3 works from the authors themselves only; additionally addresses the known confound explicitly. Context: at revision 2, during the morning shift. Reported by the monitoring system. | Is this scenario one where: the methods section is reproducible? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_ea6303b841a50290_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0.01,
0.03,
0.37,
0.59
] | A manuscript claims a breakthrough from a single anecdote; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: at revision 2, at the end of the fiscal period. Reported by the operator. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_df611d29b0859afb_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.0202,
0.1111,
0.2222,
0.5657,
0.0808,
0
] | A manuscript exceeds the journal scope but is sound; additionally reports only the significant subgroup. Context: under the preprint policy, during a scheduled maintenance window. Reported by the operator. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_3d03d2be493af8cb_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.63,
0.37
] | A preprint addresses the known confound explicitly; additionally reports n=12 with no power analysis. Context: for a top-tier venue, during the quarterly review. Reported by the review queue. | Is this scenario one where: the methods section is reproducible? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_8206b4d26394a5d3_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.01,
0,
0.02,
0.34,
0.62,
0.01
] | A grant application reports n=12 with no power analysis; additionally has a methods section that cannot be reproduced. Context: under the preprint policy, under reduced staffing. Reported by the supervisor. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_cea36ffb17146a3e_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.54,
0.46
] | A manuscript cites 3 works from the authors themselves only; additionally addresses the known confound explicitly. Context: in a fast-track review, shortly after a software update. Reported by the operator. | Is this scenario one where: the conclusions exceed the data? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_89a46c2299895aa0_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0.05,
0.43,
0.46,
0.06,
0
] | A conference submission claims a breakthrough from a single anecdote; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: under the preprint policy, at the end of the fiscal period. Reported by the monitoring system. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_11aa74acbd6c7310_c | choice | [
"statistics",
"methods",
"novelty",
"framing"
] | [
0.03,
0.28,
0.13,
0.56
] | A manuscript claims a breakthrough from a single anecdote; additionally uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics. Context: for a top-tier venue, following a recent audit. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Primary flaw for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_1a886009f2056341_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0.01,
0.05,
0.43,
0.49,
0.02
] | A preprint includes raw data and analysis code; additionally reports only the significant subgroup. Context: under the preprint policy, during an external partner integration. Reported by the automated check. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_f8d185d8ef781977_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.51,
0.49
] | A conference submission cites 3 works from the authors themselves only; additionally has a methods section that cannot be reproduced. Context: at revision 2, during an external partner integration. Reported by the supervisor. | Is this scenario one where: the conclusions exceed the data? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_d5f9140af12217ef_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.01,
0.22,
0.47,
0.27,
0.03,
0
] | A conference submission uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics; additionally cites 3 works from the authors themselves only. Context: under the preprint policy, under an active deadline. Reported by the operator. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_021d4c27ec09a129_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.02,
0.13,
0.23,
0.49,
0.12,
0.01
] | A preprint includes raw data and analysis code; additionally exceeds the journal scope but is sound. Context: in a fast-track review, during the system migration. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_8ec9ed316be80f3d_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0.48,
0.25,
0.18,
0.09
] | A preprint replicates the key finding with an independent cohort; additionally uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics. Context: under the preprint policy, during an external partner integration. Reported by the review queue. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_fbb8807e4f14d2b4_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.02,
0.05,
0.24,
0.48,
0.2,
0.01
] | A grant application reports only the significant subgroup; additionally replicates the key finding with an independent cohort. Context: at revision 2, with staffing at reduced levels. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_9c265217d9eaf0e8_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.77,
0.23
] | A manuscript exceeds the journal scope but is sound; additionally cites 3 works from the authors themselves only. Context: in a fast-track review, while legacy systems are still active. Reported by the supervisor. | Is this scenario one where: publication is warranted? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_d5a3145a0c0c7175_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.03,
0.27,
0.24,
0.42,
0.04,
0
] | A preprint includes raw data and analysis code; additionally exceeds the journal scope but is sound. Context: in a fast-track review, while on-call rotation changed. Reported by the monitoring system. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_9a520ed416737533_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0.02,
0.35,
0.38,
0.24,
0.01
] | A manuscript has a methods section that cannot be reproduced; additionally addresses the known confound explicitly. Context: in a fast-track review, with a new vendor onboarded. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_36715a58c2d3f99f_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.88,
0.12
] | A preprint claims a breakthrough from a single anecdote; additionally reports only the significant subgroup. Context: under the preprint policy, while legacy systems are still active. Reported by the monitoring system. | Is this scenario one where: the methods section is reproducible? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_8b90010b0666bf07_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.76,
0.24
] | A conference submission cites 3 works from the authors themselves only; additionally exceeds the journal scope but is sound. Context: under the preprint policy, during peak load. Reported by the automated check. | Is this scenario one where: publication is warranted? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_54a38942641f4af0_c | choice | [
"statistics",
"methods",
"novelty",
"framing"
] | [
0.71,
0.15,
0,
0.14
] | A grant application reports only the significant subgroup; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: under the preprint policy, during the system migration. Reported by the automated check. | Primary flaw for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_13f0e5fd80c51ba1_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.65,
0.35
] | A preprint replicates the key finding with an independent cohort; additionally claims a breakthrough from a single anecdote. Context: for a top-tier venue, immediately after go-live. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Is this scenario one where: the methods section is reproducible? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_25e252fdd4c69464_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.3,
0.7
] | A grant application cites 3 works from the authors themselves only; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: at revision 2, during the system migration. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Is this scenario one where: the methods section is reproducible? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_06c59c0d65be0b0a_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0,
0.08,
0.58,
0.34,
0
] | A conference submission cites 3 works from the authors themselves only; additionally has a methods section that cannot be reproduced. Context: in a fast-track review, while on-call rotation changed. Reported by the operator. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_c82fbe69363400e9_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.24,
0.28,
0.05,
0.24,
0.11,
0.08
] | A grant application uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics; additionally replicates the key finding with an independent cohort. Context: at revision 2, under an active deadline. Reported by the review queue. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_0d72fb8432782d07_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0.08,
0.4,
0.45,
0.07,
0
] | A preprint has a methods section that cannot be reproduced; additionally addresses the known confound explicitly. Context: under the preprint policy, during a scheduled maintenance window. Reported by the supervisor. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_4591f285dc7e5ea3_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0.57,
0.32,
0.09,
0.02
] | A manuscript addresses the known confound explicitly; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: for a top-tier venue, under reduced staffing. Reported by the automated check. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_f66b76927d828e38_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0.05,
0.43,
0.43,
0.09
] | A grant application uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics; additionally cites 3 works from the authors themselves only. Context: at revision 2, with a new vendor onboarded. Reported by the operator. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_679525ad00ddf4cd_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0.01,
0.05,
0.39,
0.55
] | A conference submission addresses the known confound explicitly; additionally reports only the significant subgroup. Context: at revision 2, during the system migration. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_2c029bb165008089_c | choice | [
"statistics",
"methods",
"novelty",
"framing"
] | [
0.2,
0.38,
0.09,
0.33
] | A preprint uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics; additionally addresses the known confound explicitly. Context: in a fast-track review, with a new vendor onboarded. Reported by the automated check. | Primary flaw for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_d2992a5d971dd147_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0.01,
0.04,
0.69,
0.26
] | A preprint cites 3 works from the authors themselves only; additionally reports n=12 with no power analysis. Context: in a fast-track review, while on-call rotation changed. Reported by the monitoring system. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_101932b3080d083d_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.84,
0.16
] | A grant application cites 3 works from the authors themselves only; additionally exceeds the journal scope but is sound. Context: in a fast-track review, during the system migration. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Is this scenario one where: the conclusions exceed the data? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_c37d19118ec7b250_c | choice | [
"statistics",
"methods",
"novelty",
"framing"
] | [
0.01,
0.08,
0.56,
0.35
] | A conference submission cites 3 works from the authors themselves only; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: at revision 2, during peak load. Reported by the supervisor. | Primary flaw for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_51999c53b5456bcc_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0.02,
0.36,
0.52,
0.1,
0
] | A preprint includes raw data and analysis code; additionally has a methods section that cannot be reproduced. Context: at revision 2, while legacy systems are still active. Reported by the automated check. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_ee64806db6969baf_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0.01,
0.03,
0.29,
0.67
] | A preprint cites 3 works from the authors themselves only; additionally has a methods section that cannot be reproduced. Context: under the preprint policy, under an active deadline. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_f0afe882bda3faa6_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.01,
0.15,
0.42,
0.4,
0.02,
0
] | A preprint addresses the known confound explicitly; additionally cites 3 works from the authors themselves only. Context: under the preprint policy, shortly after a software update. Reported by the supervisor. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_b59868f912360bf2_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0.01,
0.17,
0.6,
0.22
] | A conference submission uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics; additionally claims a breakthrough from a single anecdote. Context: under the preprint policy, during the system migration. Reported by the monitoring system. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_b9158e513c2c1be6_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0.02,
0.25,
0.53,
0.2,
0
] | A conference submission includes raw data and analysis code; additionally reports only the significant subgroup. Context: in a fast-track review, during the holiday freeze. Reported by the supervisor. | Rate significance for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_d981335c7058fa58_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.84,
0.16
] | A conference submission uses appropriate mixed-effects statistics; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: at revision 2, under reduced staffing. Reported by the automated check. | Is this scenario one where: the conclusions exceed the data? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_22c248debbf864db_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0.06,
0.03,
0.21,
0.7
] | A conference submission exceeds the journal scope but is sound; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: under the preprint policy, during an external partner integration. Reported by the supervisor. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_ae9df1dfb4458659_c | choice | [
"accept",
"minor_revision",
"major_revision",
"reject"
] | [
0.02,
0.14,
0.7,
0.14
] | A preprint addresses the known confound explicitly; additionally reports n=12 with no power analysis. Context: in a fast-track review, during the system migration. Reported by the on-call engineer. | Recommendation for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_280d7f6888bd4a6b_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0.03,
0.51,
0.42,
0.04,
0
] | A conference submission reports n=12 with no power analysis; additionally includes raw data and analysis code. Context: for a top-tier venue, during the quarterly review. Reported by the monitoring system. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_fc76a96f7b992c7e_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0.0202,
0.404,
0.5657,
0.0101,
0
] | A manuscript replicates the key finding with an independent cohort; additionally reports n=12 with no power analysis. Context: under the preprint policy, during the quarterly review. Reported by the supervisor. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_c10bd7e3e310db17_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0,
0.01,
0.14,
0.5,
0.33,
0.02
] | A manuscript includes raw data and analysis code; additionally claims a breakthrough from a single anecdote. Context: in a fast-track review, mid-incident. Reported by the monitoring system. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_30cd8506458bad78_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.45,
0.55
] | A manuscript reports n=12 with no power analysis; additionally has a methods section that cannot be reproduced. Context: at revision 2, during the system migration. Reported by the monitoring system. | Is this scenario one where: the conclusions exceed the data? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_01493ed3312f37c4_c | choice | [
"statistics",
"methods",
"novelty",
"framing"
] | [
0.01,
0.1,
0.53,
0.36
] | A grant application replicates the key finding with an independent cohort; additionally cites 3 works from the authors themselves only. Context: under the preprint policy, with staffing at reduced levels. Reported by the monitoring system. | Primary flaw for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_56fbe2e307cb1317_c | choice | [
"statistics",
"methods",
"novelty",
"framing"
] | [
0.7,
0.1,
0.03,
0.17
] | A manuscript cites 3 works from the authors themselves only; additionally reports only the significant subgroup. Context: for a top-tier venue, mid-incident. Reported by the automated check. | Primary flaw for this scenario. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_a95c7711546e9a16_n | noul | [
"false",
"true"
] | [
0.88,
0.12
] | A preprint reports only the significant subgroup; additionally reports n=12 with no power analysis. Context: in a fast-track review, during an external partner integration. Reported by the monitoring system. | Is this scenario one where: publication is warranted? | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
v3_a6333635a4232d7b_s | score | [
"0",
"1",
"2",
"3",
"4",
"5"
] | [
0.01,
0,
0.02,
0.27,
0.67,
0.03
] | A conference submission reports only the significant subgroup; additionally has a methods section that cannot be reproduced. Context: at revision 2, while legacy systems are still active. Reported by the automated check. | Rate scientific rigor for this scenario on a 0-5 scale. | peer_review | science | yuri_v3 |
End of preview. Expand in Data Studio
JEV corpus - peer_review
7,783 typed calibrated decision rows from the jev-distill-corpus-v3 corpus (domain: peer_review).
Each row is one typed decision: kind (noul / choice / score), a state, a question, options, and a target probability distribution over the options.
Part of the per-domain split of SargeDev/jev-distill-corpus-v3 - the full corpus in one repo.
Domains:
- Downloads last month
- 34