{"CAPTION FIG1.png": "'Figure 1: The step-by-step process of a FAF over its lifetime.\\n\\n'", "CAPTION FIG2.png": "'Figure 2: A graphical representation of arguments and relations in the update framework from Example 3. Nodes represent proposal (\\\\(\\\\mathcal{P}\\\\)), increase (\\\\(\\\\uparrow\\\\)), decrease (\\\\(\\\\downarrow\\\\)), pro (\\\\(+\\\\)) and con (\\\\(-\\\\)) arguments, while dashed/solid edges indicate, resp., the \\\\(\\\\mathcal{R}^{\\\\mathcal{P}}\\\\mathcal{R}\\\\) relations.\\n\\n'", "CAPTION TAB1.png": "'\\n\\n## References\\n\\n* [1] A. A. K. K. (1999) The structure of the \\\\(\\\\mathbb{R}^{3}\\\\)-structure of the \\\\(\\\\mathbb{R}^{3}\\\\)-structure. _Journal of Computational Physics_, 123(1):1-12, 1994.\\n\\n[MISSING_PAGE_POST]\\n\\n'", "CAPTION TAB2.png": "'\\n\\n\\\\begin{table}\\n\\\\begin{tabular}{l l'", "CAPTION TAB3.png": "'\\n\\n\\\\begin{table}\\n\\\\begin{tabular}{l l} \\\\hline \\\\hline  & \\\\\\\\ \\\\end{tabular}\\n\\\\end{table}\\nTable 3: Auxiliary results from the experiment, where \\\\(\\\\overline{C}\\\\) is the average confidence score, \u2018Forecasts\u2019 is number of forecasts made in each question and \u2018Irrational Forecasts\u2019 the number in each question which violated each constraint in \u00a74.1.\\n\\n'"}