citation-network
Veto GatesRequired pass for any deployment consideration
| Dimension | Result | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Scientific Integrity | PASS | Scientific content remained anchored to fetched metadata or source-linked evidence in the legacy review. |
| Practice Boundaries | PASS | The legacy review kept this workflow on the evidence-access side of the boundary, not the advice-giving side. |
| Methodological Ground | PASS | The older review treated the package logic as methodologically aligned with its stated workflow. |
| Code Usability | PASS | The packaged retrieval surface remained understandable at the command and parameter level in the archived review. |
Core Capability87 / 100 — 8 Categories
Medical TaskExecution Average: 96 / 100 — Assertions: 20/20 Passed
You have a citation relationship table (who cites whom) and want to... remained well-aligned with the documented contract in the preserved audit.
The archived evaluation treated You are conducting a literature review and need to identify... as a clean in-scope run.
The archived evaluation treated Builds a directed citation graph from a minimal CSV containing... as a clean in-scope run.
The De-duplicates nodes by identifier (DOI recommended; otherwise... scenario completed within the documented Build and visualize a citation network from a source/target CSV to identify key papers,... boundary.
The End-to-end case for Builds a directed citation graph from a minimal... scenario completed within the documented Build and visualize a citation network from a source/target CSV to identify key papers,... boundary.
Key Strengths
- Primary routing is Evidence Insight with execution mode B
- Static quality score is 87/100 and dynamic average is 83.6/100
- Assertions and command execution outcomes are recorded per input for human review
- Execution verification summary: Script verification 3/3; adjustment=5. build_citation_network.py: OK; export_gexf_html.py: OK; init_run.py: OK