Batch 6: Three Risk-Ranked Entries Source-Checked
Outcome: All three entries are source_checked for their declared claim-traceability scope after revision and independent read-only post-edit review. None is expert_reviewed; source checking does not prove an argument true or settle a disputed interpretation.
What changed
- Simpson’s Paradox — The table is now identified as Charig et al.’s 1986 kidney-stone study, not generic teaching data. The primary BMJ paper’s Table II confirms the figures and its methods define the second group as mean stone diameter ≥2 cm or multiple stones. The article explains the arithmetic reversal while distinguishing observed rates from causal treatment effects. An independent review confirmed the arithmetic and wording. See the evidence record.
- Fitch’s Paradox of Knowability — The proof sketch now states its assumptions, including applying knowability to a compound proposition, and limits the implication to theories that accept the relevant unrestricted principle and logic. It distinguishes Fitch’s 1963 publication from the anonymous-referee and later Church/Parry attribution history. The full proof was checked against the relevant SEP sections; Fitch’s full paper was not accessed, a limit recorded in the article and evidence record. Independent review found no correction necessary.
- The Hole Argument — The article now distinguishes active diffeomorphisms from coordinate relabeling and makes physical indeterminism conditional on treating diffeomorphism-related models as distinct worlds. It does not present relationism as a necessary conclusion and qualifies extensions to other theories. Relevant portions of Earman and Norton’s 1987 paper and the SEP were read; Einstein’s 1914 and 1916 passages were consulted through Norton’s translation/transcription, not the complete original German papers. An independent review caught an ambiguous dataset chronology, which was corrected. See the evidence record.
The three dataset records now match their articles’ Further Reading URLs. No public review-status field was added.
Review limits and audit count
The audits cover material claims and attributions, not exhaustive literature coverage. The kidney-stone study is historical and is not a treatment recommendation. Fitch’s full 1963 article and Einstein’s complete original German papers were not directly consulted; these access limits are recorded. The relevant formal proof, modern philosophical argument, and competing interpretations are supported by appropriate scholarly sources. No expert review is claimed.
After this batch, 26 of 57 expansion entries have received claim-level audits; 31 remain outside these audits. Work remains local, uncommitted, and unpushed on audit/source-review-high-risk.
The consolidated batch evidence ledger contains the three full item records and review details.