问题架构
规范模式deep-review发现。
json
{
"title": "short issue title",
"quote": "exact quote from paper",
"explanation": "reasoned explanation",
"comment_type": "methodology|claim_accuracy|presentation|missing_information",
"severity": "major|moderate|minor",
"confidence": "high|medium|low|unverified",
"source_kind": "script|llm",
"source_section": "methods",
"related_sections": ["results", "appendix"],
"root_cause_key": "normalized-shared-key",
"review_lane": "claims_vs_evidence",
"evidence_anchor": [
{"type": "citation|figure_or_table|metric|section|analysis_artifact", "text": "visible anchor"}
],
"claim_strength": "unsupported|observed|supported|strong",
"missing_evidence": ["specific support that is absent or unverified"],
"allowed_wording": "bounded wording that stays within the evidence",
"forbidden_wording": ["unbounded wording that would require stronger evidence"],
"gate_blocker": false,
"quote_verified": true
}必填字段
titlequoteexplanationcomment_typeseveritysource_kind
指导
root_cause_key当相同问题持续存在时,应在重新审核中保持稳定。gate_blocker仅适用于无法通过提交门的问题。quote_verified应该在运行后添加verify_quotes.py.evidence_anchor,claim_strength,missing_evidence,allowed_wording, 和forbidden_wording是可选的声明证据字段。出现问题时添加它们 与声明准确性、引文支持、图形/表格证据或数据有关 可用性。在下游消费者明确之前不要将它们设置为必需的 版本化模式。confidence遵循有序的梯子high > medium > low > unverified.unverified保留用于无法找到锚点引用的结果 在源中。跑步verify_quotes.py --write-back将降级任何问题 和quote_verified=false到confidence: unverified所以下游 合并和报告可以将其视为证据不足,而不是 默默地保留着最初的自信标签。
可选的捆绑包装
final_issues.json通常是上述记录的顶级列表 (遗留模式,仍然是默认生成的consolidate_review_findings.py). 对于重新审核分数跟踪,它可能是包含相同列表的字典 以及可选的轮级元数据:
json
{
"issues": [ /* records as defined above */ ],
"round_scores": {
"quality": 78,
"clarity": 73,
"significance": 70,
"originality": 75
}
}issues使用dict形式时需要;消费者又回到了 如果不存在则为空列表。round_scores是可选的。键是自由格式的维度名称( 4 维摘要或 9 维 ScholarEval 层都可以工作)。 值必须是数字。scripts/diff_review_issues.py和scripts/render_revision_trajectory.py自动检测 dict 形式。当两个包都没有暴露时round_scores,轨迹渲染被默默地跳过而不是出错。