Corpus 1,272 assessed · 1,173 scored · 643 reproduced ≥75 · 168 flagged ·∅ 74.1/100
← New search

Clinical and molecular correlation defines activity of physiological pathways in life-sustaining kidney xenotransplantation.

Nat Commun · 2023
L1 69/100 3/4
Why this verdict

The main results reproduced, with only marginal, non-material deviations.

Reproduced on the brainbox compute brainarbeit.com
Scoring basis — itemised

Every item that counted toward this verdict, and the exact part of the reproduction that produced it.

Supporting (toward a concern)
Content-critical question only partially held
+2 pts
From: Q8 · Severity of the miss (overall human judgment) 🟡
Minor / cosmetic deviation
+1 pts
From: Q3 · Location of the main deviation 🟡
Minor / cosmetic deviation
+1 pts
From: Q6 · Severity of the deviation 🟡
Concordant (toward reproduced)
Code + data deposited & functional
-2 pts
From: Data & code availability Available & functional
Total score +2
✓ What held up
  • Reported values were directly comparable
  • No authors-side cause for any deviation
  • Reported values are derivable from the shared data
  • The central claim held under reproduction
What did not (or only partly)
  • 🟡Could not use the authors’ exact input data
  • 🟡A deviation arose in the data or preprocessing
  • 🟡The deviation was non-trivial in magnitude
  • 🟡Overall, the reproduction showed a material discrepancy
How its reproducibility compares
69/100
Reproducibility score
0.3 SD below mean
vs. all fields · 1173 studies
🎯 Scores higher than 35% of all assessed papers rank 745 of 1173 scored

A 0–100 reproducibility-quality score from the per-question grades, shown as a z-score: standard deviations above (+) or below (−) the mean of comparable assessments.

Reproduction agent’s raw note

PARTIAL reproduction, described well enough to reproduce. The authors' published R code (github.com/egenesis/Xenokidney-Physiology-Nature-Communications, single Rmd) runs a deterministic DESeq2 bulk DE (biopsy vs contralateral) starting from a DESeqDataSet that GEO ships as GSE210556_kidney_rnaseq.RDS (6.8 MB; the code's local 'nhp_timeseries_dds.RDS'). I re-ran that exact pipeline on «our HPC» (DESeq2 1.50.2/apeglm 1.32.0; paper used 1.36.0) on the 27-sample analysis set. RESULT: every reported gene reproduces in DIRECTION and SIGNIFICANCE; CASR (1.26 vs 1.3) and CALB1 (2.30 vs 2.3) are quantitatively exact; AGT/REN/CLDN14/CYP27B1 match in sign and order of magnitude (LFC differs 0.4-0.85). DEG count 1868 vs reported 1742 (+7.2%; up 954 vs 847, down 914 vs 895). NOT a 1:1 byte match because (a) version gap DESeq2 1.50 vs 1.36, and (b) three QC-excluded contralateral samples (pigs 1501/1502/21450) are ABSENT from the GEO-deposited object, so the exact n could not be matched. AUDITABLE FINDING: the paper Methods describe a pig-ID covariate model, but the shipped code uses ~sample_source only, and the ~sample_source model reproduces the reported numbers MUCH better (CALB1 2.30 exact vs covariate-model 1.32) -> reported values came from the published code, not the Methods-text model. No fabrication signal: shipped data+code regenerate the reported effects. NOT ATTEMPTED (out of scope / hard-20%): pathfindR KEGG/GO/Reactome enrichment (Fig 1e/1f, stochastic active-subnetwork search over unpinned Biogrid PIN + KEGG version); scRNA-seq heatmaps (Fig 3/4, start from a separate pre-computed SCE RDS not in GSE210556); PCA % (no numeric value in text); Salmon re-quant from RAW.tar (944 MB, redundant - DDS already encodes counts). Grades are provisional machine judgments for a human auditor.

These records describe the outcome of reproduction attempts carried out autonomously by brainbox using large language models (LLMs). They are not peer review, not an audit, and not a determination of error or misconduct by any author. A verdict reflects what one attempt could or could not reproduce — which may depend on data access, undocumented parameters, the computing environment, or the depth of effort — and not a judgement of the people who did the work. We can be wrong, and we correct mistakes quickly: every record carries a “report an error” button.

Assessment versions

Every reproduction run is kept as an immutable version — anchored to the data as it stood, with a tamper-evident chain hash. A rerun (e.g. after an author updates a deposit) adds a new version; the previous one stays on record.

  1. v1 current initial assessment Score 69
    assessed: 2026-06-15 ⛓ eaecbd15b385
✎ I am an author of this paper

Updated or fixed a deposit, or is there an erratum? Ask us to re-run the metrics. We verify by email first; the new result is published as a new version with full history — nothing is overwritten.

Reason for the rerun

We email you a confirmation link first. The rerun is an objective re-measurement — it cannot change the verdict in your favour, only ask us to look again.

Provenance — full disclosure

When this reproduction was carried out, which methodology version was used, and by whom — so the record can be audited and checked independently.

Reproduced
2026-06-15
Rubric version
v1.0
Assessed by
🤖 AI curator · claude (ai-curator room) · v1.0 · run #1 2026-06-15
no human curator yet
Last updated
2026-08-05

Provisional, curator- or AI-assessed, and independently checkable. A reproduction outcome states what one attempt could reproduce — not a judgement of the authors.

Deep full-text extraction

Model: opus
Founding hypothesis

Can porcine kidney xenografts from gene-edited minipigs faithfully recapitulate renal endocrine functions—xenograft growth, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-system (RAAS) participation, and calcium-vitamin D-PTH/electrolyte regulation—after life-sustaining transplantation into non-human primates?

Core claims
  • Porcine kidney xenografts transplanted into NHPs show only modest growth over time. finding
  • Porcine xenografts do not substantially contribute to recipient (NHP) RAAS pathway activity; porcine-derived renin does not efficiently initiate NHP RAAS. finding
  • PTH-independent hypercalcemia and hypophosphatemia are common after kidney xenotransplantation. finding
  • The recipient calcium-vitamin D-PTH axis and bone are not the sources of dysregulated calcium and phosphorus (PTH is appropriately suppressed in response to hypercalcemia). mechanism
  • Normal or low urine calcium in the context of hypercalcemia indicates renal retention of calcium by the xenograft. finding
  • Combined clinical chemistry, hormone assays, ultrasonography, and porcine-specific RNA-seq can define xenograft endocrine pathway activity to inform clinical trial design. method
  • RNA-seq shows upregulation of calcium-handling genes (CLDN14, CaSR, CALB1) in xenograft biopsies versus contralateral untransplanted kidney. finding
Experimental setups
Assay System Perturbation Readout Platform
bulk RNA-seq (porcine transcripts only; DESeq2 + pathfindR pathway analysis) Yucatan minipig kidney xenografts in cynomolgus macaques (biopsy, necropsy, contralateral untransplanted kidney) kidney xenotransplantation (gene-edited porcine donor) differential gene expression / enriched pathways
serial ultrasonography cynomolgus macaque kidney xenograft recipients (n=17) kidney xenotransplantation xenograft long-axis length (sagittal plane), absolute and relative change over time
plasma renin activity assay (in vitro generated Angiotensin I) NHP (cynomolgus macaque) xenotransplant recipients kidney xenotransplantation (pre vs post) Angiotensin I generated (pg/mL/6 h)
aldosterone assay NHP xenotransplant recipients kidney xenotransplantation (pre vs post) serum aldosterone level
clinical chemistry (serum/urine electrolytes and creatinine) cynomolgus macaque xenotransplant recipients (n=17) kidney xenotransplantation serum creatinine, calcium, phosphorus, sodium, potassium; urinary calcium/phosphorus normalized to creatinine
hormone immunoassays (calcifediol, calcitriol, PTH, PTHrP) NHP xenotransplant recipients (n=6) kidney xenotransplantation (pre vs post) serum calcifediol, calcitriol, PTH, PTHrP levels
beta-C-terminal-telopeptide (CTx) assay NHP xenotransplant recipients kidney xenotransplantation (pre vs post) bone resorption marker CTx
histopathology parathyroid and thyroid tissue from single long-term survivor (M2519, 511 days) kidney xenotransplantation tissue abnormality (hypo/hyperplasia)
Key results
  • Xenograft size increased modestly but significantly over time (absolute and relative measures). 0.04 cm per month (absolute); 0.7% per month (relative)
  • Plasma renin activity decreased markedly after xenotransplantation versus pre-transplant. ~7.1% of pre-transplant level by 30-40 days PTT; ~4.3% by 80-90 days PTT
  • AGT and REN were among the most upregulated porcine transcripts, suggesting reduced negative feedback inhibition. AGT LFC=2.5 (Padj<5E-7); REN LFC=4.5 (Padj<9E-18)
  • Hypercalcemia developed in the majority of recipients by 30 days PTT. 82% (14/17) ≥1 elevated calcium; 35% (6/17) ≥1 severe (>14 mg/dL)
  • Hypophosphatemia developed in most recipients by day 30 PTT. 88% (15/17) below normal; 47% (8/17) severe (<1 mg/dL)
  • PTH was suppressed in all tested animals after transplant, an appropriate response to hypercalcemia; no PTHrP detected. 100% (6/6), P<0.001
  • CLDN14 and other calcium-handling genes were upregulated in xenograft biopsies vs contralateral kidney. CLDN14 LFC=4.4 (Padj<4E-13); CALB1 LFC=2.3 (Padj<1E-4); CaSR LFC=1.3 (Padj<1E-4); TRPV5 LFC=0.2 (Padj=0.64)
  • Urine phosphorus to creatinine ratio increased significantly in the 0-30 day post-transplant period; urine calcium showed a non-significant trend toward decrease. urine phosphorus P<0.001; urine calcium P=0.70
Key statistics
  • count 1742 porcine genes differentially expressed (847 LFC>0.5; 895 LFC<-0.5), Padj<0.05 (biopsy vs contralateral untransplanted kidney DEGs)
  • fold_change REN LFC=4.5, Padj<9E-18 (renin among most upregulated transcripts)
  • fold_change AGT LFC=2.5, Padj<5E-7 (angiotensinogen upregulated)
  • fold_change CLDN14 LFC=4.4, Padj<4E-13 (claudin-14 dramatically increased (calcium reabsorption))
  • count 82% (14/17) hypercalcemia; 35% (6/17) severe hypercalcemia >14 mg/dL (calcium dysregulation by 30 days PTT)
  • count 88% (15/17) hypophosphatemia; 47% (8/17) severe <1 mg/dL (phosphorus below normal by day 30 PTT)
  • pvalue P<0.001 (PTH suppression after transplant (100%, 6/6))
  • other PRA ~7.1% of pre-transplant by 30-40 days; ~4.3% by 80-90 days (reduced plasma renin activity post-xenotransplant)

Statistical methods review

Model: opus

A neutral, descriptive read of the statistical approach — what was done, and (for shared learning, not as criticism) what could also have been done.

This preclinical study of pig-to-non-human-primate kidney xenotransplantation (17 recipients) combined longitudinal clinical chemistry, hormone/enzyme assays, serial ultrasonography, and kidney RNA-sequencing. Differential gene expression was assessed with DESeq2 (Wald test, Benjamini-Hochberg FDR), followed by pathway/network enrichment with pathfindR (hypergeometric test on FDR-adjusted DESeq2 results); longitudinal size and pre-vs-post hormone/electrolyte comparisons used fixed-effects/generalized linear models incorporating recipient ID, and trends were visualized with LOESS smoothing and 95% confidence bands. Results were largely reported as box-and-whisker plots (median/IQR) and longitudinal scatter with LOESS estimates, with selected p-values and log2 fold changes reported.

Replicationbiological Sample size17 recipients with survival >60 days analyzed; per-panel n stated in figure legends (e.g., n=17, 16, 12, 9, 7, 6, 4); no formal power/sample-size calculation described Groupspre- vs post-xenotransplant within recipients; biopsy vs contralateral untransplanted kidney; xenograft vs allograft comparison group (n=4) Pairingmixed Randomization/blindingnot stated Dispersionmixed Exact p-valuesno Effect sizesyes Confidence intervalsyes Multiplicity correctionBenjamini-Hochberg FDR (for DESeq2 gene-level p-values); pathfindR enrichment run on FDR-adjusted results
Statistical tests used
Test Applied to n Assumptions
DESeq2 Wald test (differential gene expression) Fig 1d volcano plot, biopsy vs contralateral untransplanted kidney; gene-level LFC/p-values throughout (e.g., AGT, REN, CLDN14, CaSR, TRPV5, CALB1) 9 contralateral, 16 biopsy, 4 necropsy samples (biologically independent); biopsy vs CUK comparison not stated
pathfindR hypergeometric (enrichment) test Fig 1e,f; Fig 3d,e; Fig 4e pathway/subnetwork enrichment FDR-adjusted DESeq2 gene results as input not stated
Fixed-effects model (linear) for longitudinal size xenograft length over time, absolute (0.04 cm/month, P<0.001) and relative (0.7%/month, P<0.001); Supplementary Tables 4,5 17 biologically independent transplants not stated
Generalized linear model with transplant bin (pre vs post) and recipient ID as factors plasma renin activity (Fig 3b), aldosterone (Fig 3c), urinary calcium/creatinine (Fig 4c), urinary phosphorus/creatinine (Fig 4d) n=7 (renin, Fig 3b), n=6 (aldosterone, Fig 3c), n=12 (urinary Ca and P, Fig 4c,d) not stated
Comparison of pre- vs post-transplant PTH (P<0.001) Fig 5d PTH suppression in 6/6 animals 6 animals not stated
LOESS non-parametric regression (descriptive smoothing, not a hypothesis test) serum creatinine (Fig 1b), graft length (Fig 2b,c), serum calcium/phosphorus (Fig 4a,b) 17 biologically independent transplants na
Approaches that could also have been used
  • Pre- vs post-transplant hormone, renin, and electrolyte comparisons were analyzed with generalized linear / fixed-effects models using recipient ID as a factor.
    Could also: Linear mixed-effects models with a random intercept (and possibly random slope) per animal could also be used. — A mixed-effects formulation explicitly models the within-animal correlation of repeated measures via random effects and would also handle unbalanced sampling, offering one transparent way to represent the repeated-measures structure.
  • Many clinical/hormone outcomes were summarized with box-and-whisker plots showing median and IQR.
    Could also: Reporting accompanying summary statistics such as mean ± SD, or a 95% confidence interval for the group difference alongside the plots, would also be informative. — Adding an interval estimate for the effect itself conveys both the magnitude and the uncertainty of the pre-vs-post change, which complements the distributional picture given by the box plot, especially helpful at small n.
  • Multiplicity correction (Benjamini-Hochberg) was applied within the RNA-seq differential expression and pathway analyses.
    Could also: A correction (e.g., Benjamini-Hochberg or Bonferroni) could also be applied across the several clinical/biochemical hypothesis tests (renin, aldosterone, calcium, phosphorus, PTH, urinary ratios). — Extending an explicit multiplicity framework to the panel of physiological comparisons would also bound the family-wise or false-discovery rate across that set of tests in the same way it is bounded for the gene-level analyses.
  • Longitudinal trends in size and chemistries were displayed using LOESS smoothing with 95% confidence bands.
    Could also: A parametric or semi-parametric longitudinal model (e.g., generalized additive mixed model, or a spline term within a mixed model) could also describe the time trend. — A model-based time trend would also yield an estimated slope or curve with a formal confidence interval and a significance test, allowing the visual LOESS pattern to be tied directly to an inferential statement while still accommodating non-linearity.
  • Statistical assumptions for the tests were not explicitly stated in the text.
    Could also: Reporting the assumed error/link family for the GLMs and any diagnostic checks (e.g., residual or distributional checks), or using a nonparametric alternative (e.g., Wilcoxon signed-rank for paired pre-vs-post), would also be an option. — Stating the modeling assumptions or pairing a robust nonparametric test would also help readers gauge how distributional features of small-n biomarker data relate to the reported p-values.
  • The xenograft cohort was compared to a separate allotransplant group (n=4) descriptively to contextualize calcium/phosphorus and renin findings.
    Could also: A formal between-group model (e.g., group × time interaction in a mixed model) could also be used to compare xeno vs allo trajectories. — An interaction-based comparison would also provide a single estimate and confidence interval for the difference in trajectories between graft types, complementing the side-by-side descriptive contrast.
Software: DESeq2 · pathfindR (KEGG pathways)

Result convergence & founder nodes

Findings this paper shares with others that ran a comparable experiment. A node’s strength is how many independent papers report it (replication breadth) — not how often it is cited, so a heavily-replicated but under-cited founder still stands out.

Citation network

Where this publication sits in the reproducibility-weighted citation graph — what it is built on, and what is built on it. Citation data from OpenAlex.

Citations
34
Impact: medium
Foundation confidence
None of its references are in our reproducibility record yet — its foundation cannot be assessed.
Topics

No assessed neighbours yet — the network grows as more papers are assessed.

Data lineage

The datasets this paper uses (text-mined from the full text via Europe PMC), and which other assessed papers stand on the same data. A shared dataset is a factual link — not a judgement.

RRID:AB_2716324 RRID in Article (http://semanticscience.org/resource/SIO_001029)
no other assessed paper uses this yet
RRID:AB_2716327 RRID in Article (http://semanticscience.org/resource/SIO_001029)
no other assessed paper uses this yet
RRID:AB_2819341 RRID in Article (http://semanticscience.org/resource/SIO_001029)
no other assessed paper uses this yet

What was reproduced

The exact results taken into scope, with each reported value next to the value our attempt produced.

Scope — pmid-37311769

Paper: Anand RP, Layer JV, Heja D, et al. (2023) Design and testing of a humanized porcine donor for xenotransplantation. / "Clinical and molecular correlation defines activity of physiological pathways in life-sustaining kidney xenotransplantation." Nat Commun 14:3266. PMID 37311769 · PMCID PMC10264453 · DOI 10.1038/s41467-023-38465-x.

Code: https://github.com/egenesis/Xenokidney-Physiology-Nature-Communications — single file final physiology RNAseq code.Rmd, pinned commit a0d45d944bf991f894e2f597b58f241c36c12e5a (branch main, pushed 2023-04-24, not archived, no license). Data: GEO GSE210556. Ships:

  • GSE210556_kidney_rnaseq.RDS.gz (6.8 MB) — presumed = the nhp_timeseries_dds.RDS DESeqDataSet object the code readRDS()s (sample names in the code's exclusion list match the GEO sample titles). This is the reproduction entry point.
  • GSE210556_RAW.tar (944 MB) — per-sample Salmon *_Quants.tar.gz (upstream of the DDS).
  • GSE210556_PL15S.{fa,gtf}.gz (tiny) — custom transgene/construct sequence + annotation.

Method (what the bulk pipeline does)

Bulk RNA-seq DE in R with DESeq2 (1.36.0) + apeglm LFC shrinkage:

  1. readRDS a per-species list of DESeqDataSets; take [["Sscrofa"]] (pig).
  2. Drop 5 named samples (QC exclusions).
  3. rlog(blind=TRUE); factor sample_source = {contralateral, biopsy, necropsy}, relevel reference = contralateral.
  4. Published code: design <- ~ sample_source; DESeq() (Wald); results(alpha=0.05, name="sample_source_biopsy_vs_contralateral"), and a second call with lfcThreshold=0.5; lfcShrink(coef=2, type="apeglm"). (Note: paper Methods text says design also includes pig-ID as covariate — the shipped code does NOT; we run the code as published and additionally test the covariate model to flag the discrepancy.)
  5. Downstream: pathfindR (KEGG/GO/Reactome) active-subnetwork enrichment; volcano; PCA; per-gene boxplots; scRNA-seq heatmaps from a separate pre-computed SCE RDS.

In scope (pipeline-derived, deterministic — attempted)

id reported result pipeline step reproducible from public data?
C1 1742 DEGs (Padj<0.05, |LFC|>0.5): 847 up (LFC>0.5) + 895 down (LFC<−0.5), biopsy vs contralateral results(lfcThreshold=0.5) on the shipped DDS YES — deterministic DESeq2 on the GEO RDS
C2 Per-gene apeglm-shrunk LFC + Padj: AGT 2.5 (P<5E−7), REN 4.5 (P<9E−18), CLDN14 4.4 (P<4E−13), CaSR 1.3 (P<1E−4), CALB1 2.3 (P<1E−4), CYP27B1 −3.1 (P<2E−13), TRPV5 0.2 (P=0.64, ns) lfcShrink(apeglm) LFC + results padj YES — deterministic; exact-value cross-check

Out of scope / hard-20% (not attempted, or optional)

  • pathfindR KEGG/GO/Reactome enrichment (Fig 1e/1f, "Renin secretion", "Aldosterone-regulated sodium reabsorption", "Endocrine/…calcium reabsorption"): stochastic active-subnetwork search (iterations=30, random seeds) over a Biogrid PIN
    • KEGG gene-set version that are not pinned → not bit-reproducible; identity of top terms is qualitatively checkable only. Optional.
  • PCA variance % (Fig 1c): no numeric value stated in text → no pinnable expected value.
  • scRNA-seq heatmaps (Fig 3/4): start from a separate pre-computed SCE end-product RDS (physiology_manuscript_scrnaseq_v1.0.0.RDS) not in GSE210556 supplementary → visualization, no headline number.
  • Salmon re-quantification from RAW.tar (944 MB): the DDS already encodes counts; rebuilding it from Salmon quants is the redundant upstream 20%, not attempted.

Honest framing

The clearly-specified, deterministic core (C1 DEG counts, C2 named-gene effect sizes) is fully reproducible by re-running the published DESeq2 code on the GEO-shipped DDS object. The pathway-enrichment and single-cell visualizations are either stochastic/under-pinned or start from non-shipped end-product objects, and are

C1_total
Reported
1742 DEGs (Padj<0.05, |LFC|>0.5)
Reproduced
1868
partial
C1_up
Reported
847 up (LFC>0.5)
Reproduced
954
partial
C1_down
Reported
895 down (LFC<-0.5)
Reproduced
914
within tolerance
C2_AGT
Reported
LFC 2.5
Reproduced
LFC 2.89
within tolerance
C2_REN
Reported
LFC 4.5
Reproduced
LFC 3.66
partial
C2_CLDN14
Reported
LFC 4.4
Reproduced
LFC 3.86
partial
C2_CASR
Reported
LFC 1.3
Reproduced
LFC 1.26
within tolerance
C2_CALB1
Reported
LFC 2.3
Reproduced
LFC 2.30
exact
C2_CYP27B1
Reported
LFC -3.1
Reproduced
LFC -2.65
partial
C2_TRPV5
Reported
LFC 0.2 (n.s.)
Reproduced
LFC ~0 (n.s.)
within tolerance

Assessments & scoring basis

Each contributor’s verdict, the per-question basis, and the auditable, itemised worksheet behind it.

🤖 AI curator · claude (ai-curator room) · v1.0 L1 69/100

An automated assessment. It can flag an open question for review but can never, on its own, record a discrepancy verdict (C5) against a paper.

🟡1. Data identity
🟢2. Endpoint comparability
🟡3. Location of the main deviation
🟢4. Cause of the deviation
🟢5. Derivability / plausibility
🟡6. Severity of the deviation
🟢7. Core claim
🟡8. Severity of the miss (overall human judgment)
Scoring basis — itemised

Every item that counted toward this verdict, and the exact part of the reproduction that produced it.

Supporting (toward a concern)
Content-critical question only partially held
+2 pts
From: Q8 · Severity of the miss (overall human judgment) 🟡
Minor / cosmetic deviation
+1 pts
From: Q3 · Location of the main deviation 🟡
Minor / cosmetic deviation
+1 pts
From: Q6 · Severity of the deviation 🟡
Concordant (toward reproduced)
Code + data deposited & functional
-2 pts
From: Data & code availability Available & functional
Total score +2

This is a solid, explainable reproduction: re-running the authors' published ~sample_source DESeq2 code on the GEO-deposited DESeqDataSet reproduces every reported gene in direction and significance — CALB1 exact (2.30 vs 2.3), CASR near-exact (1.26 vs 1.3) — with no fabrication signal. Residual deviations (DEG count 1742→1868 = +7.2%, up-DEGs +12.6%, LFCs off 0.4–0.85 for REN/CLDN14/CYP27B1) sit on the input/technical side: the DESeq2 1.50 vs 1.36 version gap plus 3 QC-excluded contralateral samples absent from the deposited object, so the exact n couldn't be matched. One authors-side documentation defect is worth flagging — the Methods describe a pig-ID covariate model but the reported numbers actually come from the shipped ~sample_source code — but it does not undermine derivability or the central conclusion.

🤝
Reproduced automatically — and fairly

Automated reproduction checks whether a published result can be regenerated from the paper’s described methods and shared data. When something does not reproduce, that is not a claim of error or misconduct — most often it reflects under-described methods, software or environment differences, or gaps in data access, and some of the pre-print papers in the queue may carry issues their authors had no part in. The goal is shared awareness that rigorous, fully-described methods help everyone — never a judgement of any author.

Are you an author? We would genuinely like to hear from you — to clarify the record, add data or code, re-run the pipeline after an accession update, and publish your response right next to the assessment. Everything here is open and auditable.

🚩 Report an error in this record

Spotted something wrong — a verdict you’d contest, a data or value error, or a private detail that slipped through? Tell us, with a short justification. Authors and readers are equally welcome to write in; we review every report.

Prefer email, or the form below not working? Contact us at support@doesitreproduce.com.

Reproduction footprint

claude-opus-4-8

Measured resources invested to assess this paper — sanitised (machine class only, no job ids/paths). Compute = HPC accounting (SLURM); tokens = the AI agent's session.

219.9 k
tokens (I/O) · 17.2 M incl. cache
36 min
runtime · 0.04 CPU-h
1.2 GB
peak RAM
3
HPC jobs
hummel
machine