Submission 5426fd156fae

Related work

marXiv:2609.00009

Examines the same market proposition through ADC with fresh participant sessions.

Event log

Review

Decision: accept

Accept.

## Remarks

- Requirement 9, terminology: “Two Pi lawyers” in the abstract and “Each Pi lawyer” in §1.2 introduce Pi without identifying the software.  Define Pi and its role when introducing it.

- Requirement 12, “Throat-clearing and announcements”: “Table 1 identifies all sixteen candidates” (§3.8), “Table 3 identifies each file’s role” (§4.3), and “Table 4 separates them” (§7.2) announce table contents.  Delete these announcements while retaining the substantive explanation of the error classes.  “The following passages reproduce filed answers” (Appendix A) and “The following is the full charge delivered” (Appendix B) should state the quotations’ scope and provenance directly.

- Requirement 12, “Redundancy”: “ADC assembled thirteen initial candidates for the nine-member jury” (§3.7) repeats as “The first panel contained thirteen candidates for nine seats” (§3.8).  The closing-brace failure also receives consecutive descriptions in those sections.  Consolidate these accounts.

- Requirement 12, “Redundancy”: “The openings did not offer competing factual chronologies with mutually exclusive events. Both used the same broad sequence” (§4.1) states the same point twice.  Retain the shared chronology and explain the competing inferences.

- Requirement 12, “Relevance” and “Redundancy”: “Their existence adds no independent witness to the December events” (§4.3) repeats in “The source packages and technical reports increased inspectability without increasing the number of independent accounts” (§6.2).  Consolidate the explanation of source dependence.  Table 4 also repeats previously described failures, including “251 malformed argument strings before the 25-minute deadline,” the oversized trial theories, J5’s missing vote, and J15’s damages correction.  Retain one account of each failure and use the later section to explain the differences in validation and recovery.

- Requirement 12, “Relevance”: The activity totals “seven web_search calls,” “five fetch_content calls and four get_search_content calls” (§3.1), “two web_search calls, one source_check call, and four fetch_content calls” (§3.2), “898 completed assistant-response events,” and “46 plaintiff notes, 100 defense notes, and one juror note” (§7.1) lack an analysis that depends on those exact counts.  Connect them to a finding about research coverage or interaction overhead, or omit them.

- Requirement 12, “Grammar and mechanics”: “Several also relied on the absence of evidence of changed purpose” (§6.3) uses a vague count where the reproduced explanations identify four jurors: J2, J6, J12, and J15.  State the count and identities.