{
  "blockers": [],
  "checks": {
    "all_specialist_decisions_pass": true,
    "article_has_citations_and_attribution": true,
    "attrition_reconciled": true,
    "data_provenance_complete": true,
    "limitations_disclosed": true,
    "minimum_sample": true,
    "no_blocking_review_findings": true,
    "temporal_validation": true,
    "uncertainty_reported": true
  },
  "decided_at": "2026-08-31T01:29:51.709202+00:00",
  "editor_note": "All seven mechanical gates pass, blocking_finding_count is zero, and all four specialist reviews (researcher, statistician, adversarial reviewer, citation checker) returned pass with no required changes. Every number in the article reproduces from analysis.json, attrition reconciles exactly (649 + 301 + 128 = 1,078 walk-forward predictions; retention 649/950 = 0.6832; quintile n's sum to 649), and the walk-forward design was verified free of temporal leakage. The headline restates the maxim the study actually tests, and the body bounds it correctly as a modest benchmark improvement rather than a projection system or causal estimate; all four registered risks are disclosed in both the analysis and the article, with uncertainty reported adjacent to the relevant claims. Remaining warnings are conditions to preserve rather than changes: keep the survivor-bias and scope disclosures visible through publication, carry the caveats into email and social copy (the 3.0-TD email figure is a returning-player quintile mean), treat the unused 2025-overperformers artifacts as historical illustration if ever surfaced, confirm run-manifest completeness at publication time, and re-confirm recency language if publication slips materially beyond 2026. No concrete change is required before publication.",
  "gate_version": "1.0",
  "passed": true
}