{ "schema_version": "1.5.0", "rubric_version": "1.2.0", "params": { "prior": 0.5, "scale": 2.0, "quality_exp": 1.0, "directness_exp": 1.0, "independence_discount": 0.5, "basis_weights": [ 1.0, 0.7, 0.4 ], "contested_pull": 1.0, "mixed_directness_min": 0.5, "side_mass_min": 0.5, "cluster_roots": "primary", "mass_min": 1.0, "verdict_thresholds": [ 0.15, 0.35, 0.65, 0.85 ], "and_leak": 0.0, "or_leak": 0.0, "max_pool_size": 25, "polarity_sample": 0.2, "queries_per_side": 2, "results_per_query": 10, "excerpt_chars": 2000, "strictness": 0.5 }, "profile": "public", "claim": { "slug": "recovery-act-reduced-unemployment", "text": "The 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the stimulus, reduced US unemployment below what it would otherwise have been.", "submitted_text": "The stimulus worked", "paraphrased": true, "topic": "US employment and federal fiscal stimulus, 2009-2012", "created_at": "2026-09-17T00:00:00Z" }, "tree": { "id": "root", "kind": "and", "tag": "empirical", "text": "Job losses ended after the Recovery Act, and the Act was a major cause of higher employment than there would otherwise have been", "reason": null, "children": [ { "id": "outcome", "kind": "leaf", "tag": "empirical", "text": "US monthly job losses shrank sharply and employment stopped falling within about a year of the Recovery Act's enactment in February 2009", "reason": null, "children": [] }, { "id": "cause", "kind": "leaf", "tag": "empirical", "text": "The Recovery Act was a major cause of higher US employment in 2009-2012 than would have occurred without it, beyond what Federal Reserve policy, the automatic stabilizers and the financial-sector rescue would have produced on their own", "reason": null, "children": [] } ] }, "decomposed_by": "hand", "retrieval": { "search_backend": "ddg", "items_by_backend": { "ddg": 42 }, "pdf_pages_fetched_ok": 14, "queries_prompt_version": "queries_v1", "results_per_query": 10, "max_pool_size": 25, "excerpt_chars": 2000, "unique_urls": 67, "search_api_calls": 2, "live_fetches": 67, "fetch_errors": { "HTTP 403": 16, "too little text": 6, "ReadTimeout": 2, "HTTP 401": 1, "HTTP 202": 1 }, "leaves": { "outcome": { "queries": { "for": [ "Bureau of Labor Statistics payroll employment monthly changes 2009 2010", "Congressional Budget Office Recovery Act employment effects report 2010" ], "against": [ "census hiring masked private sector job losses 2010", "unemployment remained high after 2009 Recovery Act" ] }, "search_hits": 37, "candidates": 37, "fetched_ok": 25, "pool": 25 }, "cause": { "queries": { "for": [ "CBO estimated Recovery Act employment effects 2010 2011", "Blinder Zandi fiscal stimulus jobs multiplier 2009 study" ], "against": [ "Federal Reserve QE employment impact versus fiscal stimulus 2009", "automatic stabilizers accounted for most employment recovery after recession" ] }, "search_hits": 34, "candidates": 33, "fetched_ok": 19, "pool": 19 } }, "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "api_calls": 0, "cache_hits": 2, "cost_usd": 0.0 }, "roots": { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "prompt_version": "roots_v1", "canon_prompt_version": "roots_canon_v2", "distinct_root_ids": 63, "canon_calls": 1, "groups": [ [ "alan blinder mark zandi", "blinder zandi 2010", "blinder zandi 2015", "blinder zandi economic analysis", "blinder zandi stimulus analysis" ], [ "bls", "bls ces", "bls current employment statistics", "bls current employment statistics survey", "bureau of labor statistics", "current employment statistics", "current employment statistics program", "current employment statistics survey", "us bureau of labor statistics" ], [ "census bureau", "us census bureau" ], [ "congressional budget office", "congressional budget office recovery act estimate" ], [ "current population survey", "current population survey tenure supplements" ], [ "the white house", "white house" ] ], "aliases": { "alan blinder mark zandi": "blinder zandi 2010", "blinder zandi 2010": "blinder zandi 2010", "blinder zandi 2015": "blinder zandi 2010", "blinder zandi economic analysis": "blinder zandi 2010", "blinder zandi stimulus analysis": "blinder zandi 2010", "bls": "bureau of labor statistics", "bls ces": "bureau of labor statistics", "bls current employment statistics": "bureau of labor statistics", "bls current employment statistics survey": "bureau of labor statistics", "bureau of labor statistics": "bureau of labor statistics", "current employment statistics": "bureau of labor statistics", "current employment statistics program": "bureau of labor statistics", "current employment statistics survey": "bureau of labor statistics", "us bureau of labor statistics": "bureau of labor statistics", "census bureau": "us census bureau", "us census bureau": "us census bureau", "congressional budget office": "congressional budget office", "congressional budget office recovery act estimate": "congressional budget office", "current population survey": "current population survey", "current population survey tenure supplements": "current population survey", "the white house": "white house", "white house": "white house" }, "items_failed": 0, "api_calls": 43, "cache_hits": 0, "cost_usd": 0.266769 }, "judging": { "retrieval_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "per_model": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": { "api_calls": 140, "cache_hits": 0, "cost_usd": 0.1776, "cache_lookups": 140 }, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": { "api_calls": 140, "cache_hits": 0, "cost_usd": 0.120998, "cache_lookups": 140 }, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": { "api_calls": 140, "cache_hits": 0, "cost_usd": 0.053608, "cache_lookups": 140 }, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": { "api_calls": 140, "cache_hits": 0, "cost_usd": 0.134016, "cache_lookups": 140 }, "x-ai/grok-4.3": { "api_calls": 140, "cache_hits": 0, "cost_usd": 0.347253, "cache_lookups": 140 } }, "api_calls": 700, "cache_hits": 0, "cache_lookups": 745, "spent_usd": 0.833474, "budget_usd": 5.0, "budget_exceeded": false, "stopped_reason": null, "failed": [], "baseline_cost_usd": 0.00752, "rescored_to_rubric": "1.2.0", "rescored_from": "2026-09-17T03:59:09.918168+00:00" }, "pool": [ { "id": "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "url": "https://blsmon1.bls.gov/", "title": "U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics", "publisher": "Bureau of Labor Statistics", "published_at": "2017-02-22", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:16.408995Z", "excerpt": "An official website of the United States government\n//XIMPIM Test 9/16/2026// In July, U.S. import prices decreased 0.4 percent following a drop of 0.3 percent in June. U.S. export prices fell 1.3 percent in July, after declining 0.7 percent in June. Over the past 12 months, import prices advanced 5.9 percent and export prices rose 8.2 percent.\nBLS offers many types of data for regions, states and local areas. To browse for available information, make a selection from the tabs or use the economic news release finder below.", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83", "url": "https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/R/PDF/R40368/R40368.7.pdf", "title": "R40368.7.pdf", "publisher": "congress.gov", "published_at": null, "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:16.407914Z", "excerpt": "Unemployment Insurance Provisions in the \nAmerican Recovery and Reinvestment Act of \n2009 \nUpdated June 17, 2010 \nCongressional Research Service \nhttps://crsreports.congress.gov \nR40368 \nUnemployment Insurance Provisions in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act \n \nCongressional Research Service \nSummary \nThe American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5, also known as ARRA or the \n2009 stimulus package) contained several provisions affecting unemployment benefits, described \nbelow. \n ARRA temporarily increased unemployment benefits by $25 per week for all \nrecipients of regular unemployment compensation (UC), extended benefits (EB), \nemergency unemployment compensation (EUC08), Trade Adjustment Assistance \n(TAA) programs, and Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA). \n The act extended the temporary EUC08 program through December 26, 2009 \n(with grandfathering), to be financed by federal general revenues. The EUC08 \nprogram’s expiration date has since been further extended. \n It provided for temporary 100% federal financing of the EB program, to be \nfinanced by the federal government through the Unemployment Trust Fund. \n ARRA allowed states the option of changing temporarily the eligibility \nrequirements for the EB program to expand the number of persons eligible for \nEB benefits, to end before June 1, 2010. \n It provided for an additional 13 weeks to the maximum amount of time railroad \nworkers may receive extended unemployment benefits. \n The legislation suspended income taxation on the first $2,400 of unemployment \nbenefits received in 2009, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2008. \n It provided relief to states from the payment and accrual of interest on federal \nloans to states for the payment of unemployment benefits, from enactment of the \nstimulus package on February 17, 2009, through December 31, 2010. \n ARRA provided for a special transfer of up to $7 billion in federal monies to \nstate unemployment programs as “incenti", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1", "url": "https://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-9/the-2020-census-and-ces-employment.htm", "title": "The 2020 census and CES employment", "publisher": "Bureau of Labor Statistics", "published_at": "2020-02-27", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:16.403258Z", "excerpt": "An official website of the United States government\nThe U.S. Constitution mandates an enumeration, or a full count, of the entire population of the United States every 10 years. The census results are used to apportion Congressional Representatives and distribute billions of dollars in federal funds to local communities.1 The importance of the census and the Census Bureau’s scale of work mean that it must hire hundreds of thousands of temporary and intermittent workers to conduct this exercise. These workers are reflected in employment estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Current Employment Statistics (CES) survey. 2\nThis Beyond the Numbers article describes how census workers affect CES employment estimates. Typically, a mass movement of workers onto—and then off of—the Census Bureau payroll occurs around the turn of every decade. These fluctuations cause sharp spikes—and then sharp declines—in the employment data for the CES government series titled “federal government, except U.S. postal service,” as well as aggregate industries up to and including total nonfarm. Isolating census-specific employment changes from CES data allows users to identify employment trends without the effects of the census. It is also important to note that hiring plans announced for the 2020 census, as well as hiring that has already occurred, are different from historical census hiring.\nThe Census Bureau designates April 1 of years ending in zero as “Census Day,” the day on which the census is conducted. Historically, hiring for past censuses had begun up to 24 months prior to April 1st, with hiring activity tending to peak in May of the census year. There are two hiring phases associated with the census that are large, in terms of staffing needs—address canvassing and nonresponse followup. During the address canvassing phase, workers update and validate addresses in order to mail out census questionnaires. During nonresponse followup, workers will contact residents that failed", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e", "url": "https://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/End-of-Great-Recession.pdf", "title": "End-of-Great-Recession.pdf", "publisher": "economy.com", "published_at": null, "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:46.877324Z", "excerpt": "How the Great Recession \nWas Brought to an End\nJULY 27 , 2010\nPrepared By\nAlan S. Blinder\nGordon S. Rentschler Memorial Professor of Economics, Princeton University\n609.258.3358\nblinder@princeton.edu\nMark Zandi\nChief Economist, Moody’s Analytics\n610.235.5151\nmark.zandi@moodys.com\nHOW THE GREAT RECESSION WAS BROUGHT TO AN END 1\nHow the Great Recession Was Brought to an End\nBY ALAN S. BLINDER AND MARK ZANDI1\nT\nhe U.S. government’s response to the financial crisis and ensuing Great Recession included some \nof the most aggressive fiscal and monetary policies in history. The response was multifaceted and \nbipartisan, involving the Federal Reserve, Congress, and two administrations. Yet almost every one \nof these policy initiatives remain controversial to this day, with critics calling them misguided, ineffective \nor both. The debate over these policies is crucial because, with the economy still weak, more government \nsupport may be needed, as seen recently in both the extension of unemployment benefits and the Fed’s \nconsideration of further easing.\nIn this paper, we use the Moody’s Analytics model of the U.S. economy—adjusted to accommodate some \nrecent financial-market policies—to simulate the macroeconomic effects of the government’s total policy \nresponse. We find that its effects on real GDP, jobs, and inflation are huge, and probably averted what could \nhave been called Great Depression 2.0. For example, we estimate that, without the government’s response, \nGDP in 2010 would be about 11.5% lower, payroll employment would be less by some 8½ million jobs, and \nthe nation would now be experiencing deflation. \nWhen we divide these effects into two components—one attributable to the fiscal stimulus and the other at-\ntributable to financial-market policies such as the TARP, the bank stress tests and the Fed’s quantitative eas-\ning—we estimate that the latter was substantially more powerful than the former. Nonetheless, the effects \nof the fiscal stimulus alone appear ver", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b", "url": "https://www.crfb.org/blogs/cbo-report-discusses-arra-effect-jobs-gdp-growth", "title": "CBO Report Discusses ARRA Effect on Jobs, GDP Growth | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget", "publisher": "Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget", "published_at": "2009-11-30", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:52.664079Z", "excerpt": "CBO Report Discusses ARRA Effect on Jobs, GDP Growth\nThe Congressional Budget Office has come out with a report estimating the impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act on employment and economic output. The report estimated the federal stimulus package, in the third quarter, raised GDP by somewhere between 1.2 and 3.2 percentage points higher than it would have been without the program (the range reflects the uncertainty of estimating the effects of fiscal stimulus).\nAdditionally, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf said that about 640,000 jobs were either created or retained through September of this year directly due to ARRA funding. He did note, however, that the impact could be higher or lower for several reasons:\n- It is “impossible to determine how many of the reported jobs would have existed in the absence of the stimulus package.”\n- The recipient reported job figures measure only the jobs created by employers who received ARRA funds.\n- The job reports do not measure indirectly created or saved jobs as a result of increased demand from recipients and their employees.\n- The job reports only cover certain provisions under ARRA, encompassing around one-quarter of the total amount spent through spending and tax breaks (the reports do not measure the effects of tax cuts and transfer payments).\nIn March of 2009, a report by the CBO had estimated that in the third quarter of 2009, we would see employment increase by 600,000 to 1.5 million more people with ARRA than otherwise in the absense of the stimulus, and real GDP would be 1.1 percent to 3.0 percent higher.\nThe report includes a table portraying the estimated output multipliers and budgetary costs of the major provisions within ARRA. That information can be seen below.", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5", "url": "https://faculty.fiu.edu/~gummerso/151016JaredBernsteinonBlinder&Zandi.pdf", "title": "151016JaredBernsteinonBlinder&Zandi.pdf", "publisher": "faculty.fiu.edu", "published_at": null, "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:36.652203Z", "excerpt": "A new study finds that we fought the \nGreat Recession with much success. \nWhat can we learn about counter-cyclical policy from \nwhat we got right and wrong in fighting the Great \nRecession? \nBy Jared Bernstein October 16 Washington Post \nJared Bernstein, a former chief economist to Vice President Biden, is a senior fellow at the Center on \nBudget and Policy Priorities and author of the new book 'The Reconnection Agenda: Reuniting Growth and \nProsperity.' \n \nSource: Blinder and Zandi (2015) \nWhen contemplating economic policy, it’s just as important to look backward as it is to look forward. What \ntools did we use the last time we were faced with a particular challenge, and how well did they work? What \ncan we learn that should inform our thinking the next time around? \nOne of the most important areas of policy in this regard is so-called counter-cyclical policy, meaning \nactions taken by the government and the Federal Reserve to offset an economic downturn. The Recovery \nAct — the $800 billion stimulus package implemented in 2009-10 — is a clear example of a temporary, \ncounter-cyclical policy (really, set of policies) designed to inject a significant dose of economic resources \ninto the pockets of those hurt by the deep recession of those years, as well as into their \ncommunities and schools, and the infrastructure they use. \nThe Federal Reserve aggressively applied monetary policies, both conventional — lowering the interest \nrate they control to make consumer credit and mortgages more affordable — and unconventional — \n“quantitative easing,” or pushing down long-term interest rates by purchasing longer-term bonds. \n\nAnd finally, key sectors, including finance and the two failing auto companies, got bailouts in order to \nprevent cascading failures with the potential to turn a recession into a depression. \nDid these interventions work? Did they have their intended impact, without much in the way of unintended \nconsequences? Can we quantify their impacts? And partic", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe", "url": "https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_11052010.pdf", "title": "empsit_11052010.pdf", "publisher": "bls.gov", "published_at": null, "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:32.252908Z", "excerpt": "Transmission of material in this release is embargoed until USDL-10-1519 \n8:30 a.m. (EDT) Friday, November 5, 2010 \n \nTechnical information: \nHousehold data: (202) 691-6378 • cpsinfo@bls.gov • www.bls.gov/cps \nEstablishment data: (202) 691-6555 • cesinfo@bls.gov • www.bls.gov/ces \n \nMedia contact: (202) 691-5902 • PressOffice@bls.gov \n \n \nTHE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION – OCTOBER 2010 \n \n \nNonfarm payroll employment increased by 151,000 in October, and the unemployment rate was \nunchanged at 9.6 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Since December 2009, \nnonfarm payroll employment has risen by 874,000. \n \n-800\n-600\n-400\n-200\n0\n200\n400\n600\nOct-08 Jan-09 A pr-09 Jul-09 Oct-09 Jan-1 0 A pr-1 0 Jul-1 0 Oct-1 0\nThousands\nChart 2. Nonfarm payroll employment over-the-month \nchange, seasonally adjusted, October 2008 –\nOctober 2010\nPercen t\n4.0\n5.0\n6.0\n7.0\n8.0\n9.0\n10.0\n11.0\nOct-08 Jan-09 A pr-09 Jul-09 Oct-09 Jan-1 0 A pr-1 0 Jul-1 0 Oct-1 0\nChart 1. Unemployment rate, seasonally adjusted, \nOctober 2008 – October 2010\n \n \nHousehold Survey Data \n \nThe number of unemployed persons, at 14.8 million, was little changed in October. The unemploy-\nment rate remained at 9.6 percent and has been essentially unchanged since May. (See table A-1.) \n \nAmong the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for adult men (9.7 percent), adult women \n(8.1 percent), teenagers (27.1 percent), whites (8.8 percent), blacks (15.7 percent), and Hispanics (12.6 \npercent) showed little change in October. The jobless rate for Asians was 7.1 percent, not seasonally \nadjusted. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.) \n \n \n- 2 - \nThe number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks and over) was about unchanged over \nthe month at 6.2 million. In October, 41.8 percent of unemployed persons had been jobless for 27 weeks \nor more. (See table A-12.) \n \nBoth the civilian labor force participation rate, at 64.5 percent, and the employment-population \nratio, at 58.3 percent, edged down over the ", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "url": "https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2009/", "title": "2009 home", "publisher": "Bureau of Labor Statistics", "published_at": "2009-01-01", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:28.333424Z", "excerpt": "2009 home\n \n \n Archive by Date\n \n 2009\n \n - New Definitions of Employee Access to Paid Sick Leave and Retirement Benefits in the National Compensation Survey 12/23/2009\n- Comparison of Take-up Rates in Employer-Sponsored Medical Care Plans: State and Local Government and Private Industry 12/23/2009\n- Work-related activities of single mothers before and after welfare reform 12/01/2009\n- Nominations Sought for 2010 Julius Shiskin Award 12/01/2009\n- Household liability data in the Consumer Expenditure Survey 12/01/2009\n- Multiple Jobholding in States in 2008 12/01/2009\n- The Effect of Incentive Pay on Rates of Change in Wages and Salaries 11/24/2009\n- Occupational employment projections to 2018 11/01/2009\n- Labor force projections to 2018: older workers staying more active 11/01/2009\n- The U.S. economy to 2018: from recession to recovery 11/01/2009\n- The employment projections for 2008-18 11/01/2009\n- Nominations Sought for 2010 Julius Shiskin Award 11/01/2009\n- Industry output and employment projections to 2018 11/01/2009\n- The New Health Participation and Access Data from the National Compensation Survey 10/26/2009\n- The Employment Cost Index and the Impact on Medicare Reimbursements 10/26/2009\n- Manhattan's financial sector and the 2005-07 employment dynamic 10/01/2009\n- Part-time workers: some key differences between primary and secondary earners 10/01/2009\n- Unemployment insurance recipients and nonrecipients in the CPS 10/01/2009\n- The parenting of infants: a time-use study 10/01/2009\n- Local Area Employee Benefits Estimates for 15 Metropolitan Areas 09/28/2009\n- BLS Introduces New Employer Costs for Employee Compensation Data for Private Industry Workers in 15 Metropolitan Areas 09/28/2009\n- Health care industries and the New York City labor market 09/01/2009\n- Employment growth in the Kansas City, MO-KS, Metropolitan Statistical Area 09/01/2009\n- Fifty years of BLS surveys on Federal employees’ pay 09/01/2009\n- Alternatives to Frozen Defined Benefit Pension Pla", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "url": "https://lehd.ces.census.gov/applications/creat/paper-profile/598", "title": "CREAT: Census Research Exploration and Analysis Tool", "publisher": "U.S. Census Bureau", "published_at": "2007-09-01", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:32.341163Z", "excerpt": "The recession of 2007-09 witnessed high rates of unemployment that have been slow to recede. This has led many to conclude that structural changes have occurred in the labor market and that the economy will not return to the low rates of unemployment that prevailed in the recent past. Is this true? The question is important because central banks may be able to reduce unemployment that is cyclic in nature, but not that which is structural. An analysis of labor market data suggests that there are no structural changes that can explain movements in unemployment rates over recent years. Neither industrial nor demographic shifts nor a mismatch of skills with job vacancies is behind the increased rates of unemployment. Although mismatch increased during the recession, it retreated at the same rate. The patterns observed are consistent with unemployment being caused by cyclic phenomena that are more pronounced during the current recession than in prior recessions.\n \n - \n \n The Shifting Job Tenure Distribution\n \n January 2016\n \n Working Paper Number:CES-16-12R\n \n There has been a shift in the U.S. job tenure distribution toward longer-duration jobs since 2000. This change is apparent both in the tenure supplements to the Current Population Survey and in matched employer-employee data. A substantial portion of this shift can be accounted for by the ageing of the workforce and the decline in the entry rate of new employer businesses. This shift is accounted for more by declines in the hiring rate, which are concentrated in the labor market downturns associated with the 2001 and 2007-2009 recessions, rather than declines in separation rates. The increase in average real earnings since 2007 is less than what would be predicted by the shift toward longer-tenure jobs because of declines in tenure-held-constant real earnings. Regression estimates of the returns to job tenure provide no evidence that the sh", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b", "url": "https://www.frbsf.org/wp-content/uploads/wp10-17bk.pdf", "title": "wp10-17bk.pdf", "publisher": "frbsf.org", "published_at": null, "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:37.707442Z", "excerpt": "251\nAmerican Economic Journal: Economic Policy 2012, 4(3): 251–282 \nhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1257/pol.4.3.251\nFiscal Spending Jobs Multipliers: Evidence from \nthe 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act†\nBy Daniel J. Wilson*\nThis paper estimates the “jobs multiplier” of fiscal stimulus spend-\ning using the state-level allocations of federal stimulus funds from the \nAmerican Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009. Because \nthe level and timing of stimulus funds that a state receives was poten-\ntially endogenous, I exploit the fact that most of these funds were \nallocated according to exogenous formulary allocation factors such \nas the number of federal highway miles in a state or its youth share \nof population. Cross-state IV results indicate that ARRA spending \nin its first year yielded about eight jobs per million dollars spent, or \n$125,000 per job. (JEL E24, E62, H72, H75, R23)\nNot for the first time, as an elected official, I envy economists. Economists \nhave available to them, in an analytical approach, the counterfactual … \nThey can contrast what happened to what would have happened. No one \nhas ever gotten reelected where the bumper sticker said, ‘It would have \nbeen worse without me. ’ You probably can get tenure with that. But you \ncan’t win office.\n — US Representative Barney Frank, July 21, 20091\nT\nhis paper analyzes the fiscal stimulus spending provided by the American \nRecovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 and contrasts “what hap-\npened to what would have happened.” It does so by exploiting the cross-sectional \ngeographic variation in ARRA spending and the many exogenous factors that deter-\nmined that variation. The use of cross-sectional variation, in contrast to most prior \nstudies of the economic effects of fiscal policy which rely on time series varia-\ntion, greatly mitigates the risk of confounding fiscal policy effects with effects from \nother macroeconomic factors, such as monetary policy, that are independent of the \n1 “Transcript, ", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "url": "https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2011/03/art2full.pdf", "title": "art2full.pdf", "publisher": "bls.gov", "published_at": null, "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:17.283179Z", "excerpt": "Monthly Labor Review • M ay 2010 23\nPayroll Employment in 2010\nJohn P . Eddlemon\nA\nfter falling by 8.8 million between an \nemployment peak in January 2008 \nand a trough in February 2010, non-\nfarm employment, as measured by the Cur-\nrent Employment Statistics ( CES) survey, \nincreased by 1,014,000 in the last 10 months \nof the year. 1 (See chart 1.) The hiring and \nlayoff of temporary, intermittent workers for \nthe 2010 Census had a large impact on total \nnonfarm employment for much of the year. \nHowever, by November, the effect had been \nlargely offset.2 For the remainder of this arti-\ncle, “nonfarm employment” will refer to total \nnonfarm employment, excluding temporary, \nintermittent 2010 Census workers. Follow -\ning job losses in January and February, non-\nfarm employment rose for the remainder of \nthe year. Job growth was strongest in April \nand October, and job gains averaged 105,000 \nper month after the employment trough in \nFebruary. (See chart 2.)\nHistorically, CES employment growth has \ntended to lag the end of a recession. (See \ntable 1.) The most recent recession lasted \nfrom December 2007 through June 2009, \nbut employment continued to fall through \nFebruary 2010.3 The lag between the end of \nthe business cycle and the trough in non-\nfarm employment was shorter than it was \nafter the previous recession, but longer than \nthe historical average. A comparison of \ngrowth 10 months after troughs in employ -\nment shows that the employment recovery \nPayroll employment \nturns the corner in 2010\nNonfarm payroll employment reached a low point\nin February 2010, and modest job growth continued\nthroughout the rest of the year\nJohn P . Eddlemon is an \neconomist in the Division \nof Current Employment \nStatistics, Office of Em-\nployment and Unemploy-\nment Statistics, Bureau \nof Labor Statistics. Email: \neddlemon.john@bls.gov\nwhich began in February 2010 was weaker \nthan growth in previous recoveries. Through \nDecember 2010, employment increased 0.8 \npercent from its lo", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491", "url": "https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2010/12/blinder.htm", "title": "Finance and Development", "publisher": "Finance and Development | F&D", "published_at": "2010-12-01", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:38.324025Z", "excerpt": "Stimulus Worked\nFinance & Development,\nWithout the quick and massive policy response, the Great Recession might still plague the United States\nTHE U.S. economy has come a long way since the dark days of the Great Recession. Less than two years ago, the global financial system was on the brink of collapse, and the United States was suffering its worst economic downturn since the 1930s. At its worst, real gross domestic product (GDP) appeared to be in free fall, declining at nearly a 7 percent annual rate, with job losses averaging close to 750,000 a month. Today, the financial system is operating much more normally, real GDP has grown by more than 3 percent during the past year, and job growth has resumed, although at an insufficient pace.\nFrom the perspective, say, of early 2009, this rapid turnabout was a surprise. Maybe the country and the world were just lucky. But we take another view: the Great Recession in the United States gave way to recovery as quickly as it did largely because of the unprecedented responses by monetary and fiscal policymakers.\nThe Federal Reserve (Fed), the Bush and Obama administrations, and the U.S. Congress pursued the most aggressive and multifaceted fiscal and monetary policy responses in history. While the effectiveness and/or wisdom of any individual element can be debated, we estimate that if policymakers had not reacted as aggressively or as quickly as they did, the financial system might still be unsettled, the economy might still be shrinking, and the costs to U.S. taxpayers would have been vastly greater.\nThat said, almost every policy response remains controversial, with critics accusing them of being misguided, ineffective, or both. Resolution of this issue is crucial because, with the durability of the economic recovery still uncertain, there may be need for further stimulus.\nPolicy responses\nBroadly speaking, the U.S. government set out to accomplish two goals: to stabilize the sickly financial system and to mitigate the bu", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909", "url": "https://files.gao.gov/reports/GAO-25-106455/index.html", "title": "GAO-25-106455, ECONOMIC DOWNTURNS: Considerations for an Effective Automatic Fiscal Response", "publisher": "files.gao.gov", "published_at": "2003-07-10", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:37.599714Z", "excerpt": "ECONOMIC DOWNTURNS\nConsiderations for an Effective Automatic Fiscal Response\nReport to Congressional Requesters\nThe publication date is June 9, 2025, and the public release date is July 7, 2025.\nUnited States Government Accountability Office\nFor more information, contact Jeff Arkin at arkinj@gao.gov\nHighlights of GAO-25-106455, a report to congressional requesters\nConsiderations for an Effective Automatic Fiscal Response\nGAO previously found that automatic stabilizers reduced the detrimental effects of recent economic downturns. For example, studies GAO reviewed showed that during downturns automatic stabilizers generated additional economic activity. They also had positive effects on the well-being of individuals and families, such as alleviating poverty and supporting positive health outcomes. Automatic stabilizers temporarily increase federal deficits in the wake of economic downturns.\nGAO was asked to review several issues related to automatic stabilizers. This report describes (1) factors that contribute to the effective design of automatic stabilizers, (2) how triggers can be used to support automatic stabilization, and (3) the trade-offs and other considerations of select policy options to enhance automatic stabilizers.\nTo identify the factors that contribute to the effective design of automatic stabilizers and how triggers can be used to support automatic stabilization, GAO evaluated and compiled information from a literature review and from 21 expert interviews.\nTo identify policy options, GAO assessed information from a literature review and interviewed 21 experts in economic policy, social policy, automatic stabilizers, and specific policy areas. GAO evaluated evidence of various potential automatic stabilizers’ strengths and limitations, including their alignment with the factors that make automatic stabilizers effective. GAO discussed the potential automatic stabilizers with applicable federal agencies.\nGAO previously recommended that Congress could con", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d", "url": "https://www.elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/022/0047/004/article-A005-en.xml", "title": "Stimulus Worked", "publisher": "IMF eLibrary", "published_at": "2010-12-01", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:37.151788Z", "excerpt": "This issue of F&D looks at the growing role of emerging markets. Analysis by the IMF's Ayhan Kose and Eswar Prasad, professor of trade policy at Cornell University, argues that their economic ascendance will enable emerging markets such as Brazil, China, India, and Russia to play a more significant part in global economic governance and take on more responsibility for economic and financial stability. And Vivek Arora and Athanasios Vamvakidis measure how China's economy is increasingly affecting the rest of the world not just its neighbors and main trading partners. In addition, F&D examines a variety of topics that are particularly relevant as the world struggles to shake off the crisis. Alan Blinder and Mark Zandi look at the positive effects of stimulus in the United States. Without it, they say, the United States would still be in recession. IMF researchers look at how countries can get debt under control, and what happens when government debt is downgraded. Other articles examine the human costs of unemployment, how inequality can lead over time to financial crisis, and what changes in the way banks do business could mean for the financial system. Two articles look at Islamic banking, which was put to the test during the global crisis and proved its mettle, and in Faces of the Crisis Revisited, we continue to track how the recession affected several individuals around the world. This issue of F&D profiles Princeton economic theorist Avinash Dixit in the regular People in Economics feature, and Back to Basics looks at externalities.\nAbstract\nThis issue of F&D looks at the growing role of emerging markets. Analysis by the IMF's Ayhan Kose and Eswar Prasad, professor of trade policy at Cornell University, argues that their economic ascendance will enable emerging markets such as Brazil, China, India, and Russia to play a more significant part in global economic governance and take on more responsibility for economic and financial stability. And Vivek Arora and Ath", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782", "url": "https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2019/10/effects-of-economic-downturn-private-and-public-employment.html", "title": "Private Industry Hit Harder but Bounced Back Faster", "publisher": "Census.gov", "published_at": "2019-10-17", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:16.549501Z", "excerpt": "Since the United States suffered an economic downturn more than 10 years ago, employment in the public sector has never fully bounced back.\nThe public sector took less of a hit than private industry but belt-tightening by state and local governments has not loosened enough to return to pre-recession employment levels.\nGovernment tends to react more slowly than private industry to economic shifts. The decline in employment in the public sector began later and lasted longer than in the private sector.\nFrom March 2008 to March 2018, the number of public sector jobs declined by 93,000 to 19.6 million, a 0.5% decline, according to U.S. Census Bureau statistics from the Annual Survey of Public Employment & Payroll (ASPEP).\nBy contrast, private industry has rebounded in a big way even though it took a bigger hit during the recession. Employment in the private sector in 2018 reached a total of 125.9 million jobs, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Since 2008 (115.8 million jobs), the private sector has grown almost 8.65%, adding over 10 million jobs in spite of the downturn during that same 10-year period.\nWhile the private sector was already stalled in 2008 and in decline in 2009, the public sector simply leveled off in 2009 and the decline in public employment was not seen until 2010.\nAlthough employment in the public sector did not decline as much overall as employment in private industry, the rebound of the public sector is taking longer than it did for the private sector.\nBy March 2014, the private sector had already regained and surpassed the level of employment it had in the same month in 2008. As of March 2018, state and local governments still had not fully regained 2008 employment levels.\nDuring the period of decline, several areas experienced great impact in their level of government employment. Overall, state and local governments declined 3% from 2008 to 2013, losing more than 585,000 employees.\nElementary and secondary education saw the largest decre", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "url": "https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/public-sector-impacts-great-recession-and-covid-19/", "title": "Public Sector Impacts of the Great Recession and COVID-19", "publisher": "UC Berkeley Labor Center", "published_at": "2026-02-12", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:32.701726Z", "excerpt": "Great Recession declines and recovery\nDespite experiencing the longest period of economic expansion in U.S. history from 2009 to 2019, the nation’s economic recovery from the Great Recession was one of the weakest on record. The Great Recession saw massive employment losses—8.7 million jobs were lost in the U.S. from December 2007 to February 2010, representing 6.2% of the country’s nonfarm employment. Nonfarm employment in the U.S. did not recover pre-recession levels until May 2014; private sector employment recovered in March 2014.\nThe recession was especially severe in California; California’s unemployment rate surpassed the national rate, peaking at 12.3% several months after the national peak of 10% (Figure 1). The depth of California’s downturn has been detailed by many researchers (see Center on Wage and Employment Dynamics briefs of 2010, 2012, 2016, and 2018).[1]\nAlthough the Great Recession was followed by the longest period of economic expansion on record, that recovery is widely regarded to be incomplete, characterized by both widening inequality and very slow growth in real incomes. Several measures illustrate the incomplete national and state economic recovery:\n- The employment-to-population ratio (the percentage of the working-age population employed) had still not recovered by 2019.[2]\n- Inflation-adjusted wages and household incomes stagnated in California and nationally. This was particularly true for the middle of the wage distribution, as the bottom wage earners were boosted by state and local increases in the minimum wage.[3] Real wage growth from 2000-2007—economic boom times—failed to keep pace with rising productivity.[4] Wage trends from 2009-2019, the longest period of economic growth in U.S. history, followed a similar pattern. The median California household saw an income decline of 13.5% from 2006-2011.\n- Unemployment rates did not fall to 2007 levels until 2017—8 years after the official end of the recession.[5]\n- Long-term unemploymen", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "url": "https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2010/ted_20100112.htm", "title": "Payroll employment in 2009", "publisher": "Bureau of Labor Statistics", "published_at": "2010-01-12", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:16.547464Z", "excerpt": "An official website of the United States government\nIn 2009, payroll employment declined by 4.2 million. Over the course of the year, job losses moderated substantially. In the first quarter of 2009, job declines averaged 691,000 per month, compared with 69,000 per month in the last quarter.\nTotal nonfarm payroll employment edged down in December 2009 (-85,000). Job losses continued in construction, manufacturing, and wholesale trade, while temporary help services and health care continued to add jobs.\nThese employment data are from the Current Employment Statistics program and are seasonally adjusted. Data for the most recent two months are preliminary. To learn more, see \"The Employment Situation – December 2009\" (HTML) (PDF), news release USDL-09-1583.\nBureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, The Economics Daily, Payroll employment in 2009 at https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2010/ted_20100112.htm (visited September 16, 2026).", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709", "url": "https://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/great-recession-of-200709", "title": "The Great Recession", "publisher": "federalreservehistory.org", "published_at": "2025-04-07", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:39.561300Z", "excerpt": "The Great Recession\nDecember 2007-June 2009\nThe Great Recession began in December 2007 and ended in June 2009, which makes it the longest recession since World War II. Beyond its duration, the Great Recession was notably severe in several respects. Real gross domestic product (GDP) fell 4.3 percent from its peak in 2007Q4 to its trough in 2009Q2, the largest decline in the postwar era (based on data as of October 2013). The unemployment rate, which was 5 percent in December 2007, rose to 9.5 percent in June 2009, and peaked at 10 percent in October 2009.\nThe financial effects of the Great Recession were similarly outsized: Home prices fell approximately 30 percent, on average, from their mid-2006 peak to mid-2009, while the S&P 500 index fell 57 percent from its October 2007 peak to its trough in March 2009. The net worth of US households and nonprofit organizations fell from a peak of approximately $69 trillion in 2007 to a trough of $55 trillion in 2009.\nAs the financial crisis and recession deepened, measures intended to revive economic growth were implemented on a global basis. The United States, like many other nations, enacted fiscal stimulus programs that used different combinations of government spending and tax cuts. These programs included the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.\nThe Federal Reserve's response to the crisis evolved over time and took a number of nontraditional avenues. Initially, the Fed employed \"traditional\" policy actions by reducing the federal funds rate from 5.25 percent in September 2007 to a range of 0-0.25 percent in December 2008, with much of the reduction occurring in January to March 2008 and in September to December 2008. The sharp reduction in those periods reflected a marked downgrade in the economic outlook and the increased downside risks to both output and inflation (including the risk of deflation).\nWith the federal funds rate at its effective lower bound by December 2008", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23", "url": "https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2019/05/ten-years-laterdid-qe-work/", "title": "Ten Years Later—Did QE Work? - Liberty Street Economics", "publisher": "Liberty Street Economics", "published_at": "2019-05-08", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:51.101758Z", "excerpt": "By November 2008, the Global Financial Crisis, which originated in the residential housing market and the shadow banking system, had begun to turn into a major recession, spurring the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) to initiate what we now refer to as quantitative easing (QE). In this blog post, we draw upon the empirical findings of post-crisis academic research–including our own work–to shed light on the question: Did QE work?\nUnconventional Monetary Policy and Quantitative Easing\nFirst things first: What does the term QE describe? QE is part of what is now referred to as unconventional monetary policy. Over the two decades prior to the Global Financial Crisis, central banks mainly conducted monetary policy through two instruments. First, a central bank would set the short-term money rate—in the United States, the fed funds target rate. Second, the central bank would try to “manage expectations” by giving the public a sense of where the future policy rate would be through its official communications with the public. This way of conducting monetary policy is based on the premise that a lower (expected) interest rate will lead to an expansion of economic activity, enabling the central bank to minimize economic volatility over the course of the business cycle and to fulfill its (explicit or implicit) mandate to achieve price stability and maximum employment.\nWhen the nominal interest rate is close to zero, this way of supporting the economy becomes less effective; should a central bank consider negative nominal rates to be an option, the effectiveness of the tool is still limited, since nominal rates can only be pushed so far below zero. Alternatively, the central bank can attempt to support the economy by buying large amounts of financial assets to make risky assets more liquid and/or lower longer-term interest rates. A form of unconventional monetary policy, these large-scale asset purchases (LSAPs) are often simply referred to as QE.\nAfter the financial-marke", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826", "url": "https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/mpr_20090224_part1.htm", "title": "Part 1: Overview: Monetary Policy and the Economic Outlook", "publisher": "federalreserve.gov", "published_at": "2009-02-24", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:36.752440Z", "excerpt": "- February 24, 2009: Part 1\n- Part 2\n- Part 3\n- Part 4\n- Appendix\n- Abbreviations\n- Printable Version (872 KB PDF)\nPart 1: Overview: Monetary Policy and the Economic Outlook\nMonetary Policy Report submitted to the Congress on February 24, 2009, pursuant to section 2B of the Federal Reserve Act\nThe U.S. economy weakened markedly in the second half of 2008 as the turmoil in financial markets intensified, credit conditions tightened further, and asset values continued to slump. Conditions in the labor market worsened significantly after early autumn, and nearly all major sectors of the economy registered steep declines in activity late last year. Meanwhile, inflation pressures diminished appreciably as prices of energy and other commodities dropped sharply, the margin of resource slack in the economy widened, and the foreign exchange value of the dollar strengthened.\nThe second half of 2008 saw an intensification of the financial and economic strains that had initially been triggered by the end of the housing boom in the United States and other countries and the associated problems in mortgage markets. The ensuing turmoil in global credit markets affected asset values, credit conditions, and business and consumer confidence around the world. Over the summer, a weakening U.S. economy and continued financial turbulence led to a broad loss of confidence in the financial sector. In September, the government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were placed into conservatorship by their regulator, and Lehman Brothers Holdings filed for bankruptcy. The insurance company American International Group, Inc., or AIG, also came under severe pressure, and the Federal Reserve, with the full support of the Treasury, agreed to provide substantial liquidity to the company. In addition, a number of other financial institutions failed or were acquired by competitors. As a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy, a prominent money market mutual fund suffered capital losses, w", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923", "url": "https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w34411/w34411.pdf", "title": "w34411.pdf", "publisher": "nber.org", "published_at": null, "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:37.900559Z", "excerpt": "NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES\nLESSONS FOR AUTOMATIC FISCAL STABILIZERS FROM THE GREAT RECESSION \nAND THE COVID RECESSION\nKaren Dynan\nDouglas Elmendorf\nWorking Paper 34411\nhttp://www.nber.org/papers/w34411\nNATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH\n1050 Massachusetts Avenue\nCambridge, MA 02138\nOctober 2025\nWe have received no funding for this work and have no material and relevant financial \nrelationships. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect \nthe views of the National Bureau of Economic Research.\nNBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been \npeer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies \nofficial NBER publications.\n© 2025 by Karen Dynan and Douglas Elmendorf. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to \nexceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, \nincluding © notice, is given to the source.\nLessons for Automatic Fiscal Stabilizers from the Great Recession and the COVID Recession \nKaren Dynan and Douglas Elmendorf\nNBER Working Paper No. 34411\nOctober 2025\nJEL No. E32, E62, E63, H12\nABSTRACT\nThis paper simulates economic developments as if the discretionary fiscal stimulus enacted in the \npast two recessions had not occurred and additional automatic fiscal stabilizers had been deployed \ninstead. For the calibration of key economic relationships most consistent with the empirical \nliterature, we find that more sustained fiscal stimulus would have pushed unemployment down \nmore rapidly following the Great Recession and that more limited stimulus would have caused \ninflation to increase much less following the COVID recession. We caution, though, that our \nestimates are uncertain given the large number of assumptions embedded in the calculations. Under \ndifferent assumptions about the supply side of the economy when resource utilization is high, the \nstimulus enacted in early 2021 was not a", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "url": "https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2010/08/24/statement-vice-president-new-cbo-report-employment-and-economic-impact-r", "title": "Statement by the Vice President on New CBO Report on Employment and Economic Impact of the Recovery Act", "publisher": "whitehouse.gov", "published_at": "2010-08-24", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:16.407037Z", "excerpt": "Statement by the Vice President on New CBO Report on Employment and Economic Impact of the Recovery Act\nVice President Joe Biden today issued the following statement on a new report from the Congressional Budget Office on the employment and economic impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act:\n“This new analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is further confirmation of what we’ve been hearing from leading economists, the nation’s governors and families across the country: the Recovery Act is working to rescue the economy from eight years of failed economic policy and rebuild it even stronger than before. When the CBO, Congress’s top watchdog and an institution widely-respected on both sides of the aisle, says that because of the Recovery Act as many as 3.3 million Americans are on the job today and the unemployment rate is as much as 1.8 percent lower, it’s impossible for even the most cynical, bent-on-rooting-for-failure critics to deny. So while Republicans in Congress – the same party that got us into this mess in the first place - may want to turn back the clock and drive us back into the same ditch we’re making our way out of, it’s now clearer than ever before that we can’t afford to go backward; we have to keep moving forward and build on measures like the Recovery Act that are creating jobs and making us competitive in the 21st century economy.”\nAccording to the CBO report, “Estimated Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act on Employment and Economic Output from April 2010 through June 2010,” in the second quarter of 2010, the Recovery Act:\n• Raised the level of real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product (GDP) by between 1.7 percent and 4.5 percent,\n• Lowered the unemployment rate by between 0.7 percentage points and 1.8 percentage points,\n• Increased the number of people employed by between 1.4 million and 3.3 million\nThe report can be viewed in full HERE.", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome", "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb", "url": "https://www2.census.gov/ces/wp/2012/CES-WP-12-04.pdf", "title": "CES-WP-12-04.pdf", "publisher": "www2.census.gov", "published_at": null, "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:16.398949Z", "excerpt": "JOB TO JOB FLOWS AND THE BUSINESS CYCLE \n \n \nby \n \n \nHenry Hyatt * \nU.S. Bureau of the Census \n \nand \n \n \nErika McEntarfer * \nU.S. Bureau of the Census \n \n \n \nCES 12-04 March, 2012 \n \n \n \nThe research program of the Center for Econ omic Studies (CES) produces a wide range of \neconomic analyses to improve the statistical programs of the U.S. Census Bureau. Many of these \nanalyses take the form of CES research pape rs. The papers have not undergone the review \naccorded Census Bureau publications and no endorsement should be inferred. Any opinions and \nconclusions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not nece ssarily represent the \nviews of the U.S. Census Burea u. All results have been reviewed to ensure that no confidential \ninformation is disclosed. Republication in whole or part must be cleared with the authors. \n \nTo obtain information about the series, see www.census.gov/ces or contact C.J. Krizan, Editor, \nDiscussion Papers, U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies 2K130F, 4600 Silver Hill \nRoad, Washington, DC 20233, CES.Papers.List@census.gov. \n \n \n \n \n \n \nAbstract \n \n \n \n Movements of workers between jobs are th e principal mechanism by which labor markets \nallocate workers to optimize productivity. While these flows are large and economically \nimportant, they represent a significant gap in available economic statistics. In this paper, we \nanalyze a new database of job-to-job flows from 1998 to 2010 for the United States. This \nanalysis provides new estimates of gross employment flows, origin and destination industries, \nnonemployment, and associated earnings. We evaluate these pilot data in the context of the last \ntwo recessions and the intervening economic expansion. We find sharp drops in rates of job \nchange in both recessions, with the largest declines among younger workers. There is cyclicality \nin both earnings gains from job change and earnings penalties from nonemployment. We also \nshow evidence of higher rates of nonemployment ", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044", "url": "https://www.congress.gov/111/chrg/CHRG-111hhrg57735/CHRG-111hhrg57735.pdf", "title": "CHRG-111hhrg57735.pdf", "publisher": "congress.gov", "published_at": null, "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:26.921973Z", "excerpt": "U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE\nWASHINGTON : \nFor sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office\nInternet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800\nFax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001\n57–735 PDF 2010 \nTHE AMERICAN RECOVERY \nAND REINVESTMENT ACT \nOF 2009, AN UPDATE \nHEARING \nBEFORE THE \nCOMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET \nHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES \nONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS \nSECOND SESSION \nHEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, JULY 14, 2010 \nSerial No. 111–29 \nPrinted for the use of the Committee on the Budget \n( \nAvailable on the Internet: \nhttp://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/house/budget/index.html \n(II) \nCOMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET \nJOHN M. SPRATT, J R., South Carolina, Chairman \nALLYSON Y. SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania \nMARCY KAPTUR, Ohio \nXAVIER BECERRA, California \nLLOYD DOGGETT, Texas \nEARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon \nMARION BERRY, Arkansas \nALLEN BOYD, Florida \nJAMES P. M CGOVERN, Massachusetts \nNIKI TSONGAS, Massachusetts \nBOB ETHERIDGE, North Carolina \nBETTY M CCOLLUM, Minnesota \nJOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky \nROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey \nROSA L. D ELAURO, Connecticut, \nCHET EDWARDS, Texas \nROBERT C. ‘‘BOBBY’’ SCOTT, Virginia \nJAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island \nRICK LARSEN, Washington \nTIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York \nGWEN MOORE, Wisconsin \nGERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia \nKURT SCHRADER, Oregon \nDENNIS MOORE, Kansas \nPAUL RYAN, Wisconsin, \nRanking Minority Member \nJEB HENSARLING, Texas \nSCOTT GARRETT, New Jersey \nMARIO DIAZ–BALART, Florida \nMICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho \nPATRICK T. M CHENRY, North Carolina \nCONNIE MACK, Florida \nJOHN CAMPBELL, California \nJIM JORDAN, Ohio \nDEVIN NUNES, California \nROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama \nCYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming \nSTEVE AUSTRIA, Ohio \nGREGG HARPER, Mississippi \nCHARLES K. DJOU, Hawaii \nPROFESSIONAL STAFF \nTHOMAS S. K AHN, Staff Director and Chief Counsel \nAUSTIN SMYTHE, Minority Staff Director \n(III) \nC O N T E N T S \nPage \nHearing held in Washington, DC, July 14, 2010 ............", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "url": "https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2018/article/great-recession-great-recovery.htm", "title": "Great Recession, great recovery? Trends from the Current Population Survey", "publisher": "Bureau of Labor Statistics", "published_at": "2018-06-04", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:16.411916Z", "excerpt": "It has now been a decade since the start of the Great Recession—the most severe economic downturn in the United States since the Great Depression.1 In a 2-year span starting in December 2007, the unemployment rate rose sharply, from about 5 percent to 10 percent. In late 2009, more than 15 million people were unemployed. Total employment, as measured by the Current Population Survey (CPS),2 dropped by 8.6 million, or almost 6 percent. In 2010, however, the U.S. economy and labor market began to recover. By December 2017, the unemployment rate had fallen to 4.1 percent. Employment had grown by 16.0 million, reaching a level about 5 percent higher than that in November 2007. However, not all U.S. labor market indicators had returned to their pre-Great Recession levels. The number of long-term unemployed, especially those who had been jobless for a year or more, remained elevated. The ranks of those working part time involuntarily were still sizable. In addition, long-term trends, such as the decline in labor force participation, continued throughout the recession and recovery. This article uses CPS data on unemployment, labor underutilization, labor force participation, employment, and earnings to analyze how the U.S. labor market has recovered from the Great Recession.\nUnemployment\nThe unemployment rate represents the number of people who are jobless, looking for a job, and available for work, as a percentage of the labor force (all people who are employed or unemployed). During the 2007–09 recession,3 the unemployment rate more than doubled. (See figure 1.) The rate increased by 5.3 percentage points since November 2007, peaking at 10.0 percent in October 2009, when more than 15 million people were unemployed. This peak marked the highest unemployment rate since the aftermath of the 1981–82 recession, when the rate exceeded 10 percent for 10 consecutive months, from September 1982 to June 1983. The rate began to trend downward in April 2010, with sharper declines st", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "url": "https://ecommons.cornell.edu/entities/publication/fc980e12-7ab9-4bb8-bc0c-e91cfaceadcb", "title": "Estimated Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act on Employment and Economic Output From April 2010 Through June 2010", "publisher": "hdl.handle.net", "published_at": "2010-08-01", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:16.403817Z", "excerpt": "Estimated Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act on Employment and Economic Output From April 2010 Through June 2010\n[Excerpt] The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) contains provisions that are intended to boost economic activity and employment in the United States. Section 1512(e) of the law requires the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to comment on reports filed by recipients of ARRA funding that detail the number of jobs funded through their activities. This CBO report fulfills that requirement. It also provides CBO’s estimates of ARRA’s overall impact on employment and economic output in the second quarter of calendar year 2010. Those estimates—which CBO considers more comprehensive than the recipients’ reports—are based on evidence from similar policies enacted in the past and on the results of various economic models.", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome", "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8", "url": "https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/economy/jobs/recovery-act/", "title": "The Recovery Act", "publisher": "The White House", "published_at": "2010-08-10", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:32.368914Z", "excerpt": "Jobs & The Economy: Putting America Back to Work\n“It is our generation’s task, to reignite the true engine of America’s economic growth —\n a rising, thriving middle class,”\nThe Recovery Act\nPresident Obama took office in the middle of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, at a time the economy was losing over 700,000 jobs a month and in the midst of what we now know was the worst 6-month period for GDP growth in over 60 years. To respond to the crisis, the President took immediate, bold, and effective action, signing the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act into law less than a month after taking office, helping to create jobs and make the investments we need to out-innovate, out-educate and out-build the competition so we can create true economic security for the middle class.\nAnd despite claims to the contrary, these efforts were successful in preventing another Depression, and returning our economy to growth. As of January 2014, the economy has now added private sector jobs for 47 consecutive months, and a total of 8.5 million jobs has been added over that period.\nA range of independent estimates have confirmed the effectiveness of the President’s actions. According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the Recovery Act supported as many as 3.5 million jobs across the country by the end of last year. Princeton’s Alan Blinder and Moody’s Chief Economist Mark Zandi estimate that without the financial interventions and Recovery Act, we would have entered another Depression - there would have been 8.5 million jobs less in 2010, and GDP would have been about 6.5 percent lower.\nThrough the Recovery Act, which was enacted on February 17, 2009, the President helped deliver crucial support to the economy in three ways.\nThe single largest part of the Act — more than one-third of it — was tax cuts. Ninety-five percent of working Americans have seen their taxes go down as a result of the Act. The second-largest part — just under a third — was dir", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62", "url": "https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106056", "title": "U.S. GAO - Economic Downturns: Effects of Automatic Spending Programs and Taxes", "publisher": "Economic Downturns: Effects of Automatic Spending Programs and Taxes", "published_at": "2026-02-04", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:38.496659Z", "excerpt": "Fast Facts\n\"Automatic stabilizers\" adjust federal spending and taxes during an economic downturn. These budget mechanisms can help keep the economy afloat when unemployment is high and incomes fall.\nOur Q&A report documents the effects of automatic stabilizers in recent economic downturns. Specifically, they:\nPrevented the economy from getting worse by generating additional economic activity\nHelped support people's wellbeing by alleviating poverty and improving nutrition through government benefits like unemployment insurance and food assistance\nContributed to deficits in the wake of recent downturns, but aren't a key driver of unsustainable debt\nUnemployment insurance is a type of automatic stabilizer\nHighlights\nWhat GAO Found\nStudies GAO reviewed showed that automatic stabilizers—mechanisms that alter tax and spending levels in response to changes in economic conditions without direct intervention by policymakers—reduced the detrimental effects of recent economic downturns. Automatic stabilizers include taxes—such as the individual income tax, where taxpayers owe less as their income declines—as well as benefit programs—such as unemployment insurance, where more people become eligible during economic downturns. These automatic stabilizers prevented the economy from getting worse by generating additional economic activity.\nStudies showed that during economic downturns, programs with an automatic stabilizer component had various positive effects on the wellbeing of individuals and families, such as alleviating poverty and supporting positive health outcomes such as improved nutrition and healthy birthweights. However, it is difficult to isolate the effects of automatic stabilizers, because studies frequently did not separately analyze the automatic portions of these programs and discretionary changes made by policymakers to address economic downturns.\nAutomatic stabilizers contributed to federal deficits in the wake of recent economic downturns, according to Congres", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a", "url": "https://www.bls.gov/cew/publications/employment-and-wages-annual-averages/2010/", "title": "Employment and Wages Online Annual Averages, 2010", "publisher": "Bureau of Labor Statistics", "published_at": "2026-02-26", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:16.406363Z", "excerpt": "An official website of the United States government\nThe annual bulletin Employment and Wages contains employment and wage data from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) program aggregated by industry at the national, state, and county levels.\nThis web-only publication, Employment and Wages Online, is the successor to the annual print bulletin, Employment and Wages. The 2008 issue of the Employment and Wages bulletin was the final edition to be issued on paper in March 2010.\nThere are some differences between the print publication and the web-only publication. Many of the graphs which appeared in the print publication are no longer produced. The web-only publication continues to present extensive tables of QCEW data along with supplemental documentation. Questions regarding these data can be addressed to the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) program by calling (202) 691-6567 or by using any of the channels provided on the QCEW contact page on the BLS Web site at www.bls.gov/cew/cewcont.htm.\nThe quarterly County Employment and Wages news releases produced by the QCEW program as well as PDFs of all 2010 QCEW news releases can be found at the QCEW news release archive. County Employment and Wages news releases present employment and wages by county and are released approximately 6 months after the reference quarter. With continuous process improvements, the QCEW is now on an accelerated schedule to release data earlier than in previous years. All data, at each level of geography, can be found at QCEW databases. All tables in this publication are available as PDFs on the above Web site. Questions regarding these data can be addressed to the QCEW program by calling (202) 691-6567 or by email.\nBusiness Employment Dynamics (BED) news releases present gross job gains and losses and are released approximately 8 months after the reference quarter. BED also began publishing data on an accelerated schedule by releasing the second quarter 2010 data tw", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1", "url": "https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2010/", "title": "2010 home", "publisher": "Bureau of Labor Statistics", "published_at": "2010-01-07", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:16.395904Z", "excerpt": "2010 home\n \n \n Archive by Date\n \n 2010\n \n - Fatal Occupational Injuries to Volunteer Workers, 2003-07 12/15/2010\n- Duration of unemployment in States, 2007-09 12/01/2010\n- Errata, December 2010 12/01/2010\n- Nominations Sought for 2011 Julius Shiskin Award 12/01/2010\n- Bringing work home: implications for BLS productivity measures 12/01/2010\n- The U.S. housing bubble and bust: impacts on employment 12/01/2010\n- Wages of Full-time and Part-time Cooks: A Multicity Tour 11/22/2010\n- Fatal occupational injuries at road construction sites, 2003-07 11/01/2010\n- Reversals in the patterns of women's labor supply in the United States, 1977-2009 11/01/2010\n- The Nation's underemployed in the “Great Recession” of 2007-09 11/01/2010\n- Nominations Sought for 2011 Julius Shiskin Award 11/01/2010\n- Consumer-Driven Health Care: What Is It, and What Does It Mean for Employees and Employers? 10/25/2010\n- Disability and occupational projections 10/01/2010\n- The impact of the 2007-09 recession on workers with disabilities 10/01/2010\n- The composition of the unemployed and long-term unemployed in tough labor markets 10/01/2010\n- Ranking of Full-time Civilian Occupations by Hourly and Annual Earnings, July 2009 09/29/2010\n- Evaluating the 1996-2006 employment projections 09/01/2010\n- Household expenditures on children, 2007-08 09/01/2010\n- Self-employment in the United States 09/01/2010\n- Disparities in Automatic Enrollment Plan Availability 08/30/2010\n- Workplace Safety and Health in the Health Care and Social Assistance Industry, 2003-07 08/30/2010\n- Revising the Standard Occupational Classification system for 2010 08/01/2010\n- The expanding role of temporary help services from 1990 to 2008 08/01/2010\n- Time-use surveys: issues in data collection on multitasking 08/01/2010\n- Supplemental Pay in the Healthcare Industry: Overtime Pay, Bonuses, and Shift Differentials 07/23/2010\n- Multiple jobholding during the 2000s 07/01/2010\n- Employment and earnings of recent veterans: data from the CP", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "url": "https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/administration/eop/cea/Estimate-of-Job-Creation/", "title": "Estimates of Job Creation from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009", "publisher": "The White House", "published_at": "2016-01-04", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:44.634673Z", "excerpt": "Estimates of Job Creation from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009\nEXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT\nCOUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS\nESTIMATES OF JOB CREATION FROM THE\nAMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009\nClick here to download printable PDF\nThe American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) was designed to save and create jobs, as well as to cushion the economic downturn and make crucial public investments. At the time of passage, the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) made estimates of the employment effects of the Act for the economy as a whole. As the money is being distributed by the various agencies, there is interest in estimates of the likely jobs effects of the individual pieces. Of course, as projects swing into action, the government will gather actual data on reported job creation. This report describes the estimating procedures used so far; specifies procedures to be used by recipients for estimating job creation going forward; discusses reporting requirements for job creation; and describes the procedures the CEA will use to evaluate the job creation and retention benefits of the ARRA going forward.\nI. AGGREGATE ESTIMATES OF THE JOB IMPACT OF THE ARRA\nThe methodology used to estimate the job impact of the ARRA was described in detail in Romer and Bernstein (Obama Transition Document, January 11, 2009). In this section we briefly summarize the methodology and discuss the results.\nMethodology\nThe ARRA of 2009 had a total fiscal impact of $787 billion. The individual components fall into six broad categories: individual income tax cuts; a two-year patch to the alternative minimum tax; investment incentives; aid to people directly hurt by the recession; state fiscal relief, and direct government investment spending. At the time of passage, we took the best estimates available of the total amount of spending in each of these categories. We used Office of Management and Budget (OMB) estimates to specify the likely spend-out, by quarter, ", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630", "url": "https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wm-macroeconomics/chapter/counterbalancing-recession-and-boom/", "title": "Macroeconomics", "publisher": "courses.lumenlearning.com", "published_at": "2015-05-28", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:36.691458Z", "excerpt": "Learning Objectives\n- Describe how fiscal policy can be designed to stabilize the economy using automatic stabilizers\nFiscal policies include discretionary fiscal policy and automatic stabilizers. Discretionary fiscal policy occurs when the Federal government passes a new law to explicitly change tax rates or spending levels. The stimulus package of 2009 is an example. Changes in tax and spending levels can also occur automatically through non-discretionary spending, due to automatic stabilizers, which are programs that are already in place, and thus do not require Congress to act. Instead, they prevent aggregate demand from falling as much as it otherwise would in recession, or they hold down aggregate demand in a potentially inflationary boom. Let’s see how this works.\nCounterbalancing Recession and Boom\nAutomatic stabilizers include unemployment insurance, food stamps, and the personal and corporate income tax. Suppose aggregate demand were to fall sharply so that a recession occurred. The lower level of aggregate demand and higher unemployment will tend to pull down personal incomes and corporate profits, which would tend to reduce consumer and investment spending, further cutting aggregate demand and GDP. Consider, though, the effects of automatic stabilizers. As individuals are laid-off, they qualify for unemployment compensation, food stamps and other welfare programs. Additionally, since their income has fallen, so have their tax liabilities. All of these things serve to buoy aggregate demand and prevent it from falling as far as it otherwise would. Thus, recessions are somewhat milder.\nThe process works in reverse, too. Consider the situation where aggregate demand has risen sharply, causing the macro equilibrium to occur at a level of output above potential GDP. Because taxes are based on personal income and corporate profits, a rise in aggregate demand automatically increases tax payments, reducing disposable income and thus spending. On the spending side", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4", "url": "https://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/great-recession-and-its-aftermath", "title": "The Great Recession and Its Aftermath", "publisher": "federalreservehistory.org", "published_at": "2011-12-01", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:34.274783Z", "excerpt": "The Great Recession and Its Aftermath\n2007-\nThe period known as the Great Moderation came to an end when the decade-long expansion in US housing market activity peaked in 2006 and residential construction began declining. In 2007, losses on mortgage-related financial assets began to cause strains in global financial markets, and in December 2007 the US economy entered a recession. That year several large financial firms experienced financial distress, and many financial markets experienced significant turbulence. In response, the Federal Reserve provided liquidity and support through a range of programs motivated by a desire to improve the functioning of financial markets and institutions, and thereby limit the harm to the US economy.1 Nonetheless, in the fall of 2008, the economic contraction worsened, ultimately becoming deep enough and protracted enough to acquire the label \"the Great Recession.\" While the US economy bottomed out in the middle of 2009, the recovery in the years immediately following was by some measures unusually slow. The Federal Reserve has provided unprecedented monetary accommodation in response to the severity of the contraction and the gradual pace of the ensuing recovery. In addition, the financial crisis led to a range of major reforms in banking and financial regulation, congressional legislation that significantly affected the Federal Reserve.\nRise and Fall of the Housing Market\nThe recession and crisis followed an extended period of expansion in US housing construction, home prices, and housing credit. This expansion began in the 1990s and continued unabated through the 2001 recession, accelerating in the mid-2000s. Average home prices in the United States more than doubled between 1998 and 2006, the sharpest increase recorded in US history, and even larger gains were recorded in some regions. Home ownership in this period rose from 64 percent in 1994 to 69 percent in 2005, and residential investment grew from about 4.5 percent of US g", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e", "url": "https://www.economicpopulist.org/files/ces_cps_trends.pdf", "title": "ces_cps_trends.pdf", "publisher": "economicpopulist.org", "published_at": null, "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:32.382239Z", "excerpt": "May 7, 2010 \nEmployment from the BLS household and payroll surveys: \nsummary of recent trends \n \nThis report is updated monthly in conjunction with the release of the Employment Situation. The release \ndates are available on the BLS website. \n \nThe Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) has two monthly surveys that measure employment levels and \ntrends: the Current Population Survey (CPS), also known as the household survey, and the Current \nEmployment Statistics (CES) survey, also known as the payroll or establishment survey. \n \nEmployment estimates from both the household and payroll surveys are published in the \nEmployment Situation news release each month. These estimates differ because the surveys have \ndistinct definitions of employment and distinct survey and estimation methods. (See the \ncomparison of the surveys on page 4.) This report is intended to help data users better understand \nthe differences in the surveys’ employment measures as well as divergences that sometimes occur \nin their trends. \n \nBoth the payroll and household surveys are needed for a complete picture of the labor market. The \npayroll survey provides a highly reliable gauge of monthly change in nonfarm payroll employment. \nThe household survey provides a broader picture of employment including agriculture and the self \nemployed. \nLatest trends in payroll and household survey employment \nSeasonally adjusted, numbers in thousands \n \n1 Payroll survey estimates for March and April 2010 are preliminary and subject to revision. \n2 The effects of population control revisions in January 2000 and January of 2003-10 have been smoothed out in the \nhistorical household survey employment estimates used here; thus, the changes shown above will differ from those \ncalculated using the official estimates in the Employment Situation and in the public database available on the BLS \nwebsite. See Appendix for further explanation. \n3 This is a research series created from household survey employment to be more simi", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "url": "https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2011/03/art3full.pdf", "title": "art3full.pdf", "publisher": "bls.gov", "published_at": null, "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:16.409762Z", "excerpt": "Monthly Labor Review • March 2011 33\nThe 2010 Census and Employment\nThe 2010 Census: the employment\nimpact of counting the Nation\nThe 2010 Census count marked the addition\nof 564,000 temporary, intermittent workers to payrolls; \n2010 Census hiring masked the underlying trends\nin Current Employment Statistics estimates\nEmily Richards\nEmily Richards is an economist \nwith the Current Employment \nStatistics program in the Office \nof Employment and Unemploy-\nment Statistics, Bureau of Labor \nStatistics. E-mail: richards.emily@\nbls.gov\nE\nvery 10 years, the U.S. Census Bu-\nreau carries out a count of every resi-\ndent in the United States, including \nPuerto Rico and the U.S. island territories, \nas mandated by the United States Consti-\ntution.1 To accomplish this task, the Census \nBureau hires a large number of temporary \nworkers for short periods. As a result, some \nemployment estimates from the Current \nEmployment Statistics (CES) survey are af-\nfected.2 Historically—and most recently in \n2010, a year following the end of one of the \ndeepest U.S. recessions ever—the ability to \naccurately account for the impact of these \ntemporary, intermittent census workers and \ngauge underlying employment trends has \nbeen vital.\nDuring the most recent recession (be -\ntween December 2007 and June 2009),3 em-\nployment in nonfarm establishments fell by \n7.5 million. Although the rate of job losses \nslowed in the second half of 2009, an addi-\ntional 1.2 million jobs were cut by the end \nof that year. In 2010, employment growth \nresumed, and nearly 1 million positions \nwere added to payrolls, about 13 percent of \nthe jobs lost during the recession. Although \nemployment did grow during the year, the \neffect of 2010 Census employment masked \nunderlying trends within the economy on \na month-to-month basis because a large \nnumber of workers were hired early in the \nyear to work on the 2010 Census and then let go \nas work on the census wound down. (See chart 1.)\nCensus hiring\nThe 2010 Census inv", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8", "url": "https://pressbooks.ccconline.org/accbertelsen/chapter/30-5-automatic-stabilizers/", "title": "Chapter 15 – Automatic Stabilizers", "publisher": "Pressbooks", "published_at": "2019-12-09", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:44.501449Z", "excerpt": "Learning Objectives\nBy the end of this section, you will be able to:\n- Describe how discretionary fiscal policy can be used by the federal government to stabilize the economy.\n- Identify examples of automatic stabilizers.\n- Understand how a standardized employment budget can be used to identify automatic stabilizers.\nThe millions of unemployed in 2008–2009 could collect unemployment insurance benefits to replace some of their salaries. Federal fiscal policies include discretionary fiscal policy, when the government passes a new law that explicitly changes tax or spending levels. The stimulus package of 2009 is an example. Changes in tax and spending levels can also occur automatically, due to automatic stabilizers, such as unemployment insurance and food stamps, which are programs that are already laws that stimulate aggregate demand in a recession and hold down aggregate demand in a potentially inflationary boom.\nCounterbalancing Recession and Boom\nConsider first the situation where aggregate demand has risen sharply, causing the equilibrium to occur at a level of output above potential GDP. This situation will increase inflationary pressure in the economy. The policy prescription in this setting would be a dose of contractionary fiscal policy, implemented through some combination of higher taxes and lower spending. To some extent, both changes happen automatically. On the tax side, a rise in aggregate demand means that workers and firms throughout the economy earn more. Because taxes are based on personal income and corporate profits, a rise in aggregate demand automatically increases tax payments. On the spending side, stronger aggregate demand typically means lower unemployment and fewer layoffs, and so there is less need for government spending on unemployment benefits, welfare, Medicaid, and other programs in the social safety net.\nThe process works in reverse, too. If aggregate demand were to fall sharply so that a recession occurs, then the prescription woul", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "url": "https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2010/03/art2full.pdf", "title": "art2full.pdf", "publisher": "bls.gov", "published_at": null, "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:16.402113Z", "excerpt": "Monthly Labor Review • March 2010 23\nPayroll Employment in 2009\nT\nen months into the recession that \nbegan in December 2007, job \nlosses accelerated, breaking from \nthe trends of the previous two recessions, \nin early 1990 and early 2000. 1 With the \nworsening crisis in the financial sector in \nlate 2008, employees in most industries felt \nthe impact. Payroll employment losses ac -\ncelerated, and the largest 1-month job loss \n(779,000) of the recession occurred in Janu-\nary 2009. Employment declines moderated \nthroughout the rest of the year. (See chart \n1.) In 2009, nonfarm payroll employment, \nas measured by the Current Employment \nStatistics ( CES) survey, 2 declined by 4.7 \nmillion, to 130 million. Construction and \nmanufacturing shed the most jobs during \nthe year, while health services continued to \nadd employees to payrolls.\nAs total nonfarm employment losses \nmoderated in the second half of the year, \nother economic indicators also suggested \nan improvement in the general health of \nthe U.S. economy. (See tables 1–3.) The \ngross domestic product ( GDP) posted \ngrowth in the third and fourth quarters, \nafter the previous four quarters saw losses. \nCorporate profits also grew in the third and \nfourth quarters, and the composite index of \neconomic indicators gradually improved \nthroughout the year. In the labor market, \nPayroll employment in 2009:\njob losses continue\nEmployment declined by 4.7 million in 2009,\nthe largest calendar-year job loss in the history\nof the series (since 1939); although payrolls\ndeclined sharply at the beginning of the year,\njob losses moderated thereafter\nMegan M. Barker and \nAdam A. Hadi are \neconomists in the \nNational Estimates \nBranch, Office of \nEmployment and \nUnemployment Statistics, \nBureau of Labor Statistics. \nE-mail: barker.megan@\nbls.gov or hadi.adam@\nbls.gov.\nMegan M. Barker\nand\nAdam A. Hadi\ntemporary help services not only saw job \nlosses moderate, but also began to add jobs \nin the last few months of the year. Firms \nof", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c", "url": "https://irle.berkeley.edu/publications/brief/high-unemployment-after-the-great-recession-why-what-can-we-do/", "title": "High Unemployment After the Great Recession: Why? What Can We Do? – Institute for Research on Labor and Employment", "publisher": "Institute for Research on Labor and Employment", "published_at": "2010-06-01", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:17.080781Z", "excerpt": "In May 2010, a record 46 percent of the unemployed were counted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics as long-term unemployed — defined as durations of six months or more. Those who were unemployed for more than a year, whom I shall call the very-long-term unemployed, numbered 23 percent of all the unemployed. These are unprecedented figures.\nWe know that long-term unemployment and very long-term unemployment generate serious and long-lasting harm to millions of individuals and to the economy. The scarring effects upon the economic, mental and physical health of long-term unemployed workers and their families are well-documented (von Wachter 2010). We also know that many of the very long-term unemployed eventually leave the labor force permanently, and some of those end up on the disability rolls. Very-long-term unemployment consequently generates adverse effects upon the Treasury and upon the capacity of the economy to grow in the long-run.\nIn the past two years the proportion of the unemployed who have been out of work six months or longer has grown to levels not seen since the Great Depression (Chart 1). At first, the growth of the long term unemployed seemed to be a function of the surprisingly rapid and extended increase in the overall unemployment rate, which rose from 4.7 percent in November 2007, when the recession began and peaked at 10.1 percent in October 2009. As has been true in previous recessions, the long-term unemployment rate grew at about the same rate as the growth in the unemployment rate (Chart 1).\nIn the recovery phase that began in April or May of 2009, what went up quickly has not come down very much. Since its cyclical peak of 10.1 percent in October 2009, the overall unemployment rate fell to 9.7 percent in January 2010 and remained at 9.7 percent in May 2010. But in the same period, the long-term unemployment rate has continued to skyrocket as rapidly as during the recession phase. By May 2010, the proportion of the unemployed with jobless du", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa", "url": "https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/files/documents/cea_4th_arra_report.pdf", "title": "cea_4th_arra_report.pdf", "publisher": "obamawhitehouse.archives.gov", "published_at": null, "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:16.410437Z", "excerpt": "EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT \nCOUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS \n \n \n \n \n \n \nTHE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE \nAMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009 \n \nFOURTH QUARTERLY REPORT \nJULY 14, 2010\n \n \nTHE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009 \nFOURTH QUARTERLY REPORT \n \nEXECUTIVE SUMMARY \n \nAs part of the unprecedented accountability and transparency provisions included in the \nAmerican Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), the Council of Economic Advisers \n(CEA) is charged with providing to Congress quarterly reports on the effects of the Recovery \nAct on overall economic activity, and on employment in particular. In this fourth report, we \nprovide an assessment of the effects of the Act through the second quarter of 2010. \n \nEvaluating the impact of countercyclical macroeconomic policy is inherently difficult \nbecause we do not observe what would have happened to the economy in the absence of policy. \nBecause of the challenges in the analysis, we approach the task of estimating the impact of the \nRecovery Act from a number of different directions , and supplement our estimates with those of \nnumerous outside analysts. \n \nOne section of the report looks at trends in the size and com position of Recovery Act \nspending and tax reductions. We find that: \n \n• The magnitude of the fiscal stimulus increased substantially in the first quarter of 2010 \nand has increased further in the second quarter (from $ 80 billion in 2009:Q4 to $108 \nbillion in 2010:Q1 to $116 billion in 2010:Q2). \n \n• Government investment outlays in areas such as infrastructure, clean energy , and \ncommunications technology increased by roughly 50 percent between the first and \nsecond quarters of 2010. \n \nAnother section evaluates the economic impact of the Recovery Act from a number of \ndifferent perspectives. The key findings are: \n \n• Following implementation of the ARRA, the trajectory of the economy changed \ndramatically. Real GDP began to grow steadily start", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5", "url": "https://www.theguardian.com/business/2010/aug/06/us-job-losses-double-expected", "title": "US job losses are double expected figure", "publisher": "The Guardian", "published_at": "2010-08-06", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:24.302340Z", "excerpt": "Employers in the US shed twice as many jobs as expected in July, adding to fears that the recovery in the world's largest economy will not see a revival in employment.\nThe dismal US job figures came as the National Institute of Economic and Social Research predicted a protracted depression for the UK economy.\nAcross the Atlantic talk of a double-dip recession was revived when the government revealed 131,000 jobs were lost last month. That dwarfed forecasts for a fall of 65,000. June's drop was also revised to a far steeper 221,000 from 125,000.\nThe July drop was mainly due to work by temporary staff on the government census coming to an end. But private hiring was also weaker than expected.\nEconomists forecast that private-sector jobs would rise by 90,000, but in the event only 71,000 were added.\nThe White House urged critics not to read too much into a single month's data while president Barack Obama said it was a \"good sign\" the US had added private sector jobs every month this year.\nFinancial markets were less upbeat. There were solid rises for government bonds, seen as safer investments when the economic picture darkens, while stock indices fell, including the FTSE 100 in the UK. The pound rose against the dollar, touching a high of $1.60.\nStephen Gallagher, economist at Société Générale, said: \"This employment report only reinforces a sluggish recovery. Private sector job and income gains are not weak enough to point to a renewed downturn, nor are they strong enough to suggest the recovery is free of such risk.\"\nWithin July's drop, 143,000 jobs were census staff who were laid off, but there were also a further 59,000 public sector job losses as the US government mirrored its counterparts around the world in tightening budgets. Economists voiced concerns that the private sector outlook was also gloomy, suggesting that Americans will remain wary about their job prospects and do little to power the recovery.\nThe sharp drop in jobs, which follows news of slowing ec", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "outcome" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f", "url": "https://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/rptcongress/annual09/sec1/c1.htm", "title": "Monetary Policy Report of February 2010", "publisher": "federalreserve.gov", "published_at": "2010-06-22", "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:36.583776Z", "excerpt": "After declining for a year and a half, economic activity in the United States turned up in the second half of 2009, supported by an improvement in financial conditions, stimulus from monetary and fiscal policies, and a recovery in foreign economies. These factors, along with increased business and household confidence, appear likely to boost spending and sustain the economic expansion. However, the pace of the recovery probably will be tempered by households' desire to rebuild wealth, still-tight credit conditions facing some borrowers, and, despite some tentative signs of stabilization, continued weakness in labor markets. With substantial resource slack continuing to suppress cost pressures and with longer-term inflation expectations stable, inflation is likely to be subdued for some time.\nU.S. real gross domestic product (GDP) rose at about a 4 percent pace, on average, over the second half of 2009. Consumer spending--which was boosted by supportive monetary and fiscal policies--posted solid increases, though it remained well below its pre-recession level. Meanwhile, activity in the housing market, which began to pick up last spring, flattened over the second half of 2009. In the business sector, investment in equipment and software posted a sizable gain in the second half of last year, likely reflecting improved conditions in capital markets and brighter sales prospects. In addition, firms reduced the pace of inventory liquidation markedly in the fourth quarter. In contrast, investment in nonresidential structures continued to contract. With the recovery in U.S. and foreign demand, U.S. trade flows rebounded in the second half of 2009 after precipitous declines late in 2008 and early in 2009. Nevertheless, both exports and imports stayed considerably below their earlier peaks.\nDespite the pickup in output, employment continued to contract in the second half of 2009, albeit at a markedly slower pace than in the first half. The unemployment rate rose further durin", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] }, { "id": "ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5", "url": "https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/cea_8th_arra_report_final_draft.pdf", "title": "cea_8th_arra_report_final_draft.pdf", "publisher": "obamawhitehouse.archives.gov", "published_at": null, "retrieved_at": "2026-09-17T03:59:52.008452Z", "excerpt": "EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT \nCOUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS \n \n \n \n \n \n \nTHE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE \nAMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009 \n \nEIGHTH QUARTERLY REPORT \nDECEMBER 9, 2011\n \n \nTHE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009 \nEIGHTH QUARTERLY REPORT \n \nEXECUTIVE SUMMARY \n \nAs part of the unprecedented accountability and transparency provisions included in the \nAmerican Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), the Council of Economic Advisers \n(CEA) is charged with providing to Congress quarterly reports on the effects of the Recovery \nAct on overall economic activity, and on employment in particular. This is the eighth report and \nit provides an assessment of the effects of the Act through the second quarter of 2011. \n \nAs discussed in previous quarterly reports, e valuating the impact of countercyclical \nmacroeconomic policy is inherently difficult because we do not observe what would have \nhappened to the economy in the absence of policy. Because of the challenges in the analysis, the \nreport estimates the impact of the Recovery Act using independent approaches and supplements \nthose estimates with those of numerous outside analysts. \n \nAmong the key findings of the study are the following: \n \n Following implementation of the ARRA, the trajectory of the economy changed \nsignificantly. Real GDP began to grow steadily starting in the third quarter of 2009 an d \nprivate payroll employment increased on net by 2.2 million from the start of 2010 to the \nend of the second quarter of 2011. (From the employment trough in February 2010 to \nNovember 2011 private payroll employment increased by 2.9 million.) \n \n The two established CEA methods of estimating the impact of the fiscal stimulus suggest \nthat the ARRA has raised the level of GDP as of the second quarter of 2011, relative to \nwhat it otherwise would have been, by between 2.0 and 2.9 percent. These estimates are \nvery similar to those of a wide range of other an", "full_text_path": "data/runs/recovery-act-reduced-unemployment/20260917T035909Z/text/ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5.txt", "leaf_ids": [ "cause" ], "found_by": [ "ddg" ] } ], "judgments": [ { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a primary document from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a federal agency with established authority and methodology for collecting official employment and economic data. While the excerpt provided contains only price index data rather than direct evidence on the specific topic of employment and fiscal stimulus, BLS publications represent authoritative primary records with rigorous data collection standards and no apparent conflicts of interest.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a primary document from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a federal agency with established authority and methodology for collecting official employment and economic data. While the excerpt provided contains only price index data rather than direct evidence on the specific topic of employment and fiscal stimulus, BLS publications represent authoritative primary records with rigorous data collection standards and no apparent conflicts of interest.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses import and export prices in July with no information about employment, job losses, the Recovery Act, or labor market trends.\\\"}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document excerpt contains only information about import/export prices and BLS data availability, with no content addressing job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act's effects.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 1970, "completion_tokens": 424, "total_tokens": 2394, "reasoning_tokens": 174 }, "cost_usd": 0.003760696, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.319035Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a primary document from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a federal agency with established authority and methodology for collecting official employment and economic data. While the excerpt provided contains only price index data rather than direct evidence on the specific topic of employment and fiscal stimulus, BLS publications represent authoritative primary records with rigorous data collection standards and no apparent conflicts of interest.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a primary document from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a federal agency with established authority and methodology for collecting official employment and economic data. While the excerpt provided contains only price index data rather than direct evidence on the specific topic of employment and fiscal stimulus, BLS publications represent authoritative primary records with rigorous data collection standards and no apparent conflicts of interest.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses import and export prices in July with no information about employment, job losses, the Recovery Act, or labor market trends.\\\"}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document excerpt contains only information about import/export prices and BLS data availability, with no content addressing job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act's effects.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 577, "completion_tokens": 76, "total_tokens": 653, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.000957, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.319035Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a Congressional Research Service report analyzing specific statutory provisions of enacted legislation (P.L. 111-5), representing an official government analysis of primary legal documents with institutional credibility and editorial standards. CRS reports are authoritative secondary sources on legislative content, though not peer-reviewed academic research.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "american recovery and reinvestment act 2009" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a Congressional Research Service report analyzing specific statutory provisions of enacted legislation (P.L. 111-5), representing an official government analysis of primary legal documents with institutional credibility and editorial standards. CRS reports are authoritative secondary sources on legislative content, though not peer-reviewed academic research.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document describes unemployment insurance provisions of the Recovery Act but does not report on or test employment trends, job losses, or whether employment stopped falling within a year of enactment.\\\"}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document describes unemployment insurance provisions of the Recovery Act but contains no data, observations, or claims about job losses, employment trends, or whether employment stopped falling within a year of enactment.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"american recovery and reinvestment act 2009\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3222, "completion_tokens": 698, "total_tokens": 3920, "reasoning_tokens": 440 }, "cost_usd": 0.00646456, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.319375Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official government document from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a primary source agency responsible for employment statistics, explaining their methodology and data collection procedures. It provides authoritative documentation of how census employment affects official employment estimates, with clear sourcing and institutional credibility, though it is explanatory rather than a raw data record.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us constitution" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official government document from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a primary source agency responsible for employment statistics, explaining their methodology and data collection procedures. It provides authoritative documentation of how census employment affects official employment estimates, with clear sourcing and institutional credibility, though it is explanatory rather than a raw data record.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.0,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document discusses Census Bureau employment fluctuations and their effects on CES data collection methodology, with no mention of the Recovery Act, job losses, employment trends in 2009, or the economic recovery period being tested.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses census employment fluctuations and their effects on CES data but contains no information about job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act's impact during 2009-2010.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us constitution\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2983, "completion_tokens": 2749, "total_tokens": 5732, "reasoning_tokens": 2459 }, "cost_usd": 0.015472699999999999, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.319588Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The document is authored by credentialed economists (Blinder from Princeton, Zandi from Moody's Analytics) with named affiliations and contact information, uses a recognized economic model (Moody's Analytics) with transparent methodology, and addresses the specific topic with primary data analysis. However, it is not peer-reviewed academic research, lacks independent editorial oversight beyond the publisher, and represents analysis by economists with potential institutional interests rather than a definitive primary record.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "moodys analytics model" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "economycom" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is authored by credentialed economists (Blinder from Princeton, Zandi from Moody's Analytics) with named affiliations and contact information, uses a recognized economic model (Moody's Analytics) with transparent methodology, and addresses the specific topic with primary data analysis. However, it is not peer-reviewed academic research, lacks independent editorial oversight beyond the publisher, and represents analysis by economists with potential institutional interests rather than a definitive primary record.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly addresses the Recovery Act's employment effects and compares it against a counterfactual baseline, but does not isolate the Recovery Act's independent contribution beyond Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial-sector rescue as the sub-claim specifically requires.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document asserts model-based estimates that fiscal stimulus had substantial positive effects on employment, though it also states financial-market policies were 'substantially more powerful,' which partially qualifies the Recovery Act's independent contribution.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"moodys analytics model\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"alan blinder mark zandi\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"economycom\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3435, "completion_tokens": 2098, "total_tokens": 5533, "reasoning_tokens": 1757 }, "cost_usd": 0.010213772599999999, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.319729Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is reputable journalism reporting on official primary sources (CBO reports and statements by CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf) with named attribution and specific data points. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, while having a fiscal conservative perspective, is an established nonpartisan organization with editorial standards, and the piece accurately conveys official government findings rather than original analysis, though the source organization itself has a known policy orientation that could influence what findings it chooses to highlight.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is reputable journalism reporting on official primary sources (CBO reports and statements by CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf) with named attribution and specific data points. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, while having a fiscal conservative perspective, is an established nonpartisan organization with editorial standards, and the piece accurately conveys official government findings rather than original analysis, though the source organization itself has a known policy orientation that could influence what findings it chooses to highlight.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly addresses ARRA's effect on employment and GDP growth compared to a counterfactual baseline, but focuses on 2009 estimates rather than the full 2009-2012 period and does not explicitly address the comparative contribution relative to Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial-sector rescue.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports CBO estimates that ARRA raised GDP by 1.2-3.2 percentage points and created/retained 640,000 jobs through September 2009, supporting the sub-claim that ARRA was a major cause of higher employment, though the estimates are qualified by acknowledged uncertainties and measurement limitations.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2881, "completion_tokens": 366, "total_tokens": 3247, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00444838, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.319865Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "This is secondary journalism (Washington Post op-ed) by a named author with relevant credentials, citing a primary study (Blinder and Zandi 2015), but it is opinion/analysis rather than reporting of findings, lacks detailed sourcing of specific claims, and the author has a clear policy perspective as a former Biden administration economist, creating potential bias on this politically contentious topic.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.5,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is secondary journalism (Washington Post op-ed) by a named author with relevant credentials, citing a primary study (Blinder and Zandi 2015), but it is opinion/analysis rather than reporting of findings, lacks detailed sourcing of specific claims, and the author has a clear policy perspective as a former Biden administration economist, creating potential bias on this politically contentious topic.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly addresses whether the Recovery Act was effective counter-cyclical policy and mentions it alongside Federal Reserve policy and financial-sector rescue, but the excerpt does not provide the specific quantitative analysis comparing employment outcomes with and without the Recovery Act.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document poses questions about whether interventions worked and asks if impacts can be quantified, but provides no actual evidence, data, or findings addressing the specific causal claim about the Recovery Act's employment effects beyond other policy mechanisms.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"blinder zandi 2015\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3155, "completion_tokens": 688, "total_tokens": 3843, "reasoning_tokens": 388 }, "cost_usd": 0.00638908, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.320023Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official primary document from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, a federal statistical agency with established methodological standards and no conflicts of interest. It presents directly collected employment data with technical sourcing information, contact details, and seasonal adjustment methodology, making it a definitive primary record of employment statistics for the specified period.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official primary document from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, a federal statistical agency with established methodological standards and no conflicts of interest. It presents directly collected employment data with technical sourcing information, contact details, and seasonal adjustment methodology, making it a definitive primary record of employment statistics for the specified period.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document provides employment data from October 2010 showing job gains since December 2009 and charts depicting the trajectory of job losses and unemployment from October 2008 onward, which directly illustrates whether employment stopped falling within a year of February 2009, though it does not explicitly analyze the Recovery Act's causal role.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document's Chart 2 shows nonfarm payroll employment losses ending around late 2009/early 2010 (approximately 9-12 months after February 2009 Recovery Act enactment) with employment gains resuming by early 2010, and the text confirms 874,000 jobs added since December 2009, directly supporting the sub-claim's timeline and direction of employment recovery.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current population survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bls\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 4196, "completion_tokens": 1680, "total_tokens": 5876, "reasoning_tokens": 1314 }, "cost_usd": 0.010505612, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.320161Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The Bureau of Labor Statistics is a primary source agency of the U.S. Department of Labor with statutory authority to collect and publish official employment data. This archive page lists peer-reviewed and officially vetted research products on employment, compensation, and labor force statistics directly relevant to the topic, representing primary data collection and analysis by a government agency with established methodological standards and no commercial conflicts of interest.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The Bureau of Labor Statistics is a primary source agency of the U.S. Department of Labor with statutory authority to collect and publish official employment data. This archive page lists peer-reviewed and officially vetted research products on employment, compensation, and labor force statistics directly relevant to the topic, representing primary data collection and analysis by a government agency with established methodological standards and no commercial conflicts of interest.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.0,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document is a table of contents/archive listing for BLS publications in 2009 with no substantive data or analysis about job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act's effects.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document is merely a table of contents/archive listing of BLS publications from 2009 with no substantive content addressing job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act's effects.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3541, "completion_tokens": 291, "total_tokens": 3832, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00468778, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.320294Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The Bureau of Labor Statistics is a primary source agency of the U.S. Department of Labor with statutory authority to collect and publish official employment data. This archive page lists peer-reviewed and officially vetted research products on employment, compensation, and labor force statistics directly relevant to the topic, representing primary data collection and analysis by a government agency with established methodological standards and no commercial conflicts of interest.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The Bureau of Labor Statistics is a primary source agency of the U.S. Department of Labor with statutory authority to collect and publish official employment data. This archive page lists peer-reviewed and officially vetted research products on employment, compensation, and labor force statistics directly relevant to the topic, representing primary data collection and analysis by a government agency with established methodological standards and no commercial conflicts of interest.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.0,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document is a table of contents/archive listing for BLS publications in 2009 with no substantive data or analysis about job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act's effects.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document is merely a table of contents/archive listing for 2009 BLS publications and contains no substantive content about job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act's effects.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 1034, "completion_tokens": 81, "total_tokens": 1115, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.001439, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.320294Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a primary document from the U.S. Census Bureau's official research division (Census Research Exploration and Analysis Tool), presenting peer-reviewed working papers with explicit methodology, named data sources (Current Population Survey, matched employer-employee data), and formal working paper numbering. The Census Bureau is a highly authoritative government statistical agency with rigorous editorial and quality standards for its research outputs.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "matched employer employee data" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a primary document from the U.S. Census Bureau's official research division (Census Research Exploration and Analysis Tool), presenting peer-reviewed working papers with explicit methodology, named data sources (Current Population Survey, matched employer-employee data), and formal working paper numbering. The Census Bureau is a highly authoritative government statistical agency with rigorous editorial and quality standards for its research outputs.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.2,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses unemployment patterns and labor market dynamics during the 2007-09 recession but does not directly address job losses, their trajectory, or the specific timing and magnitude of changes within a year of the Recovery Act's February 2009 enactment.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses unemployment patterns and job tenure shifts during the 2007-09 recession but does not directly address job losses, their trajectory, or the specific timeline and effects of the Recovery Act enacted in February 2009.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"current population survey tenure supplements\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"matched employer employee data\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us census bureau\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2847, "completion_tokens": 353, "total_tokens": 3200, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00426454, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.320566Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a primary document from the U.S. Census Bureau's official research division (Census Research Exploration and Analysis Tool), presenting peer-reviewed working papers with explicit methodology, named data sources (Current Population Survey, matched employer-employee data), and formal working paper numbering. The Census Bureau is a highly authoritative government statistical agency with rigorous editorial and quality standards for its research outputs.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "matched employer employee data" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a primary document from the U.S. Census Bureau's official research division (Census Research Exploration and Analysis Tool), presenting peer-reviewed working papers with explicit methodology, named data sources (Current Population Survey, matched employer-employee data), and formal working paper numbering. The Census Bureau is a highly authoritative government statistical agency with rigorous editorial and quality standards for its research outputs.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.2,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses unemployment patterns and labor market dynamics during the 2007-09 recession but does not directly address job losses, their trajectory, or the specific timing and magnitude of changes within a year of the Recovery Act's February 2009 enactment.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses unemployment patterns and job tenure shifts during the 2007-2009 recession but does not directly address whether job losses shrank sharply or employment stopped falling within a year of the Recovery Act's February 2009 enactment.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"current population survey tenure supplements\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"matched employer employee data\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us census bureau\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 853, "completion_tokens": 94, "total_tokens": 947, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.001323, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.320566Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a peer-reviewed academic study published in the American Economic Journal (a reputable peer-reviewed journal), using primary data from federal stimulus allocations and employing rigorous instrumental variables methodology to address endogeneity concerns. The source is from a Federal Reserve Bank (FRBSF), an official institution with strong editorial standards and no apparent conflicts of interest on this topic.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "recoverygov" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "fhwa" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a peer-reviewed academic study published in the American Economic Journal (a reputable peer-reviewed journal), using primary data from federal stimulus allocations and employing rigorous instrumental variables methodology to address endogeneity concerns. The source is from a Federal Reserve Bank (FRBSF), an official institution with strong editorial standards and no apparent conflicts of interest on this topic.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly estimates the jobs multiplier effect of ARRA spending itself, which is a core component of the sub-claim, but does not explicitly isolate ARRA's effect from Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial-sector rescue as the sub-claim requires.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.6,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The paper's methodology and stated purpose directly address estimating ARRA's causal employment effects by isolating fiscal stimulus impacts from other macroeconomic factors (monetary policy, automatic stabilizers), and reports a quantified jobs multiplier result, though the excerpt does not present the actual findings or magnitude of employment effects.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"recoverygov\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bls\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"fhwa\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3524, "completion_tokens": 4086, "total_tokens": 7610, "reasoning_tokens": 3734 }, "cost_usd": 0.017887184, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.320754Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a peer-reviewed article from the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Monthly Labor Review, a reputable government publication with rigorous editorial standards. The author is a named economist at BLS with official credentials, and the piece relies on primary data from the Current Employment Statistics survey, the official government source for employment data.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bls monthly labor review" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a peer-reviewed article from the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Monthly Labor Review, a reputable government publication with rigorous editorial standards. The author is a named economist at BLS with official credentials, and the piece relies on primary data from the Current Employment Statistics survey, the official government source for employment data.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly reports employment data showing job losses peaked in February 2010 and employment began recovering thereafter, which directly addresses the core claim about when employment stopped falling, though it does not explicitly discuss the Recovery Act's role or the 'within about a year' timeframe from February 2009.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly reports that employment reached its trough in February 2010 and job growth resumed thereafter, with employment increasing by 1,014,000 in the last 10 months of 2010, supporting the claim that employment stopped falling within about a year of the Recovery Act's February 2009 enactment.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls current employment statistics survey\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls monthly labor review\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3422, "completion_tokens": 354, "total_tokens": 3776, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00484682, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.320876Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is a reputable publication (IMF's Finance & Development magazine) with editorial standards, discussing fiscal stimulus using official economic data (GDP, employment figures) and policy analysis. However, it presents interpretive conclusions about stimulus effectiveness rather than primary documents or peer-reviewed research, and the excerpt shows advocacy framing ('Stimulus Worked') rather than neutral analysis of evidence.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "moodys analytics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bea nipa" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a reputable publication (IMF's Finance & Development magazine) with editorial standards, discussing fiscal stimulus using official economic data (GDP, employment figures) and policy analysis. However, it presents interpretive conclusions about stimulus effectiveness rather than primary documents or peer-reviewed research, and the excerpt shows advocacy framing ('Stimulus Worked') rather than neutral analysis of evidence.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly addresses whether stimulus policy (including the Recovery Act as part of fiscal response) caused better employment outcomes than would have occurred without it, though it does not isolate the Recovery Act's specific contribution beyond other policies like Fed actions and financial-sector rescue.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.6,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document asserts that aggressive fiscal and monetary policy responses (including the Recovery Act as part of broader stimulus) were major causes of the economic turnaround, estimating that without such responses the economy would still be shrinking, though it does not isolate the Recovery Act's independent effect from other policies.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"blinder zandi 2010\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"moodys analytics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bea nipa\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bls ces\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3203, "completion_tokens": 5696, "total_tokens": 8899, "reasoning_tokens": 5347 }, "cost_usd": 0.021831872, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.320994Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official Government Accountability Office report to Congress with named methodology (literature review and 21 expert interviews), institutional credibility, and transparent sourcing practices. While it is a secondary analysis rather than a primary document, GAO reports represent authoritative government inquiry with rigorous standards and no apparent conflicts of interest.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "government accountability office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official Government Accountability Office report to Congress with named methodology (literature review and 21 expert interviews), institutional credibility, and transparent sourcing practices. While it is a secondary analysis rather than a primary document, GAO reports represent authoritative government inquiry with rigorous standards and no apparent conflicts of interest.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.2,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses automatic stabilizers in general and their effectiveness during economic downturns, but does not address the Recovery Act specifically, its employment effects, or how its impact compared to other policy interventions during 2009-2012.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses automatic stabilizers generally and their effectiveness during economic downturns, but contains no content specifically addressing the Recovery Act's causal impact on employment in 2009-2012 or comparing it to counterfactual scenarios.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"government accountability office\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3109, "completion_tokens": 1887, "total_tokens": 4996, "reasoning_tokens": 1608 }, "cost_usd": 0.009991914000000001, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.321117Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official Government Accountability Office report to Congress with named methodology (literature review and 21 expert interviews), institutional credibility, and transparent sourcing practices. While it is a secondary analysis rather than a primary document, GAO reports represent authoritative government inquiry with rigorous standards and no apparent conflicts of interest.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "government accountability office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official Government Accountability Office report to Congress with named methodology (literature review and 21 expert interviews), institutional credibility, and transparent sourcing practices. While it is a secondary analysis rather than a primary document, GAO reports represent authoritative government inquiry with rigorous standards and no apparent conflicts of interest.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.2,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses automatic stabilizers in general and their effectiveness during economic downturns, but does not address the Recovery Act specifically, its employment effects, or how its impact compared to other policy interventions during 2009-2012.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses automatic stabilizers' effectiveness in general terms but contains no content addressing the Recovery Act's specific causal impact on employment in 2009-2012 relative to other policy interventions.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"government accountability office\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 879, "completion_tokens": 83, "total_tokens": 962, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.001294, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.321117Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is a reputable publication (IMF's Finance & Development magazine) with named authors including IMF researchers and credentialed academics (Blinder, Zandi, Prasad from Cornell), drawing on official IMF analysis and primary economic data. However, it is a magazine article summarizing research rather than the peer-reviewed studies or primary documents themselves, and the excerpt does not provide detailed sourcing or methodology.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "imf researchers" }, { "type": "study", "id": "kose prasad emerging markets analysis" }, { "type": "study", "id": "arora vamvakidis china spillover analysis" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a reputable publication (IMF's Finance & Development magazine) with named authors including IMF researchers and credentialed academics (Blinder, Zandi, Prasad from Cornell), drawing on official IMF analysis and primary economic data. However, it is a magazine article summarizing research rather than the peer-reviewed studies or primary documents themselves, and the excerpt does not provide detailed sourcing or methodology.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document explicitly mentions that Blinder and Zandi examine 'positive effects of stimulus in the United States' and state 'without it, the United States would still be in recession,' which directly addresses whether the Recovery Act caused higher employment than would have occurred without it, though the excerpt does not provide detailed analysis of the specific counterfactual or isolate the Recovery Act's effect from other policy responses.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.6,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document references an analysis by Blinder and Zandi asserting that US stimulus had positive effects and that without it the US would still be in recession, which supports the sub-claim's core proposition, though the excerpt does not detail the specific counterfactual comparison to Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial-sector rescue alone.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"blinder zandi stimulus analysis\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"imf researchers\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"kose prasad emerging markets analysis\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"arora vamvakidis china spillover analysis\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2977, "completion_tokens": 450, "total_tokens": 3427, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00480856, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.321297Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a primary document from Census.gov presenting official government statistics from the Annual Survey of Public Employment & Payroll (ASPEP) and Bureau of Labor Statistics, with named data sources, specific figures, and clear methodology. It represents authoritative administrative records on the exact topic of US employment during the 2009-2012 period and beyond.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "annual survey of public employment payroll" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a primary document from Census.gov presenting official government statistics from the Annual Survey of Public Employment & Payroll (ASPEP) and Bureau of Labor Statistics, with named data sources, specific figures, and clear methodology. It represents authoritative administrative records on the exact topic of US employment during the 2009-2012 period and beyond.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses employment trends in public vs. private sectors from 2008-2018 but does not directly address monthly job losses, their trajectory within a year of February 2009, or the specific impact of the Recovery Act.\\\"}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.7, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports Census Bureau and BLS data showing private sector employment declined in 2009 but rebounded substantially by 2014, with private sector employment surpassing 2008 levels by March 2014, approximately 5 years after the Recovery Act's February 2009 enactment, supporting the claim that job losses shrank and employment stopped falling within about a year.\\\"}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"annual survey of public employment payroll\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls current employment statistics\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"census bureau\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3223, "completion_tokens": 2189, "total_tokens": 5412, "reasoning_tokens": 2088 }, "cost_usd": 0.012444539999999999, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.321431Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The UC Berkeley Labor Center is a reputable research institution with established editorial standards. The excerpt cites specific employment statistics (8.7 million jobs lost, unemployment rates, dates) with numbered references to primary sources and prior research, and uses official data (BLS employment figures, state unemployment rates), though the excerpt itself is secondary analysis rather than a primary document.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "center on wage and employment dynamics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "economic policy institute" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The UC Berkeley Labor Center is a reputable research institution with established editorial standards. The excerpt cites specific employment statistics (8.7 million jobs lost, unemployment rates, dates) with numbered references to primary sources and prior research, and uses official data (BLS employment figures, state unemployment rates), though the excerpt itself is secondary analysis rather than a primary document.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document addresses employment recovery timing and job loss magnitude from the Great Recession, but does not specifically examine the Recovery Act's enactment in February 2009 or directly test whether job losses shrank sharply within a year of that specific policy intervention.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports that 8.7 million jobs were lost from December 2007 to February 2010 (showing job losses ended by February 2010, about one year after the Recovery Act's February 2009 enactment) and that employment subsequently recovered to pre-recession levels by May 2014, directly supporting the sub-claim that job losses shrank and employment stopped falling within about a year.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"center on wage and employment dynamics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"economic policy institute\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3247, "completion_tokens": 7385, "total_tokens": 10632, "reasoning_tokens": 7794 }, "cost_usd": 0.03307827, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.321576Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The UC Berkeley Labor Center is a reputable research institution with established editorial standards. The excerpt cites specific employment statistics (8.7 million jobs lost, unemployment rates, dates) with numbered references to primary sources and prior research, and uses official data (BLS employment figures, state unemployment rates), though the excerpt itself is secondary analysis rather than a primary document.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": -1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "center on wage and employment dynamics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "economic policy institute" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The UC Berkeley Labor Center is a reputable research institution with established editorial standards. The excerpt cites specific employment statistics (8.7 million jobs lost, unemployment rates, dates) with numbered references to primary sources and prior research, and uses official data (BLS employment figures, state unemployment rates), though the excerpt itself is secondary analysis rather than a primary document.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document addresses employment recovery timing and job loss magnitude from the Great Recession, but does not specifically examine the Recovery Act's enactment in February 2009 or directly test whether job losses shrank sharply within a year of that specific policy intervention.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": -1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports that employment losses continued until February 2010 (over a year after the Recovery Act's February 2009 enactment) and nonfarm employment did not recover pre-recession levels until May 2014, contradicting the sub-claim's negation that job losses shrank sharply and employment stopped falling within about a year.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"center on wage and employment dynamics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"economic policy institute\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 930, "completion_tokens": 118, "total_tokens": 1048, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00152, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.321576Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official government statistical agency (BLS) publishing primary employment data from its Current Employment Statistics program with transparent methodology (seasonal adjustment noted), official sourcing (references specific news release), and no apparent conflicts of interest. While not a peer-reviewed study, it represents authoritative primary data collection and reporting by the designated federal source for labor statistics.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official government statistical agency (BLS) publishing primary employment data from its Current Employment Statistics program with transparent methodology (seasonal adjustment noted), official sourcing (references specific news release), and no apparent conflicts of interest. While not a peer-reviewed study, it represents authoritative primary data collection and reporting by the designated federal source for labor statistics.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly reports monthly job loss trends throughout 2009 following the Recovery Act's February enactment, showing job losses moderated from 691,000/month in Q1 to 69,000/month in Q4, which directly addresses the sub-claim's core assertion about sharp shrinkage in job losses within a year.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly reports that job losses moderated substantially throughout 2009, declining from 691,000 per month in Q1 to 69,000 per month in Q4, supporting the claim that losses shrank sharply within about a year of the Recovery Act's February 2009 enactment, though it does not explicitly state employment stopped falling.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics program\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2294, "completion_tokens": 3697, "total_tokens": 5991, "reasoning_tokens": 3344 }, "cost_usd": 0.013674728, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.321764Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.85, "quality_rationale": "This is an official Federal Reserve historical resource presenting documented economic data (GDP, unemployment, asset prices, interest rates) with specific figures and dates that can be verified against primary sources. While it synthesizes information rather than presenting raw primary documents, it carries the authority of a government institution with strong editorial standards and direct access to official records, though the excerpt lacks specific citations for individual data points.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "author_group", "id": "nber business cycle dating committee" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federal reserve board" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.85,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official Federal Reserve historical resource presenting documented economic data (GDP, unemployment, asset prices, interest rates) with specific figures and dates that can be verified against primary sources. While it synthesizes information rather than presenting raw primary documents, it carries the authority of a government institution with strong editorial standards and direct access to official records, though the excerpt lacks specific citations for individual data points.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document mentions the Recovery Act as one of several stimulus measures implemented but provides no analysis of its specific employment effects, counterfactual outcomes, or causal contribution relative to other policy tools.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document mentions the Recovery Act was enacted but provides no analysis of its causal impact on employment relative to counterfactual scenarios or compared to other policy measures.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"nber business cycle dating committee\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of economic analysis\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"federal reserve board\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3396, "completion_tokens": 1322, "total_tokens": 4718, "reasoning_tokens": 1000 }, "cost_usd": 0.007791193, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.321882Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is a reputable source from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York's official blog that draws on peer-reviewed academic research and internal Fed analysis to address the topic. While it is secondary reporting rather than a primary document, it has strong institutional credibility, transparent sourcing (citing academic research), and no apparent conflicts of interest, making it reliable evidence on the question of QE's effectiveness during the 2009-2012 period.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "post crisis academic research on qe" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a reputable source from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York's official blog that draws on peer-reviewed academic research and internal Fed analysis to address the topic. While it is secondary reporting rather than a primary document, it has strong institutional credibility, transparent sourcing (citing academic research), and no apparent conflicts of interest, making it reliable evidence on the question of QE's effectiveness during the 2009-2012 period.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.2,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses whether QE (Federal Reserve policy) worked, but does not address the Recovery Act's independent causal contribution to employment or compare its effects relative to other policy tools.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses QE's mechanisms and effectiveness but does not address the Recovery Act's employment effects or compare its impact to other policy tools in the 2009-2012 period.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"post crisis academic research on qe\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2952, "completion_tokens": 289, "total_tokens": 3241, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00458828, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.321999Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official primary document from the Federal Reserve submitted to Congress pursuant to statutory requirement, representing authoritative institutional analysis of monetary policy and economic conditions. As a mandated government report from the central banking authority with direct access to economic data and policy decisions, it constitutes a high-quality primary source on the topic, though not a definitive record of all fiscal stimulus effects.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreserve" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official primary document from the Federal Reserve submitted to Congress pursuant to statutory requirement, representing authoritative institutional analysis of monetary policy and economic conditions. As a mandated government report from the central banking authority with direct access to economic data and policy decisions, it constitutes a high-quality primary source on the topic, though not a definitive record of all fiscal stimulus effects.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.2,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document describes economic conditions and Federal Reserve monetary policy in early 2009 but does not address the Recovery Act's employment effects or compare counterfactual employment outcomes with and without the Act.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is a February 2009 Federal Reserve monetary policy report published before the Recovery Act's effects could be observed, describing economic conditions and financial turmoil but making no claims about the Recovery Act's employment impact relative to counterfactual scenarios.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"federalreserve\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3115, "completion_tokens": 1312, "total_tokens": 4427, "reasoning_tokens": 1022 }, "cost_usd": 0.007300938, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.322114Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official primary document from the Federal Reserve submitted to Congress pursuant to statutory requirement, representing authoritative institutional analysis of monetary policy and economic conditions. As a mandated government report from the central banking authority with direct access to economic data and policy decisions, it constitutes a high-quality primary source on the topic, though not a definitive record of all fiscal stimulus effects.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreserve" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official primary document from the Federal Reserve submitted to Congress pursuant to statutory requirement, representing authoritative institutional analysis of monetary policy and economic conditions. As a mandated government report from the central banking authority with direct access to economic data and policy decisions, it constitutes a high-quality primary source on the topic, though not a definitive record of all fiscal stimulus effects.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.2,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document describes economic conditions and Federal Reserve monetary policy in early 2009 but does not address the Recovery Act's employment effects or compare counterfactual employment outcomes with and without the Act.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is a February 2009 Federal Reserve monetary policy report published before the Recovery Act's effects could be observed, discussing economic conditions and financial crisis response but containing no analysis of the Recovery Act's employment impact relative to other policy measures.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"federalreserve\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 912, "completion_tokens": 91, "total_tokens": 1003, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.001367, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.322114Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "NBER working papers are circulated by a reputable research institution with established editorial standards and author accountability (named scholars with institutional affiliations), but this document explicitly states it has not undergone peer review or NBER Board review, placing it below peer-reviewed status. The authors disclose no conflicts of interest and use simulation methods grounded in empirical literature, making it credible secondary research suitable for evidence on the topic.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "nber working paper 34411" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"NBER working papers are circulated by a reputable research institution with established editorial standards and author accountability (named scholars with institutional affiliations), but this document explicitly states it has not undergone peer review or NBER Board review, placing it below peer-reviewed status. The authors disclose no conflicts of interest and use simulation methods grounded in empirical literature, making it credible secondary research suitable for evidence on the topic.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly addresses whether discretionary fiscal stimulus (including the Recovery Act) affected unemployment during the Great Recession by simulating counterfactual scenarios, which is the core empirical question of the sub-claim, though it focuses on automatic stabilizers rather than isolating the Recovery Act's specific contribution beyond other policy tools.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.6,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document's simulation finding that 'more sustained fiscal stimulus would have pushed unemployment down more rapidly following the Great Recession' supports the sub-claim that the Recovery Act was a major cause of higher employment, though the authors explicitly caution their estimates are uncertain and rest on modeling assumptions rather than direct observation.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"nber working paper 34411\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3092, "completion_tokens": 352, "total_tokens": 3444, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00475008, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.322278Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is a secondary source relaying findings from a primary document (CBO report), published by an official government source with clear attribution to the Congressional Budget Office and a link to the full report. However, it is framed as political advocacy/commentary by the Vice President rather than neutral reporting, which reduces it from the 0.9 tier despite the underlying primary source material being authoritative.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a secondary source relaying findings from a primary document (CBO report), published by an official government source with clear attribution to the Congressional Budget Office and a link to the full report. However, it is framed as political advocacy/commentary by the Vice President rather than neutral reporting, which reduces it from the 0.9 tier despite the underlying primary source material being authoritative.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly addresses employment impact of the Recovery Act and unemployment rate changes, but focuses on Q2 2010 estimates rather than the specific timeline claim about job losses shrinking 'within about a year' of February 2009 enactment.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.6,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document cites CBO estimates that the Recovery Act lowered unemployment by 0.7-1.8 percentage points and increased employment by 1.4-3.3 million by Q2 2010 (about 16 months after February 2009 enactment), supporting the claim that employment stopped falling within about a year, though these are CBO projections rather than direct observations of actual job loss trends.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3093, "completion_tokens": 371, "total_tokens": 3464, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0046372, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.322397Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is a secondary source relaying findings from a primary document (CBO report), published by an official government source with clear attribution to the Congressional Budget Office and a link to the full report. However, it is framed as political advocacy/commentary by the Vice President rather than neutral reporting, which reduces it from the 0.9 tier despite the underlying primary source material being authoritative.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a secondary source relaying findings from a primary document (CBO report), published by an official government source with clear attribution to the Congressional Budget Office and a link to the full report. However, it is framed as political advocacy/commentary by the Vice President rather than neutral reporting, which reduces it from the 0.9 tier despite the underlying primary source material being authoritative.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly addresses whether the Recovery Act caused higher employment than would have occurred without it (citing CBO estimates of 1.4-3.3 million jobs created), but does not explicitly isolate the Recovery Act's effect beyond Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial-sector rescue as the sub-claim requires.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document cites CBO estimates attributing 1.4-3.3 million jobs and 0.7-1.8 percentage point unemployment reduction to the Recovery Act specifically, which directly supports the sub-claim, though these are CBO projections rather than observed outcomes and do not explicitly address the counterfactual of Fed policy and automatic stabilizers.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3131, "completion_tokens": 371, "total_tokens": 3502, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0046752, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.322530Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.85, "quality_rationale": "This is a working paper from the U.S. Census Bureau's Center for Economic Studies using primary administrative data (job-to-job flows database from 1998-2010), authored by named Census Bureau researchers. While it explicitly states it has not undergone formal Census Bureau publication review, it represents rigorous analysis of official government records with disclosed methodology and data sources, making it a high-quality primary source document despite its working paper status.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.85,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a working paper from the U.S. Census Bureau's Center for Economic Studies using primary administrative data (job-to-job flows database from 1998-2010), authored by named Census Bureau researchers. While it explicitly states it has not undergone formal Census Bureau publication review, it represents rigorous analysis of official government records with disclosed methodology and data sources, making it a high-quality primary source document despite its working paper status.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document addresses employment flows and recessions from 1998-2010 including the 2008-2009 period, but focuses on job-to-job transitions and worker flows rather than directly measuring monthly job losses, their trajectory, or the specific timing of when employment stopped falling post-Recovery Act.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document analyzes job-to-job flows and recessions but does not directly address the specific sub-claim about monthly job losses shrinking or employment stopping falling within a year of the Recovery Act's February 2009 enactment.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us census bureau\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3325, "completion_tokens": 335, "total_tokens": 3660, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00472196, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.322655Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official congressional hearing record published by the U.S. Government Printing Office with full institutional attribution, named committee members, and documented date and location. Congressional hearing transcripts are primary documents with high evidentiary standards, though they represent testimony rather than peer-reviewed analysis.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "house committee on the budget hearing july 14 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official congressional hearing record published by the U.S. Government Printing Office with full institutional attribution, named committee members, and documented date and location. Congressional hearing transcripts are primary documents with high evidentiary standards, though they represent testimony rather than peer-reviewed analysis.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.2,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is a cover page and table of contents for a hearing on the Recovery Act held in July 2010, which provides only bibliographic information without any actual data or analysis regarding job losses, employment trends, or the timing of employment recovery.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt provided contains only the cover page and table of contents of a congressional hearing held in July 2010 about the Recovery Act, with no substantive content addressing job losses, employment trends, or the timeline of economic recovery.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"house committee on the budget hearing july 14 2010\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 4223, "completion_tokens": 286, "total_tokens": 4509, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0058705, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.322780Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a primary document from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a federal agency with established methodological standards and direct access to the Current Population Survey data it analyzes. The source cites its data collection methodology, provides specific metrics with dates, and represents official government records on employment trends during the specified period.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "national bureau of economic research" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a primary document from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a federal agency with established methodological standards and direct access to the Current Population Survey data it analyzes. The source cites its data collection methodology, provides specific metrics with dates, and represents official government records on employment trends during the specified period.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly reports employment and job loss trends from December 2007 through 2017, including that employment dropped 8.6 million and recovery began in 2010, which closely addresses the sub-claim's timeframe and employment trajectory following the Recovery Act (February 2009), though it does not explicitly attribute changes to the Recovery Act or specify the exact timing of when job losses 'shrank sharply.'\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports that employment began recovering in 2010 (within about a year of February 2009) and that the unemployment rate began trending downward in April 2010, directly supporting the sub-claim about job losses shrinking and employment stopping its decline within roughly a year of the Recovery Act's enactment.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"current population survey\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"national bureau of economic research\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3274, "completion_tokens": 6215, "total_tokens": 9489, "reasoning_tokens": 6588 }, "cost_usd": 0.02847756, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.322892Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official government report from the Congressional Budget Office fulfilling a statutory requirement (Section 1512(e) of ARRA), making it a primary document from a highly credible source with established methodological standards. The CBO is a nonpartisan legislative agency with strong institutional reputation and transparent methodology, though it represents analysis rather than raw data collection.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official government report from the Congressional Budget Office fulfilling a statutory requirement (Section 1512(e) of ARRA), making it a primary document from a highly credible source with established methodological standards. The CBO is a nonpartisan legislative agency with strong institutional reputation and transparent methodology, though it represents analysis rather than raw data collection.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document addresses the Recovery Act's impact on employment generally, but focuses on estimates for April-June 2010 rather than directly testing the specific claim about job losses shrinking and employment stopping its decline within a year of February 2009 enactment.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses ARRA's estimated impact on employment in Q2 2010 but does not address the specific claim about job losses shrinking sharply or employment stopping falling within a year of February 2009.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2107, "completion_tokens": 305, "total_tokens": 2412, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00341768, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.323047Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official government report from the Congressional Budget Office fulfilling a statutory requirement (Section 1512(e) of ARRA), making it a primary document from a highly credible source with established methodological standards. The CBO is a nonpartisan legislative agency with strong institutional reputation and transparent methodology, though it represents analysis rather than raw data collection.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official government report from the Congressional Budget Office fulfilling a statutory requirement (Section 1512(e) of ARRA), making it a primary document from a highly credible source with established methodological standards. The CBO is a nonpartisan legislative agency with strong institutional reputation and transparent methodology, though it represents analysis rather than raw data collection.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document addresses the Recovery Act's impact on employment generally, but focuses on estimates for April-June 2010 rather than directly testing the specific claim about job losses shrinking and employment stopping its decline within a year of February 2009 enactment.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses ARRA's estimated impact on employment in Q2 2010 but does not address whether job losses shrank sharply or employment stopped falling within a year of February 2009, making it neither supportive nor contradictory to the sub-claim.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 667, "completion_tokens": 99, "total_tokens": 766, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.001162, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.323047Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official government report from the Congressional Budget Office fulfilling a statutory requirement (Section 1512(e) of ARRA), making it a primary document from a highly credible source with established methodological standards. The CBO is a nonpartisan legislative agency with strong institutional reputation and transparent methodology, though it represents analysis rather than raw data collection.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official government report from the Congressional Budget Office fulfilling a statutory requirement (Section 1512(e) of ARRA), making it a primary document from a highly credible source with established methodological standards. The CBO is a nonpartisan legislative agency with strong institutional reputation and transparent methodology, though it represents analysis rather than raw data collection.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly addresses ARRA's estimated impact on employment during the 2009-2012 period, but only covers Q2 2010 and does not explicitly compare outcomes to counterfactuals involving Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial-sector rescue separately.\\\"}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.6,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document asserts that ARRA contains provisions intended to boost employment and provides CBO estimates of ARRA's overall impact on employment based on economic models and historical evidence, supporting the sub-claim that the Recovery Act was a major cause of higher employment, though it does not explicitly isolate ARRA's effect from other policy interventions.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2145, "completion_tokens": 332, "total_tokens": 2477, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0035906799999999997, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.323323Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is an official White House document presenting primary policy information and citing named secondary sources (CBO, Blinder, Zandi), but it is advocacy material designed to promote the administration's policies rather than neutral analysis, and lacks the methodological rigor and independence of peer-reviewed research or official inquiries.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "congressional budget office" }, { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "white house" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official White House document presenting primary policy information and citing named secondary sources (CBO, Blinder, Zandi), but it is advocacy material designed to promote the administration's policies rather than neutral analysis, and lacks the methodological rigor and independence of peer-reviewed research or official inquiries.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly addresses the Recovery Act's enactment in February 2009 and its effects on employment, stating the economy was losing over 700,000 jobs monthly before the Act and later added 8.5 million jobs, but does not specifically quantify the timeline of when job losses shrank or stopped within the claimed one-year period.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document asserts the Recovery Act was effective and mentions 47 consecutive months of job growth as of January 2014, but does not directly address the specific claim about job losses shrinking sharply or employment stopping falling within about a year of February 2009.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office recovery act estimate\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"blinder zandi economic analysis\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"the white house\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2994, "completion_tokens": 350, "total_tokens": 3344, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0048148, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.323529Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, a primary official document from a nonpartisan legislative agency with established credibility and rigorous research standards. GAO reports are based on systematic review of studies and official records, carry institutional authority, and are subject to internal quality controls, making this a highly reliable primary source on federal fiscal policy effects.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "studies gao reviewed" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, a primary official document from a nonpartisan legislative agency with established credibility and rigorous research standards. GAO reports are based on systematic review of studies and official records, carry institutional authority, and are subject to internal quality controls, making this a highly reliable primary source on federal fiscal policy effects.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document addresses automatic stabilizers' effects on employment and economic activity during downturns, but does not specifically isolate or compare the Recovery Act's independent causal contribution relative to automatic stabilizers, Federal Reserve policy, and financial-sector rescue as the sub-claim requires.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document addresses automatic stabilizers' effects on employment and economic activity during downturns, but does not specifically analyze the Recovery Act's independent causal contribution beyond automatic stabilizers, Federal Reserve policy, and financial-sector rescue.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"studies gao reviewed\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"congressional budget office\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2940, "completion_tokens": 2817, "total_tokens": 5757, "reasoning_tokens": 2510 }, "cost_usd": 0.01295709, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.323680Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a primary document from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a federal statistical agency with established methodological standards and official authority over employment data collection. The QCEW program represents a comprehensive census of employment and wages with documented procedures, contact information for verification, and transparent data availability, making it a highly reliable primary source for employment statistics during the 2009-2012 period.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "qcew" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a primary document from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a federal statistical agency with established methodological standards and official authority over employment data collection. The QCEW program represents a comprehensive census of employment and wages with documented procedures, contact information for verification, and transparent data availability, making it a highly reliable primary source for employment statistics during the 2009-2012 period.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document describes the structure and availability of employment data sources from BLS but contains no actual employment figures, job loss trends, or analysis of the period following the Recovery Act's enactment.\\\"}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document describes the structure and availability of employment data publications but contains no actual employment data, job loss figures, or analysis regarding trends in the year following February 2009.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"qcew\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3143, "completion_tokens": 3415, "total_tokens": 6558, "reasoning_tokens": 3153 }, "cost_usd": 0.013529888, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.323811Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a primary document from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a federal statistical agency with established methodological standards and official authority over employment data collection. The QCEW program represents a comprehensive census of employment and wages with documented procedures, contact information for verification, and transparent data availability, making it a highly reliable primary source for employment statistics during the 2009-2012 period.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "qcew" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a primary document from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a federal statistical agency with established methodological standards and official authority over employment data collection. The QCEW program represents a comprehensive census of employment and wages with documented procedures, contact information for verification, and transparent data availability, making it a highly reliable primary source for employment statistics during the 2009-2012 period.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document describes the structure and availability of employment data sources from BLS but contains no actual employment figures, job loss trends, or analysis of the period following the Recovery Act's enactment.\\\"}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is a methodological description of BLS data publication procedures and contains no substantive employment data, trends, or analysis regarding job losses, employment recovery, or the Recovery Act's effects.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"qcew\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 905, "completion_tokens": 81, "total_tokens": 986, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00131, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.323811Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The Bureau of Labor Statistics is a primary source agency of the U.S. Department of Labor with statutory authority to collect and publish official employment data. The document is an archive index from an official government source with established methodological standards and no apparent conflicts of interest, though the excerpt itself is a directory listing rather than a substantive analysis.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The Bureau of Labor Statistics is a primary source agency of the U.S. Department of Labor with statutory authority to collect and publish official employment data. The document is an archive index from an official government source with established methodological standards and no apparent conflicts of interest, though the excerpt itself is a directory listing rather than a substantive analysis.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.2,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a table of contents listing BLS publications from 2010 that covers various labor topics including recession impacts and unemployment, but does not directly address job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act's effects in the specific timeframe claimed.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is merely a table of contents/archive listing for BLS publications from 2010 with no substantive content addressing job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act's effects.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3981, "completion_tokens": 522, "total_tokens": 4503, "reasoning_tokens": 242 }, "cost_usd": 0.0060281572, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.323977Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is an official government document from the White House Council of Economic Advisers with named methodology (Romer and Bernstein), references to primary sources (OMB estimates), and transparent procedures for job creation estimation. However, it is a policy advocacy document rather than independent peer-reviewed research, and the White House has inherent institutional interest in demonstrating positive stimulus effects.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "romer and bernstein 2009" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "omb" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official government document from the White House Council of Economic Advisers with named methodology (Romer and Bernstein), references to primary sources (OMB estimates), and transparent procedures for job creation estimation. However, it is a policy advocacy document rather than independent peer-reviewed research, and the White House has inherent institutional interest in demonstrating positive stimulus effects.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly addresses job creation estimates from the Recovery Act itself, but does not explicitly compare these effects against the counterfactual of what would have occurred with only Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial-sector rescue.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document describes the CEA's methodology for estimating ARRA job creation but does not present evidence comparing actual employment outcomes to counterfactual scenarios isolating ARRA's effect from Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, or financial-sector rescue.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"romer and bernstein 2009\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"omb\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3168, "completion_tokens": 3614, "total_tokens": 6782, "reasoning_tokens": 3674 }, "cost_usd": 0.01802016, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.324114Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is an official government document from the White House Council of Economic Advisers with named methodology (Romer and Bernstein), references to primary sources (OMB estimates), and transparent procedures for job creation estimation. However, it is a policy advocacy document rather than independent peer-reviewed research, and the White House has inherent institutional interest in demonstrating positive stimulus effects.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": -1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "romer and bernstein 2009" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "omb" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official government document from the White House Council of Economic Advisers with named methodology (Romer and Bernstein), references to primary sources (OMB estimates), and transparent procedures for job creation estimation. However, it is a policy advocacy document rather than independent peer-reviewed research, and the White House has inherent institutional interest in demonstrating positive stimulus effects.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly addresses job creation estimates from the Recovery Act itself, but does not explicitly compare these effects against the counterfactual of what would have occurred with only Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial-sector rescue.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": -1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document asserts that ARRA was designed to create jobs and describes CEA's methodology for estimating its employment effects, implicitly treating ARRA as a significant causal factor in job creation rather than merely supplementary to other policies.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"romer and bernstein 2009\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"omb\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 922, "completion_tokens": 94, "total_tokens": 1016, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.001392, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.324114Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "This is educational textbook material from a learning platform that explains fiscal policy concepts and mentions the 2009 stimulus package as an example, but provides no primary sources, data, citations, or empirical evidence about actual employment or fiscal stimulus outcomes during 2009-2012. It relays general economic theory rather than reporting specific findings about the historical period in question.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "lumen learning macroeconomics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.5,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is educational textbook material from a learning platform that explains fiscal policy concepts and mentions the 2009 stimulus package as an example, but provides no primary sources, data, citations, or empirical evidence about actual employment or fiscal stimulus outcomes during 2009-2012. It relays general economic theory rather than reporting specific findings about the historical period in question.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses automatic stabilizers and mentions the 2009 stimulus package as an example of discretionary fiscal policy, but does not directly analyze the Recovery Act's specific causal impact on employment relative to other policy interventions (Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, financial rescue).\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document describes automatic stabilizers and mentions the 2009 stimulus package as an example of discretionary fiscal policy, but makes no empirical claims about the Recovery Act's actual causal impact on employment relative to counterfactual scenarios.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"lumen learning macroeconomics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2796, "completion_tokens": 313, "total_tokens": 3109, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00410198, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.324383Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "This is educational textbook material from a learning platform that explains fiscal policy concepts and mentions the 2009 stimulus package as an example, but provides no primary sources, data, citations, or empirical evidence about actual employment or fiscal stimulus outcomes during 2009-2012. It relays general economic theory rather than reporting specific findings about the historical period in question.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "lumen learning macroeconomics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.5,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is educational textbook material from a learning platform that explains fiscal policy concepts and mentions the 2009 stimulus package as an example, but provides no primary sources, data, citations, or empirical evidence about actual employment or fiscal stimulus outcomes during 2009-2012. It relays general economic theory rather than reporting specific findings about the historical period in question.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses automatic stabilizers and mentions the 2009 stimulus package as an example of discretionary fiscal policy, but does not directly analyze the Recovery Act's specific causal impact on employment relative to other policy interventions (Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, financial rescue).\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document describes automatic stabilizers and mentions the 2009 stimulus package as an example of discretionary fiscal policy, but makes no empirical claims about the Recovery Act's actual causal impact on employment relative to counterfactual scenarios or other policy interventions.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"lumen learning macroeconomics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 851, "completion_tokens": 96, "total_tokens": 947, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.001331, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.324383Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.8, "quality_rationale": "This is an official Federal Reserve historical document with institutional authority and access to primary data, but it is a secondary synthesis/narrative rather than a primary document itself. The presence of citations (footnote 1) and reliance on official Fed records and economic data elevates it above ordinary journalism, though it falls short of peer-reviewed scholarship or raw primary records.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreservehistory org" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.8,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official Federal Reserve historical document with institutional authority and access to primary data, but it is a secondary synthesis/narrative rather than a primary document itself. The presence of citations (footnote 1) and reliance on official Fed records and economic data elevates it above ordinary journalism, though it falls short of peer-reviewed scholarship or raw primary records.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.2,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document provides general context about the Great Recession's timeline and the Federal Reserve's response, but does not directly address employment trends, job losses, or the specific effects of the Recovery Act on employment within the year following February 2009.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses the recession timeline and Federal Reserve response but does not address job losses, employment trends, or the specific effects of the Recovery Act within the claimed timeframe.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"federalreservehistory.org\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2894, "completion_tokens": 289, "total_tokens": 3183, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00451708, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.324626Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.8, "quality_rationale": "This is a BLS official report using primary government data sources (CPS and CES surveys) with transparent methodology and clear documentation of data limitations and revisions. While published through an advocacy website rather than official BLS channels, the underlying source material is authoritative primary data with established statistical standards, though the secondary republication slightly reduces the quality rating from a definitive primary record.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "employment situation news release" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.8,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a BLS official report using primary government data sources (CPS and CES surveys) with transparent methodology and clear documentation of data limitations and revisions. While published through an advocacy website rather than official BLS channels, the underlying source material is authoritative primary data with established statistical standards, though the secondary republication slightly reduces the quality rating from a definitive primary record.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document provides employment trend data from May 2010 covering the period after the Recovery Act's February 2009 enactment, directly addressing job losses and employment changes, though it does not explicitly analyze the Recovery Act's causal role or quantify the 'sharp shrinkage' claim.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is a methodological overview of BLS employment surveys dated May 2010 that presents data tables but does not make any claims about job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act's effects.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current population survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"employment situation news release\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3018, "completion_tokens": 1285, "total_tokens": 4303, "reasoning_tokens": 948 }, "cost_usd": 0.00913929, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.324804Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a peer-reviewed article from the Monthly Labor Review, an official BLS publication with editorial standards, written by a named economist with institutional affiliation and access to primary employment data from the Current Employment Statistics program. The source provides methodologically sound analysis of official government employment records directly relevant to the topic.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "national bureau of economic research" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a peer-reviewed article from the Monthly Labor Review, an official BLS publication with editorial standards, written by a named economist with institutional affiliation and access to primary employment data from the Current Employment Statistics program. The source provides methodologically sound analysis of official government employment records directly relevant to the topic.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly addresses job losses shrinking and employment trends in the period following the recession (2009-2010), which is the exact timeframe and phenomenon in the sub-claim, though it does not explicitly discuss the Recovery Act or attribute causation to it.\\\"}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly reports that job losses slowed in the second half of 2009 (about 7-8 months after February 2009 Recovery Act enactment) and employment growth resumed in 2010, supporting the sub-claim's core assertion about sharp shrinkage in job losses and employment stabilization within roughly a year.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"national bureau of economic research\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3459, "completion_tokens": 4319, "total_tokens": 7778, "reasoning_tokens": 4649 }, "cost_usd": 0.0211213, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.324979Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "This is educational textbook material from Pressbooks (an open-source publishing platform) that explains fiscal policy concepts using the 2009 stimulus as an example, but it does not provide primary sources, named data, or specific evidence about employment and stimulus outcomes. It relays economic theory and general references to policy rather than reporting on empirical findings with documented sourcing.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "pressbooks" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.5,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is educational textbook material from Pressbooks (an open-source publishing platform) that explains fiscal policy concepts using the 2009 stimulus as an example, but it does not provide primary sources, named data, or specific evidence about employment and stimulus outcomes. It relays economic theory and general references to policy rather than reporting on empirical findings with documented sourcing.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.2,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document explains what automatic stabilizers are and how they function generally, but does not address whether the Recovery Act specifically caused higher employment beyond what automatic stabilizers alone would have produced.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses automatic stabilizers and mentions the 2009 stimulus package as an example of discretionary fiscal policy, but provides no analysis comparing the Recovery Act's actual employment effects to counterfactual scenarios with or without it.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"pressbooks\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2802, "completion_tokens": 279, "total_tokens": 3081, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00396366, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.325160Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a peer-reviewed article from the Monthly Labor Review, an official publication of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (a primary federal statistical agency), written by named economists with institutional affiliations and citing primary data sources (CES survey, GDP, official employment statistics). It represents analysis of official government records by qualified government statisticians.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "national income and product accounts" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "conference board composite index of economic indicators" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "nber business cycle dating committee" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a peer-reviewed article from the Monthly Labor Review, an official publication of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (a primary federal statistical agency), written by named economists with institutional affiliations and citing primary data sources (CES survey, GDP, official employment statistics). It represents analysis of official government records by qualified government statisticians.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly reports on job losses in 2009 and their moderation throughout the year following the Recovery Act's February 2009 enactment, addressing the core temporal and employment trend claims, though it does not explicitly discuss the Recovery Act's role or provide precise timing of when employment 'stopped falling.'\\\"}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly reports measured payroll employment data showing the largest job loss (779,000) occurred in January 2009, with employment declines moderating throughout the rest of 2009, supporting the claim that job losses shrank sharply within about a year of the Recovery Act's February 2009 enactment.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"current employment statistics survey\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"national income and product accounts\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"conference board composite index of economic indicators\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"nber business cycle dating committee\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3503, "completion_tokens": 5914, "total_tokens": 9417, "reasoning_tokens": 5545 }, "cost_usd": 0.02399362, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.325277Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is a reputable research institute publication citing official Bureau of Labor Statistics data as primary sources and referencing peer-reviewed research (von Wachter 2010), with named data points and charts. However, it appears to be an analytical report rather than a peer-reviewed study, and the excerpt shows it makes policy arguments alongside data presentation, which slightly reduces its standing as pure evidence.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "study", "id": "von wachter 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a reputable research institute publication citing official Bureau of Labor Statistics data as primary sources and referencing peer-reviewed research (von Wachter 2010), with named data points and charts. However, it appears to be an analytical report rather than a peer-reviewed study, and the excerpt shows it makes policy arguments alongside data presentation, which slightly reduces its standing as pure evidence.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document addresses employment trends and unemployment rates in the recovery period following the Recovery Act, but focuses on long-term unemployment composition rather than directly measuring job losses or employment growth rates.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document addresses unemployment trends post-Recovery Act but focuses on long-term unemployment composition rather than directly measuring job losses or employment growth rates during the first year after February 2009.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"von wachter 2010\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3148, "completion_tokens": 688, "total_tokens": 3836, "reasoning_tokens": 397 }, "cost_usd": 0.0063672, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.325410Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official government document from the Executive Office of the President (Council of Economic Advisers) mandated by statute to report to Congress on ARRA's economic effects. It represents a primary source with institutional authority, transparency provisions, and accountability requirements, though it is not a purely neutral record since it was produced by the administering agency.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "council of economic advisers" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "department of the treasury" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official government document from the Executive Office of the President (Council of Economic Advisers) mandated by statute to report to Congress on ARRA's economic effects. It represents a primary source with institutional authority, transparency provisions, and accountability requirements, though it is not a purely neutral record since it was produced by the administering agency.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly addresses the Recovery Act's economic impact and mentions employment effects as a key focus, but the excerpt provided does not contain specific data on monthly job losses, their trajectory, or the timing of when employment stopped falling.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.6,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document asserts that 'following implementation of the ARRA, the trajectory of the economy changed dramatically' and that 'Real GDP began to grow steadily,' which supports the sub-claim about employment recovery, though the excerpt cuts off before providing specific employment data and relies on CEA estimates rather than direct observation of job loss trends.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"council of economic advisers\\\"},\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of economic analysis\\\"},\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"department of the treasury\\\"}\\n]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3361, "completion_tokens": 5103, "total_tokens": 8464, "reasoning_tokens": 4742 }, "cost_usd": 0.021106939999999998, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.325545Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The Guardian is a reputable news organization with editorial standards. The article cites specific official employment figures from the US government (131,000 jobs lost, revised June figures), quotes named economists (Stephen Gallagher from Société Générale), and references official statements from the White House and President Obama, demonstrating reliance on primary sources and named authorities rather than anonymous sourcing or speculation.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "national institute of economic and social research" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "white house" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "societe generale" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The Guardian is a reputable news organization with editorial standards. The article cites specific official employment figures from the US government (131,000 jobs lost, revised June figures), quotes named economists (Stephen Gallagher from Société Générale), and references official statements from the White House and President Obama, demonstrating reliance on primary sources and named authorities rather than anonymous sourcing or speculation.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports on job losses in July 2010, which is well after the Recovery Act's February 2009 enactment and the claimed timeframe of 'about a year,' making it tangential background on the broader employment recovery rather than directly testing the specific sub-claim about when job losses shrank and employment stopped falling.\\\"}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports July 2010 job losses (16 months after the Recovery Act) but does not directly address whether job losses 'shrank sharply' or when 'employment stopped falling' within the first year post-enactment (by February 2010).\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"national institute of economic and social research\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"white house\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"societe generale\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3040, "completion_tokens": 404, "total_tokens": 3444, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0046478, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.325671Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official primary document from the Federal Reserve Board, a government institution with established credibility and rigorous internal standards for economic analysis and data reporting. The document directly reports on monetary policy decisions and economic conditions based on official statistics and Fed research, making it a high-quality primary source despite not being peer-reviewed in the academic sense.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federal reserve board" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official primary document from the Federal Reserve Board, a government institution with established credibility and rigorous internal standards for economic analysis and data reporting. The document directly reports on monetary policy decisions and economic conditions based on official statistics and Fed research, making it a high-quality primary source despite not being peer-reviewed in the academic sense.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document mentions fiscal policy stimulus as one factor supporting economic recovery and notes consumer spending was boosted by fiscal policies, but does not isolate the Recovery Act's specific employment effects or compare counterfactual scenarios with/without it versus other policy tools.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.6,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document explicitly attributes the economic turnaround and consumer spending increases to 'stimulus from monetary and fiscal policies' as a supporting factor, though it does not isolate the Recovery Act's independent contribution from other policies.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"federal reserve board\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2921, "completion_tokens": 297, "total_tokens": 3218, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00414182, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.325793Z" }, { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.85, "quality_rationale": "This is an official government report from the Council of Economic Advisers with a clear mandate, named methodology, and acknowledgment of analytical limitations. While it is a primary document from an interested party (the executive branch evaluating its own policy), it was produced under statutory transparency requirements with peer-reviewed methods and supplements its analysis with outside analysts' estimates, making it highly credible despite the inherent conflict of interest.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "council of economic advisers" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.85,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official government report from the Council of Economic Advisers with a clear mandate, named methodology, and acknowledgment of analytical limitations. While it is a primary document from an interested party (the executive branch evaluating its own policy), it was produced under statutory transparency requirements with peer-reviewed methods and supplements its analysis with outside analysts' estimates, making it highly credible despite the inherent conflict of interest.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"directness\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly addresses the Recovery Act's employment impact and attempts to isolate its effect from baseline conditions, but does not explicitly separate out or compare the independent contributions of Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial-sector rescue as the sub-claim requires.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"direction\": \"```json\\n{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document asserts that ARRA raised GDP by 2.0-2.9% relative to a counterfactual baseline, which directly supports the sub-claim that the Recovery Act was a major cause of higher employment beyond other policy measures, though the counterfactual methodology itself is not empirically observed.\\\"\\n}\\n```\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"council of economic advisers\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of economic analysis\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3370, "completion_tokens": 1524, "total_tokens": 4894, "reasoning_tokens": 1142 }, "cost_usd": 0.00996248, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.325904Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publication, a primary government source with strong editorial and methodological standards. It is highly credible for labor-market data, though not a primary record on the broader stimulus topic itself.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publication, a primary government source with strong editorial and methodological standards. It is highly credible for labor-market data, though not a primary record on the broader stimulus topic itself.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.0,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt is about import and export prices and general BLS data access, not job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses import and export prices, not job losses or employment trends after the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 1863, "completion_tokens": 350, "total_tokens": 2213, "reasoning_tokens": 174 }, "cost_usd": 0.002891196, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.326025Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publication, a primary government source with strong editorial and methodological standards. It is highly credible for labor-market data, though not a primary record on the broader stimulus topic itself.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publication, a primary government source with strong editorial and methodological standards. It is highly credible for labor-market data, though not a primary record on the broader stimulus topic itself.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.0,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt is about import and export prices and general BLS data access, not job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses import and export prices in July and June, not job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act period.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 534, "completion_tokens": 49, "total_tokens": 583, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.000621, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.326025Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a Congressional Research Service report hosted on congress.gov, a highly reputable government source with strong editorial standards and clear sourcing. It is a secondary analytical document rather than a primary record, but it is well suited as evidence on U.S. employment and federal fiscal stimulus policy.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "american recovery and reinvestment act 2009" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a Congressional Research Service report hosted on congress.gov, a highly reputable government source with strong editorial standards and clear sourcing. It is a secondary analytical document rather than a primary record, but it is well suited as evidence on U.S. employment and federal fiscal stimulus policy.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.0,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt is about unemployment insurance provisions in ARRA, not about monthly job losses or employment trends after enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses ARRA unemployment insurance provisions and dates, but it does not report data on monthly job losses or whether employment stopped falling within a year.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"american recovery and reinvestment act 2009\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2931, "completion_tokens": 639, "total_tokens": 3570, "reasoning_tokens": 440 }, "cost_usd": 0.00524856, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.326182Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official Bureau of Labor Statistics publication, a high-standard U.S. government source with direct access to the underlying employment data and methodology. It is a secondary analytical article rather than a primary record, but it is highly credible and well-sourced for labor-market evidence.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us constitution" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an official Bureau of Labor Statistics publication, a high-standard U.S. government source with direct access to the underlying employment data and methodology. It is a secondary analytical article rather than a primary record, but it is highly credible and well-sourced for labor-market evidence.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt is about census hiring effects on CES employment estimates and does not address the Recovery Act, monthly job losses, or when employment stopped falling.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses census-related employment fluctuations in CES data and does not address job losses after the 2009 Recovery Act or whether employment stopped falling within a year.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us constitution\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2798, "completion_tokens": 2675, "total_tokens": 5473, "reasoning_tokens": 2459 }, "cost_usd": 0.014322199999999998, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.326293Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is a named-authored policy analysis from a reputable economics publisher (Moody’s Analytics/economy.com), not anonymous advocacy, and it uses an established macroeconomic model with explicit methodology. However, it is not peer-reviewed or an official primary record, and it is produced by an entity with an analytical/commercial stake, so it is strong secondary evidence rather than top-tier source quality.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.75, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "moodys analytics model" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "economycom" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a named-authored policy analysis from a reputable economics publisher (Moody’s Analytics/economy.com), not anonymous advocacy, and it uses an established macroeconomic model with explicit methodology. However, it is not peer-reviewed or an official primary record, and it is produced by an entity with an analytical/commercial stake, so it is strong secondary evidence rather than top-tier source quality.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt directly discusses estimated employment effects of the government response and separates fiscal stimulus from financial-market policies, but it does not isolate the Recovery Act alone versus Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial-sector rescue in exactly the way the sub-claim asks.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.75,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt explicitly estimates that the government response had huge job effects, and that fiscal stimulus contributed materially to those effects, implying the Recovery Act helped raise employment beyond what would otherwise have occurred.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"moodys analytics model\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"alan blinder mark zandi\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"economycom\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3194, "completion_tokens": 2041, "total_tokens": 5235, "reasoning_tokens": 1757 }, "cost_usd": 0.0090027726, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.326400Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is a secondary commentary post from a policy advocacy organization, but it is summarizing and quoting a contemporaneous CBO report and CBO director statements rather than presenting unsourced claims. The source has a policy stance, yet it draws on named official primary sources with standard federal analytical credibility.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a secondary commentary post from a policy advocacy organization, but it is summarizing and quoting a contemporaneous CBO report and CBO director statements rather than presenting unsourced claims. The source has a policy stance, yet it draws on named official primary sources with standard federal analytical credibility.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document directly discusses ARRA’s estimated effects on employment relative to a no-stimulus counterfactual, but it does not isolate the incremental effect beyond Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.6,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt reports CBO estimates that ARRA increased GDP and employment relative to no stimulus, implying higher jobs than would have occurred otherwise, though it does not directly isolate ARRA’s effect beyond Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and bank rescues.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2696, "completion_tokens": 250, "total_tokens": 2946, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00306363, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.326571Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "This appears to be a repost of a Washington Post column by Jared Bernstein, not an original study or official record. It cites a named source (“Blinder and Zandi (2015)”) but the document itself is journalistic/opinion commentary with limited visible sourcing and no peer review.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.5,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This appears to be a repost of a Washington Post column by Jared Bernstein, not an original study or official record. It cites a named source (“Blinder and Zandi (2015)”) but the document itself is journalistic/opinion commentary with limited visible sourcing and no peer review.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses the Recovery Act alongside Federal Reserve policy and financial-sector/auto bailouts as part of counter-cyclical policy and asks whether these interventions worked, which is closely related to estimating the Recovery Act’s employment effect relative to those other policies, but it does not directly test the exact counterfactual sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt describes the Recovery Act, Federal Reserve actions, and bailouts as counter-cyclical interventions, but it does not provide evidence that the Recovery Act specifically caused higher employment beyond what the other policies would have produced.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"blinder zandi 2015\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2882, "completion_tokens": 643, "total_tokens": 3525, "reasoning_tokens": 388 }, "cost_usd": 0.00523158, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.326729Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.95, "quality_rationale": "This is an official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics release, a primary source produced under established federal statistical methods and editorial procedures. It has very high source quality for labor market data, though it is not a complete primary record of fiscal stimulus policy itself.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.95,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics release, a primary source produced under established federal statistical methods and editorial procedures. It has very high source quality for labor market data, though it is not a complete primary record of fiscal stimulus policy itself.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This BLS employment situation release gives monthly job and unemployment trends around late 2009–2010, which is adjacent to the claim about post-ARRA recovery timing, but it does not directly analyze the Recovery Act or specifically establish the year-after-February-2009 turnaround.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.6,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The release states that by October 2010 nonfarm payroll employment had risen since December 2009 and the unemployment rate had been essentially unchanged since May, which is consistent with job losses having stopped within about a year after February 2009 and then turning into gains.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current population survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bls\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3756, "completion_tokens": 1578, "total_tokens": 5334, "reasoning_tokens": 1314 }, "cost_usd": 0.008750862, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.326882Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publication, a primary government statistical source with strong editorial and methodological standards. It is highly reliable for labor-market data relevant to employment, though it is not a direct primary record of fiscal stimulus policy.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publication, a primary government statistical source with strong editorial and methodological standards. It is highly reliable for labor-market data relevant to employment, though it is not a direct primary record of fiscal stimulus policy.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is only a 2009 BLS publications index and does not report monthly job losses, employment trends after February 2009, or any analysis of the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt is only a 2009 BLS publication index and does not mention the Recovery Act, monthly job losses, or employment trends.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3268, "completion_tokens": 206, "total_tokens": 3474, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0032870300000000002, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.327011Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publication, a primary government statistical source with strong editorial and methodological standards. It is highly reliable for labor-market data relevant to employment, though it is not a direct primary record of fiscal stimulus policy.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publication, a primary government statistical source with strong editorial and methodological standards. It is highly reliable for labor-market data relevant to employment, though it is not a direct primary record of fiscal stimulus policy.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is only a 2009 BLS publications index and does not report monthly job losses, employment trends after February 2009, or any analysis of the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt is only a 2009 BLS archive index and contains no content about monthly job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act's effects within a year of enactment.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 935, "completion_tokens": 62, "total_tokens": 997, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00098025, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.327011Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a U.S. Census Bureau research product/working paper drawing on official labor-market data and analytic methods from a highly reputable government statistical agency. It is primary, method-based evidence with strong editorial standards, though not a peer-reviewed journal article or definitive primary record.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "matched employer employee data" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a U.S. Census Bureau research product/working paper drawing on official labor-market data and analytic methods from a highly reputable government statistical agency. It is primary, method-based evidence with strong editorial standards, though not a peer-reviewed journal article or definitive primary record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses labor-market recession dynamics and hiring/separation trends around the 2007-2009 recession, but it does not directly address monthly job losses or the timing of employment stopping its decline after the Recovery Act in February 2009.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"mixed\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses unemployment patterns, job tenure, hiring, and separation rates in the 2001 and 2007-2009 recessions, but it does not mention the Recovery Act, monthly job losses shrinking, or employment stopping its decline within a year of February 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"current population survey tenure supplements\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"matched employer employee data\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us census bureau\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2667, "completion_tokens": 295, "total_tokens": 2962, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00318104, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.327193Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a U.S. Census Bureau research product/working paper drawing on official labor-market data and analytic methods from a highly reputable government statistical agency. It is primary, method-based evidence with strong editorial standards, though not a peer-reviewed journal article or definitive primary record.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "matched employer employee data" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a U.S. Census Bureau research product/working paper drawing on official labor-market data and analytic methods from a highly reputable government statistical agency. It is primary, method-based evidence with strong editorial standards, though not a peer-reviewed journal article or definitive primary record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses labor-market recession dynamics and hiring/separation trends around the 2007-2009 recession, but it does not directly address monthly job losses or the timing of employment stopping its decline after the Recovery Act in February 2009.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"mixed\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses unemployment patterns and job tenure shifts, but it does not address Recovery Act-era monthly job losses shrinking sharply or employment stopping its decline within a year of February 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"current population survey tenure supplements\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"matched employer employee data\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us census bureau\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 786, "completion_tokens": 61, "total_tokens": 847, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.000864, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.327193Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a working paper/article from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco presenting an empirical economic analysis with named authors and explicit methods based on official ARRA allocation data. It is not itself a definitive primary record, but it has strong institutional backing and substantially more rigor than ordinary journalism.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.55, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "recoverygov" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "fhwa" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a working paper/article from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco presenting an empirical economic analysis with named authors and explicit methods based on official ARRA allocation data. It is not itself a definitive primary record, but it has strong institutional backing and substantially more rigor than ordinary journalism.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document directly studies the employment effects of ARRA stimulus spending and counterfactual jobs created, which is closely related to the claim, but it does not explicitly compare ARRA against the combined effects of Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.55,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt argues that ARRA stimulus spending produced about eight jobs per million dollars in its first year and explicitly frames the paper as contrasting what happened with what would have happened absent the policy, which supports the claim that the Recovery Act raised employment relative to the counterfactual.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"recoverygov\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bls\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"fhwa\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3198, "completion_tokens": 4008, "total_tokens": 7206, "reasoning_tokens": 3734 }, "cost_usd": 0.016490184, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.327361Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a Bureau of Labor Statistics Monthly Labor Review article by a named BLS economist, using official CES survey data and standard statistical methods. It is an authoritative primary/official government source with strong editorial standards, though it is still an analytical article rather than the underlying raw record.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.92, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bls monthly labor review" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a Bureau of Labor Statistics Monthly Labor Review article by a named BLS economist, using official CES survey data and standard statistical methods. It is an authoritative primary/official government source with strong editorial standards, though it is still an analytical article rather than the underlying raw record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses U.S. payroll employment falling through February 2010 and then turning upward, which is adjacent to the claim about losses shrinking and employment stopping its decline within about a year of the February 2009 Recovery Act, but it does not directly address the Recovery Act or monthly job-loss trends from its enactment date.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.92,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt reports that nonfarm employment kept falling through February 2010 and then rose for the remainder of 2010, which supports the claim that job losses shrank sharply and employment stopped falling within about a year after February 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls current employment statistics survey\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls monthly labor review\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3102, "completion_tokens": 291, "total_tokens": 3393, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00351007, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.327487Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "Finance & Development is an IMF-published periodical with editorial standards and subject-matter expertise, which gives it decent credibility. However, this is a secondary, advocacy-leaning article rather than a primary record or peer-reviewed study, and its claims are presented in an interpretive magazine format.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "moodys analytics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bea nipa" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"Finance & Development is an IMF-published periodical with editorial standards and subject-matter expertise, which gives it decent credibility. However, this is a secondary, advocacy-leaning article rather than a primary record or peer-reviewed study, and its claims are presented in an interpretive magazine format.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses the Recovery Act as part of a broader policy response and claims stimulus helped the recovery, but it does not directly isolate the Act’s effect relative to Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.7,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt explicitly says the recovery occurred largely because of unprecedented fiscal and monetary responses and that without such aggressive action the economy might still have been shrinking, which supports the claim that the Recovery Act contributed to higher employment beyond other factors, though it does not isolate the Act from Fed policy, stabilizers, or rescues.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"blinder zandi 2010\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"moodys analytics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bea nipa\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bls ces\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3002, "completion_tokens": 5636, "total_tokens": 8638, "reasoning_tokens": 5347 }, "cost_usd": 0.020683121999999998, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.327611Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a Government Accountability Office report, an official congressional research product with strong editorial and methodological standards. It is secondary analysis based on literature review and expert interviews rather than a primary record, but it is highly credible for evidence on U.S. employment and federal fiscal stimulus.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "government accountability office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a Government Accountability Office report, an official congressional research product with strong editorial and methodological standards. It is secondary analysis based on literature review and expert interviews rather than a primary record, but it is highly credible for evidence on U.S. employment and federal fiscal stimulus.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The report discusses automatic stabilizers and their effects during downturns, but it does not directly evaluate the Recovery Act’s incremental impact on U.S. employment in 2009–2012 relative to Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt says GAO previously found that automatic stabilizers reduced downturn effects and generated additional activity, but it does not address the Recovery Act’s incremental effect on employment relative to Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"government accountability office\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2928, "completion_tokens": 1843, "total_tokens": 4771, "reasoning_tokens": 1608 }, "cost_usd": 0.008965164, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.327739Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a Government Accountability Office report, an official congressional research product with strong editorial and methodological standards. It is secondary analysis based on literature review and expert interviews rather than a primary record, but it is highly credible for evidence on U.S. employment and federal fiscal stimulus.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "government accountability office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a Government Accountability Office report, an official congressional research product with strong editorial and methodological standards. It is secondary analysis based on literature review and expert interviews rather than a primary record, but it is highly credible for evidence on U.S. employment and federal fiscal stimulus.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The report discusses automatic stabilizers and their effects during downturns, but it does not directly evaluate the Recovery Act’s incremental impact on U.S. employment in 2009–2012 relative to Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses automatic stabilizers generally and says they generated additional economic activity in downturns, but it does not address the Recovery Act’s incremental effect on 2009-2012 employment relative to Fed policy, stabilizers, and the financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"government accountability office\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 811, "completion_tokens": 75, "total_tokens": 886, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00094575, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.327739Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "Published by IMF eLibrary with institutional editorial standards, but this is a magazine-style feature issue rather than a primary document or peer-reviewed study. It cites named experts (including IMF-affiliated authors and economists) and appears well-sourced, yet it is still secondary analysis with some institutional framing.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "imf researchers" }, { "type": "study", "id": "kose prasad emerging markets analysis" }, { "type": "study", "id": "arora vamvakidis china spillover analysis" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"Published by IMF eLibrary with institutional editorial standards, but this is a magazine-style feature issue rather than a primary document or peer-reviewed study. It cites named experts (including IMF-affiliated authors and economists) and appears well-sourced, yet it is still secondary analysis with some institutional framing.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document discusses Alan Blinder and Mark Zandi’s claim that stimulus had positive effects and that without it the U.S. would still be in recession, which is adjacent to assessing Recovery Act effects on employment, but it does not directly isolate the Recovery Act from Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, or financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.6,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt says Alan Blinder and Mark Zandi find stimulus had positive effects and that without it the United States would still be in recession, which supports the claim that the Recovery Act raised employment relative to a no-stimulus baseline, though it does not specifically isolate its effect beyond Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"blinder zandi stimulus analysis\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"imf researchers\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"kose prasad emerging markets analysis\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"arora vamvakidis china spillover analysis\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2776, "completion_tokens": 361, "total_tokens": 3137, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00350956, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.327906Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a U.S. Census Bureau publication drawing on official government datasets (ASPEP and BLS) with clear institutional sourcing and no evident commercial conflict. It is not a primary record itself, but it is high-quality official analysis suitable as evidence.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "annual survey of public employment payroll" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a U.S. Census Bureau publication drawing on official government datasets (ASPEP and BLS) with clear institutional sourcing and no evident commercial conflict. It is not a primary record itself, but it is high-quality official analysis suitable as evidence.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document discusses employment trends during and after the 2008-2009 downturn, but it focuses on public versus private employment recovery over multi-year periods rather than directly measuring monthly job losses or the one-year post-Recovery Act timing in the sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses overall private and public employment trends after the recession, but it does not address monthly job losses shrinking sharply or employment stopping its decline within about a year of the February 2009 Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"annual survey of public employment payroll\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls current employment statistics\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"census bureau\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3009, "completion_tokens": 2106, "total_tokens": 5115, "reasoning_tokens": 2088 }, "cost_usd": 0.01116529, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.328052Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "UC Berkeley Labor Center is a reputable academic-policy publisher with editorial standards, and the excerpt cites specific labor-market statistics and footnoted sources rather than making unsupported claims. However, this is a secondary research brief from an advocacy-oriented center, not a peer-reviewed study or primary record.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "center on wage and employment dynamics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "economic policy institute" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"UC Berkeley Labor Center is a reputable academic-policy publisher with editorial standards, and the excerpt cites specific labor-market statistics and footnoted sources rather than making unsupported claims. However, this is a secondary research brief from an advocacy-oriented center, not a peer-reviewed study or primary record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses the Great Recession’s employment losses and the timing of recovery, but it does not directly examine monthly job losses or whether employment stopped falling within about a year of the Recovery Act’s February 2009 enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.8,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt reports that the Great Recession caused massive job losses through February 2010 and that nonfarm employment did not recover pre-recession levels until much later, which is consistent with job losses shrinking and employment stopping its decline within about a year after the February 2009 Recovery Act enactment.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"center on wage and employment dynamics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"economic policy institute\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3058, "completion_tokens": 7293, "total_tokens": 10351, "reasoning_tokens": 7794 }, "cost_usd": 0.03175952, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.328167Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "UC Berkeley Labor Center is a reputable academic-policy publisher with editorial standards, and the excerpt cites specific labor-market statistics and footnoted sources rather than making unsupported claims. However, this is a secondary research brief from an advocacy-oriented center, not a peer-reviewed study or primary record.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": -1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "center on wage and employment dynamics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "economic policy institute" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"UC Berkeley Labor Center is a reputable academic-policy publisher with editorial standards, and the excerpt cites specific labor-market statistics and footnoted sources rather than making unsupported claims. However, this is a secondary research brief from an advocacy-oriented center, not a peer-reviewed study or primary record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses the Great Recession’s employment losses and the timing of recovery, but it does not directly examine monthly job losses or whether employment stopped falling within about a year of the Recovery Act’s February 2009 enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":-1,\\\"strength\\\":0.7,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt states that Great Recession job losses were massive and that nonfarm employment did not recover pre-recession levels until May 2014, which contradicts the claim that employment stopped falling within about a year after February 2009, though it does not directly discuss monthly loss shrinkage.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"center on wage and employment dynamics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"economic policy institute\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 859, "completion_tokens": 86, "total_tokens": 945, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00103125, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.328167Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official U.S. government statistical publication from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, drawing directly on its Current Employment Statistics program and linking to the underlying news release. It is a primary-source government record with strong methodological transparency and high editorial reliability, though not a peer-reviewed study.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.85, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an official U.S. government statistical publication from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, drawing directly on its Current Employment Statistics program and linking to the underlying news release. It is a primary-source government record with strong methodological transparency and high editorial reliability, though not a peer-reviewed study.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document reports that monthly job losses moderated substantially during 2009 and that payroll employment was still declining in December 2009, which closely relates to the claim about job losses shrinking and employment stopping its fall within about a year of the Recovery Act, though it does not explicitly tie the timing to the Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.85,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document reports that in 2009 job losses moderated substantially, with monthly declines averaging 691,000 in Q1 and 69,000 in Q4, and it says payroll employment was still only edging down by December 2009, which supports the claim that losses shrank and employment stopped falling within about a year of February 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics program\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2146, "completion_tokens": 3628, "total_tokens": 5774, "reasoning_tokens": 3344 }, "cost_usd": 0.012669228000000001, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.328345Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "Federal Reserve History is an official, institutionally affiliated educational site with editorial standards and generally reliable sourcing, though this item is a secondary overview rather than a primary document or peer-reviewed study. It cites widely accepted official economic data and has low conflict-of-interest concerns, but it is not definitive evidence on its own.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "author_group", "id": "nber business cycle dating committee" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federal reserve board" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"Federal Reserve History is an official, institutionally affiliated educational site with editorial standards and generally reliable sourcing, though this item is a secondary overview rather than a primary document or peer-reviewed study. It cites widely accepted official economic data and has low conflict-of-interest concerns, but it is not definitive evidence on its own.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt provides background on the Great Recession, fiscal stimulus including ARRA, and Federal Reserve actions, but it does not directly assess how much ARRA increased employment relative to a counterfactual excluding Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and bank rescues.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt describes the recession, fiscal stimulus, and Fed actions, but it does not evaluate whether the Recovery Act caused higher employment beyond what the Fed, automatic stabilizers, and financial rescue would have produced.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"nber business cycle dating committee\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of economic analysis\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"federal reserve board\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3201, "completion_tokens": 1289, "total_tokens": 4490, "reasoning_tokens": 1000 }, "cost_usd": 0.006754443, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.328556Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "Liberty Street Economics is the New York Fed’s official economics blog, so it has strong editorial oversight and access to primary official data and internal research. However, this is a secondary explanatory blog post summarizing research rather than a primary record or peer-reviewed study.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "post crisis academic research on qe" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"Liberty Street Economics is the New York Fed’s official economics blog, so it has strong editorial oversight and access to primary official data and internal research. However, this is a secondary explanatory blog post summarizing research rather than a primary record or peer-reviewed study.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt is about the effects of Federal Reserve quantitative easing on the economy, which is related to employment during the post-crisis period, but it does not directly address the Recovery Act or disentangle its impact from fiscal stimulus, automatic stabilizers, or financial-sector rescue measures.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses QE and its general role in supporting the economy, but it does not address the Recovery Act or compare employment outcomes with and without it relative to other policies.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"post crisis academic research on qe\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2786, "completion_tokens": 228, "total_tokens": 3014, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00348903, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.328783Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official Federal Reserve Monetary Policy Report submitted to Congress, making it a primary government document with high editorial and evidentiary standards. It is authoritative for contemporaneous Federal Reserve assessments, though it is not a raw underlying record and reflects the institution’s own perspective.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreserve" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an official Federal Reserve Monetary Policy Report submitted to Congress, making it a primary government document with high editorial and evidentiary standards. It is authoritative for contemporaneous Federal Reserve assessments, though it is not a raw underlying record and reflects the institution’s own perspective.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document is a 2009 Federal Reserve monetary policy overview describing economic and labor-market deterioration and financial crisis conditions, but it does not directly analyze the Recovery Act’s incremental effect on 2009-2012 employment relative to Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, or rescue measures.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses the 2008 economic and financial downturn and Federal Reserve actions, but it does not evaluate the Recovery Act or compare employment outcomes with and without it.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"federalreserve\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2889, "completion_tokens": 1256, "total_tokens": 4145, "reasoning_tokens": 1022 }, "cost_usd": 0.0061601880000000005, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.328947Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official Federal Reserve Monetary Policy Report submitted to Congress, making it a primary government document with high editorial and evidentiary standards. It is authoritative for contemporaneous Federal Reserve assessments, though it is not a raw underlying record and reflects the institution’s own perspective.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreserve" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an official Federal Reserve Monetary Policy Report submitted to Congress, making it a primary government document with high editorial and evidentiary standards. It is authoritative for contemporaneous Federal Reserve assessments, though it is not a raw underlying record and reflects the institution’s own perspective.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document is a 2009 Federal Reserve monetary policy overview describing economic and labor-market deterioration and financial crisis conditions, but it does not directly analyze the Recovery Act’s incremental effect on 2009-2012 employment relative to Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, or rescue measures.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses the 2008-2009 financial crisis, labor market weakness, and Federal Reserve actions, but it does not address the Recovery Act or compare employment with and without it beyond other policies.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"federalreserve\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 828, "completion_tokens": 66, "total_tokens": 894, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.000918, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.328947Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "NBER working papers are produced by named authors and are generally credible, well-cited research outputs, but they are explicitly not peer-reviewed in the working-paper form shown here. It is a secondary analysis rather than a primary record, with clear author disclosure and no obvious conflict noted.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.35, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "nber working paper 34411" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"NBER working papers are produced by named authors and are generally credible, well-cited research outputs, but they are explicitly not peer-reviewed in the working-paper form shown here. It is a secondary analysis rather than a primary record, with clear author disclosure and no obvious conflict noted.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The paper discusses counterfactual effects of discretionary fiscal stimulus versus automatic stabilizers in the Great Recession, which is adjacent to the claim, but it does not directly isolate the Recovery Act’s added employment effect relative to Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.35,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt says the paper simulates counterfactuals without discretionary fiscal stimulus and finds that more sustained stimulus would have pushed unemployment down more rapidly after the Great Recession, which supports the idea that the Recovery Act raised employment relative to a no-stimulus baseline, though it does not directly isolate it from Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, or the financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"nber working paper 34411\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2869, "completion_tokens": 287, "total_tokens": 3156, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00353208, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.329136Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is an ოფიციial White House statement quoting and summarizing a Congressional Budget Office report, so it has a strong documentary basis and clear sourcing to a primary government analysis. However, it is still a political communication rather than the CBO report itself, so it is slightly below a direct primary source.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an ოფიციial White House statement quoting and summarizing a Congressional Budget Office report, so it has a strong documentary basis and clear sourcing to a primary government analysis. However, it is still a political communication rather than the CBO report itself, so it is slightly below a direct primary source.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document discusses the Recovery Act’s employment effects and claims it created jobs and lowered unemployment, but it does not directly track monthly job losses or the timing of when employment stopped falling within a year of enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.6,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The statement says the Recovery Act was “working to rescue the economy” and cites CBO estimates that it increased employment and lowered unemployment, which is consistent with job losses shrinking and employment stopping its decline within about a year.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2925, "completion_tokens": 255, "total_tokens": 3180, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00323545, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.329258Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is an ოფიციial White House statement quoting and summarizing a Congressional Budget Office report, so it has a strong documentary basis and clear sourcing to a primary government analysis. However, it is still a political communication rather than the CBO report itself, so it is slightly below a direct primary source.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.74, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an ოფიციial White House statement quoting and summarizing a Congressional Budget Office report, so it has a strong documentary basis and clear sourcing to a primary government analysis. However, it is still a political communication rather than the CBO report itself, so it is slightly below a direct primary source.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"It reports CBO estimates that the Recovery Act increased employment and lowered unemployment, which is closely related to the claim about its employment effects, but it does not directly isolate those effects from Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial-sector rescue measures.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.74,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document explicitly claims the Recovery Act increased employment by 1.4–3.3 million and lowered unemployment, which supports the claim that it was a major cause of higher employment beyond no-stimulus conditions, though it does not directly compare against Fed policy, stabilizers, or the financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2963, "completion_tokens": 280, "total_tokens": 3243, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00337645, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.329368Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a U.S. Census Bureau CES working paper written by named authors and hosted on an official government domain, with clear methodological purpose and an explicit disclosure that it is not formal Census-reviewed publication. It is a primary research document from a reputable public statistical agency, though not peer reviewed or an official report.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a U.S. Census Bureau CES working paper written by named authors and hosted on an official government domain, with clear methodological purpose and an explicit disclosure that it is not formal Census-reviewed publication. It is a primary research document from a reputable public statistical agency, though not peer reviewed or an official report.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses job-to-job flows, recessions, and nonemployment rates over 1998–2010, which is adjacent labor-market background but does not directly test monthly job losses or whether employment stopped falling within about a year of the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses job-to-job flows, recessions, and nonemployment, but it does not mention the Recovery Act, monthly job losses shrinking sharply, or employment stopping its decline within a year of February 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us census bureau\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2920, "completion_tokens": 249, "total_tokens": 3169, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00322696, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.329502Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official U.S. congressional hearing document published by GPO/congress.gov, making it a primary government record with strong editorial and archival standards. It is highly reliable as evidence for what was presented or stated in the hearing, though it remains a hearing transcript/committee document rather than an independent study.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "house committee on the budget hearing july 14 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an official U.S. congressional hearing document published by GPO/congress.gov, making it a primary government record with strong editorial and archival standards. It is highly reliable as evidence for what was presented or stated in the hearing, though it remains a hearing transcript/committee document rather than an independent study.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a 2010 hearing about the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and may discuss labor-market effects, but the excerpt shown does not specifically report monthly job losses or employment stopping its decline within a year of enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt only identifies the hearing and document metadata; it does not discuss job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act’s effects.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"house committee on the budget hearing july 14 2010\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3881, "completion_tokens": 228, "total_tokens": 4109, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0044155, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.329627Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.95, "quality_rationale": "A Bureau of Labor Statistics publication is an official government statistical source with strong editorial and methodological standards. It is based on primary CPS data and is highly reliable evidence for labor market conditions relevant to U.S. employment, though it is not a direct primary record of federal fiscal stimulus effects.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.78, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "national bureau of economic research" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.95,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"A Bureau of Labor Statistics publication is an official government statistical source with strong editorial and methodological standards. It is based on primary CPS data and is highly reliable evidence for labor market conditions relevant to U.S. employment, though it is not a direct primary record of federal fiscal stimulus effects.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses when the U.S. labor market began to recover and the timing of unemployment declines after the Great Recession, but it does not directly address monthly job losses or tie the timing to the Recovery Act’s February 2009 enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.78,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt says the unemployment rate peaked in October 2009 and began trending downward in April 2010, while employment grew by 2010 and had risen substantially by 2017, which supports the claim that job losses shrank and employment stopped falling within about a year of February 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"current population survey\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"national bureau of economic research\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3077, "completion_tokens": 6127, "total_tokens": 9204, "reasoning_tokens": 6588 }, "cost_usd": 0.02716056, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.329739Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a Congressional Budget Office report hosted on an official document repository, making it a high-quality primary/official source with strong editorial standards and no obvious commercial conflict. It is evidence-based and based on official recipient reports plus economic models, though it is still an estimate rather than a definitive primary record.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a Congressional Budget Office report hosted on an official document repository, making it a high-quality primary/official source with strong editorial standards and no obvious commercial conflict. It is evidence-based and based on official recipient reports plus economic models, though it is still an estimate rather than a definitive primary record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document concerns ARRA’s estimated employment impact in April–June 2010, which is adjacent in time and topic, but it does not directly report whether monthly job losses shrank sharply or whether employment stopped falling within about a year of enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt only says CBO estimated ARRA’s employment impact in April–June 2010; it does not report data showing job losses shrank sharply or employment stopped falling within a year of enactment.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 1974, "completion_tokens": 248, "total_tokens": 2222, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00252118, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.329855Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a Congressional Budget Office report hosted on an official document repository, making it a high-quality primary/official source with strong editorial standards and no obvious commercial conflict. It is evidence-based and based on official recipient reports plus economic models, though it is still an estimate rather than a definitive primary record.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a Congressional Budget Office report hosted on an official document repository, making it a high-quality primary/official source with strong editorial standards and no obvious commercial conflict. It is evidence-based and based on official recipient reports plus economic models, though it is still an estimate rather than a definitive primary record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document concerns ARRA’s estimated employment impact in April–June 2010, which is adjacent in time and topic, but it does not directly report whether monthly job losses shrank sharply or whether employment stopped falling within about a year of enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt only says the report estimates ARRA’s impact in 2010 and describes its methodology; it does not state whether monthly job losses shrank sharply or employment stopped falling within a year of enactment.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 615, "completion_tokens": 67, "total_tokens": 682, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00076275, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.329855Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a Congressional Budget Office report hosted on an official document repository, making it a high-quality primary/official source with strong editorial standards and no obvious commercial conflict. It is evidence-based and based on official recipient reports plus economic models, though it is still an estimate rather than a definitive primary record.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.3, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a Congressional Budget Office report hosted on an official document repository, making it a high-quality primary/official source with strong editorial standards and no obvious commercial conflict. It is evidence-based and based on official recipient reports plus economic models, though it is still an estimate rather than a definitive primary record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document estimates ARRA’s employment impact in a specific quarter of 2010, which is adjacent to the broader question of whether ARRA raised employment during 2009–2012, but it does not directly compare ARRA against counterfactual contributions from the Federal Reserve, automatic stabilizers, or financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.3,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt says CBO estimated ARRA’s overall impact on employment in Q2 2010 using evidence and models, which is consistent with the Act having increased employment, but it does not directly compare against a no-ARRA counterfactual after accounting for Fed policy, stabilizers, and bank rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2012, "completion_tokens": 284, "total_tokens": 2296, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00271168, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.330044Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official White House publication, making it a primary source for the administration’s own description of the Recovery Act and its cited estimates. Its credibility is high as an official government document, though it is also advocacy-oriented and not independent or peer-reviewed.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "congressional budget office" }, { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "white house" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an official White House publication, making it a primary source for the administration’s own description of the Recovery Act and its cited estimates. Its credibility is high as an official government document, though it is also advocacy-oriented and not independent or peer-reviewed.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document broadly discusses the Recovery Act’s job effects and cites job creation/support, but it does not directly report monthly job-loss trends or the point at which employment stopped falling within a year of enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.7,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document claims that when the Recovery Act was enacted in February 2009 the economy was losing over 700,000 jobs a month, and that the Act helped prevent another depression and return the economy to growth, which is consistent with job losses shrinking and employment stopping its decline within about a year.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office recovery act estimate\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"blinder zandi economic analysis\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"the white house\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2833, "completion_tokens": 274, "total_tokens": 3107, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00363255, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.330170Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is presented as a U.S. Government Accountability Office report, which is a highly credible official inquiry with strong editorial standards and systematic review of studies. It is a secondary synthesis rather than a primary record, but for evidence on 2009-2012 federal fiscal stimulus and employment it is high-quality, low-conflict source material.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "studies gao reviewed" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is presented as a U.S. Government Accountability Office report, which is a highly credible official inquiry with strong editorial standards and systematic review of studies. It is a secondary synthesis rather than a primary record, but for evidence on 2009-2012 federal fiscal stimulus and employment it is high-quality, low-conflict source material.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document concerns automatic stabilizers in downturns and their economic effects, which is adjacent background to the claimed comparison of Recovery Act job gains versus other forces, but it does not directly analyze the Recovery Act or employment from 2009-2012.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"mixed\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt says automatic stabilizers reduced downturn harms and generated activity, but it does not compare the Recovery Act against counterfactual employment effects or isolate it from Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"studies gao reviewed\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"congressional budget office\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2699, "completion_tokens": 2764, "total_tokens": 5463, "reasoning_tokens": 2510 }, "cost_usd": 0.011844839999999999, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.330285Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.95, "quality_rationale": "This is an official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publication based on the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, a primary administrative data source produced under strong federal statistical standards. It is highly reliable evidence for labor-market conditions, though not a peer-reviewed study and only indirectly relevant to fiscal stimulus.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "qcew" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.95,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publication based on the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, a primary administrative data source produced under strong federal statistical standards. It is highly reliable evidence for labor-market conditions, though not a peer-reviewed study and only indirectly relevant to fiscal stimulus.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.0,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt is an administrative description of BLS employment and wage data products and does not discuss the Recovery Act, monthly job losses, or whether employment stopped falling within a year.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt only describes the publication and its data programs, but it does not provide any employment trend data about 2009-2010 job losses or whether employment stopped falling.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"qcew\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2953, "completion_tokens": 3360, "total_tokens": 6313, "reasoning_tokens": 3153 }, "cost_usd": 0.012432138, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.330398Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.95, "quality_rationale": "This is an official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publication based on the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, a primary administrative data source produced under strong federal statistical standards. It is highly reliable evidence for labor-market conditions, though not a peer-reviewed study and only indirectly relevant to fiscal stimulus.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "qcew" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.95,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publication based on the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, a primary administrative data source produced under strong federal statistical standards. It is highly reliable evidence for labor-market conditions, though not a peer-reviewed study and only indirectly relevant to fiscal stimulus.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.0,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt is an administrative description of BLS employment and wage data products and does not discuss the Recovery Act, monthly job losses, or whether employment stopped falling within a year.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt only describes the publication and the timing of QCEW/BED data releases; it does not report whether monthly job losses shrank sharply or whether employment stopped falling within a year of February 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"qcew\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 834, "completion_tokens": 67, "total_tokens": 901, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.000927, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.330398Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Bureau of Labor Statistics is an official U.S. government statistical agency with high editorial and methodological standards. As a source on employment, it is a primary/official record or agency publication, though this specific page is just an index rather than the underlying data release.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"Bureau of Labor Statistics is an official U.S. government statistical agency with high editorial and methodological standards. As a source on employment, it is a primary/official record or agency publication, though this specific page is just an index rather than the underlying data release.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is only a BLS archive homepage listing later labor-market articles; it does not directly report monthly job losses or employment trends around the Recovery Act’s enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt is only a contents/archive listing and does not provide any job-loss or employment trend data about the Recovery Act period.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3708, "completion_tokens": 438, "total_tokens": 4146, "reasoning_tokens": 242 }, "cost_usd": 0.0045871572, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.330566Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official White House/CEA report, a primary government document produced under formal executive-branch standards and based on cited methodology and official estimates. It is not peer-reviewed, but its sourcing and institutional provenance make it very strong evidence for the period.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.4, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "romer and bernstein 2009" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "omb" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an official White House/CEA report, a primary government document produced under formal executive-branch standards and based on cited methodology and official estimates. It is not peer-reviewed, but its sourcing and institutional provenance make it very strong evidence for the period.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document directly estimates ARRA's job-creation/employment effects, which is closely related to the claim about higher employment than would have occurred without it, but it does not specifically isolate ARRA's contribution beyond Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.4,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document says the Recovery Act was designed to save and create jobs and references CEA estimates of its job impact, which supports the idea that it raised employment, but it does not directly compare that effect against what Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial-sector rescue would have done alone.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"romer and bernstein 2009\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"omb\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2989, "completion_tokens": 3569, "total_tokens": 6558, "reasoning_tokens": 3674 }, "cost_usd": 0.01695291, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.330675Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official White House/CEA report, a primary government document produced under formal executive-branch standards and based on cited methodology and official estimates. It is not peer-reviewed, but its sourcing and institutional provenance make it very strong evidence for the period.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "romer and bernstein 2009" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "omb" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an official White House/CEA report, a primary government document produced under formal executive-branch standards and based on cited methodology and official estimates. It is not peer-reviewed, but its sourcing and institutional provenance make it very strong evidence for the period.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document directly estimates ARRA's job-creation/employment effects, which is closely related to the claim about higher employment than would have occurred without it, but it does not specifically isolate ARRA's contribution beyond Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt says ARRA was designed to save and create jobs and discusses methods for estimating its job impact, but it does not provide evidence about whether any observed 2009-2012 employment gains were larger than a counterfactual without ARRA after accounting for Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"romer and bernstein 2009\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"omb\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 855, "completion_tokens": 89, "total_tokens": 944, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00104175, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.330675Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "This is a textbook-style instructional page from an educational publisher, not a primary document or peer-reviewed study. It provides basic macroeconomics concepts with minimal visible sourcing and no apparent editorial rigor comparable to scholarly or official evidence.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "lumen learning macroeconomics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.5,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a textbook-style instructional page from an educational publisher, not a primary document or peer-reviewed study. It provides basic macroeconomics concepts with minimal visible sourcing and no apparent editorial rigor comparable to scholarly or official evidence.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt explains the 2009 stimulus package and automatic stabilizers in general, but it does not assess the Recovery Act’s employment effects relative to Federal Reserve policy, financial-sector rescues, or a counterfactual without the Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt explains automatic stabilizers and mentions the 2009 stimulus as an example of discretionary fiscal policy, but it does not compare the Recovery Act’s employment effects against a counterfactual or isolate its impact beyond other policies.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"lumen learning macroeconomics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2647, "completion_tokens": 231, "total_tokens": 2878, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0029419800000000003, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.330871Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "This is a textbook-style instructional page from an educational publisher, not a primary document or peer-reviewed study. It provides basic macroeconomics concepts with minimal visible sourcing and no apparent editorial rigor comparable to scholarly or official evidence.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "lumen learning macroeconomics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.5,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a textbook-style instructional page from an educational publisher, not a primary document or peer-reviewed study. It provides basic macroeconomics concepts with minimal visible sourcing and no apparent editorial rigor comparable to scholarly or official evidence.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt explains the 2009 stimulus package and automatic stabilizers in general, but it does not assess the Recovery Act’s employment effects relative to Federal Reserve policy, financial-sector rescues, or a counterfactual without the Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt explains automatic stabilizers and mentions the 2009 stimulus package, but it does not assess whether the Recovery Act specifically caused higher employment beyond what other policies would have produced.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"lumen learning macroeconomics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 793, "completion_tokens": 61, "total_tokens": 854, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00086925, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.330871Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "Federal Reserve History is an official, institutionally sponsored site from the U.S. Federal Reserve, which gives it strong editorial credibility and access to primary institutional knowledge. However, this is a retrospective explanatory article rather than a primary document or peer-reviewed study, so it is best treated as reputable secondary source material.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreservehistory org" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"Federal Reserve History is an official, institutionally sponsored site from the U.S. Federal Reserve, which gives it strong editorial credibility and access to primary institutional knowledge. However, this is a retrospective explanatory article rather than a primary document or peer-reviewed study, so it is best treated as reputable secondary source material.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses the Great Recession timeline and notes that the US economy bottomed out in mid-2009, which is adjacent to employment trends, but it does not directly mention monthly job losses or the Recovery Act’s enactment timing.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.7,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt says the US economy bottomed out in the middle of 2009, which is consistent with employment stopping its decline within about a year of February 2009, though it does not directly discuss monthly job losses.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"federalreservehistory.org\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2722, "completion_tokens": 252, "total_tokens": 2974, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00353733, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.331042Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This appears to be a sourced analytical report summarizing BLS employment data and methods, with explicit references to official BLS surveys and release dates. However, it is hosted by a non-official advocacy/policy site rather than a peer-reviewed outlet or primary government document, so it is solid but not top-tier evidence.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "employment situation news release" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This appears to be a sourced analytical report summarizing BLS employment data and methods, with explicit references to official BLS surveys and release dates. However, it is hosted by a non-official advocacy/policy site rather than a peer-reviewed outlet or primary government document, so it is solid but not top-tier evidence.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document tracks monthly employment trends in the year after the Recovery Act and discusses whether payroll and household employment were falling or stabilizing, but it does not directly test the specific claim about job losses shrinking sharply within about a year of enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"mixed\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt only says the report summarizes employment trends from BLS household and payroll surveys through May 2010, but it does not state that job losses shrank sharply or that employment stopped falling within about a year of the February 2009 Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current population survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"employment situation news release\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2767, "completion_tokens": 1228, "total_tokens": 3995, "reasoning_tokens": 948 }, "cost_usd": 0.00798779, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.331162Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a Bureau of Labor Statistics Monthly Labor Review article by a named BLS economist, published by a highly reputable federal statistical agency with strong editorial standards. It is a secondary analytical piece grounded in official labor statistics and primary government data, though not itself a primary record or peer-reviewed journal article.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "national bureau of economic research" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a Bureau of Labor Statistics Monthly Labor Review article by a named BLS economist, published by a highly reputable federal statistical agency with strong editorial standards. It is a secondary analytical piece grounded in official labor statistics and primary government data, though not itself a primary record or peer-reviewed journal article.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses the timing of the recession, the slowing of job losses in late 2009, and employment growth resuming in 2010, which is adjacent to the claim, but it does not directly assess the Recovery Act or the specific one-year post-enactment timing.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.7,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt reports that after the recession's job losses in 2008-2009, 'the rate of job losses slowed in the second half of 2009' and that 'in 2010, employment growth resumed,' which is consistent with job losses shrinking sharply and employment stopping its decline within about a year of February 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"national bureau of economic research\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3145, "completion_tokens": 4284, "total_tokens": 7429, "reasoning_tokens": 4649 }, "cost_usd": 0.01993555, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.331290Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "This is a textbook-style educational chapter hosted on Pressbooks, which suggests ordinary editorial review but not peer review or primary-document status. It appears to synthesize standard economics concepts and refers generally to the 2009 stimulus rather than providing primary evidence or detailed sourcing.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "pressbooks" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.5,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a textbook-style educational chapter hosted on Pressbooks, which suggests ordinary editorial review but not peer review or primary-document status. It appears to synthesize standard economics concepts and refers generally to the 2009 stimulus rather than providing primary evidence or detailed sourcing.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.2,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt explains automatic stabilizers and mentions the 2009 stimulus only as an example of discretionary fiscal policy, but it does not evaluate the Recovery Act’s effect on employment relative to Fed policy, stabilizers, or bank rescues.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt explains automatic stabilizers and mentions the 2009 stimulus package, but it does not compare the Recovery Act’s employment effects against a counterfactual including Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"pressbooks\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2633, "completion_tokens": 227, "total_tokens": 2860, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00293216, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.331403Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a Bureau of Labor Statistics Monthly Labor Review article by named BLS economists, using official CES survey data and published under a federal statistical agency’s editorial standards. It is a strong secondary analysis of primary labor-market records, though not itself a primary document or peer-reviewed study.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "national income and product accounts" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "conference board composite index of economic indicators" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "nber business cycle dating committee" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a Bureau of Labor Statistics Monthly Labor Review article by named BLS economists, using official CES survey data and published under a federal statistical agency’s editorial standards. It is a strong secondary analysis of primary labor-market records, though not itself a primary document or peer-reviewed study.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The article directly describes the timing and moderation of U.S. payroll job losses in 2009, which is adjacent to the claim, but it does not mention the Recovery Act or specifically test effects within a year of its February 2009 enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.8,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt reports that payroll employment losses moderated throughout 2009 after the January 2009 peak, implying job losses shrank sharply and employment stopped falling within about a year of the February 2009 Recovery Act enactment.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"current employment statistics survey\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"national income and product accounts\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"conference board composite index of economic indicators\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"nber business cycle dating committee\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3180, "completion_tokens": 5835, "total_tokens": 9015, "reasoning_tokens": 5545 }, "cost_usd": 0.022585619999999997, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.331530Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is a research-institute publication with named labor-market data and discussion grounded in Bureau of Labor Statistics figures, so it has stronger sourcing than ordinary journalism. It is still a secondary analysis/advocacy piece rather than a peer-reviewed study or primary document, and the excerpt does not show formal peer review.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "study", "id": "von wachter 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is a research-institute publication with named labor-market data and discussion grounded in Bureau of Labor Statistics figures, so it has stronger sourcing than ordinary journalism. It is still a secondary analysis/advocacy piece rather than a peer-reviewed study or primary document, and the excerpt does not show formal peer review.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document discusses the post-2009 recovery in unemployment and the timing of the recovery phase, but it does not directly report monthly job losses or whether employment stopped falling within about a year of the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses unemployment rates and long-term unemployment in 2009-2010, but it does not directly state that monthly job losses shrank sharply or that employment stopped falling within about a year of the Recovery Act's enactment.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"von wachter 2010\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2956, "completion_tokens": 648, "total_tokens": 3604, "reasoning_tokens": 397 }, "cost_usd": 0.00531195, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.331645Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official White House Council of Economic Advisers quarterly report, a primary government document produced under statutory reporting duties and based on official records and analysis. It has strong institutional credibility and transparency, though it is an interested policy document rather than an անկախ peer-reviewed study.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "council of economic advisers" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "department of the treasury" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an official White House Council of Economic Advisers quarterly report, a primary government document produced under statutory reporting duties and based on official records and analysis. It has strong institutional credibility and transparency, though it is an interested policy document rather than an անկախ peer-reviewed study.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The report evaluates the Recovery Act’s effects on employment and overall economic activity through mid-2010, which closely relates to whether job losses shrank and employment stopped falling within about a year, but it does not directly test that exact timing claim in the excerpt.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.5,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt says that after ARRA implementation the economy’s trajectory changed dramatically and that the report assesses employment effects through 2010, which is consistent with job losses shrinking and employment stabilizing within about a year, but it does not directly present the relevant labor-market data in the excerpt.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"council of economic advisers\\\"},\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of economic analysis\\\"},\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"department of the treasury\\\"}\\n]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3061, "completion_tokens": 5043, "total_tokens": 8104, "reasoning_tokens": 4742 }, "cost_usd": 0.01983369, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.331754Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The Guardian is a reputable mainstream news organization with editorial standards, and this piece cites official U.S. employment data and named economists. It is still secondary reporting rather than a primary record or peer-reviewed analysis, so it is useful but not definitive evidence.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": -1, "strength": 0.4, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "national institute of economic and social research" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "white house" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "societe generale" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The Guardian is a reputable mainstream news organization with editorial standards, and this piece cites official U.S. employment data and named economists. It is still secondary reporting rather than a primary record or peer-reviewed analysis, so it is useful but not definitive evidence.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.0,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The article discusses U.S. job losses in July 2010 and the recovery outlook, but it does not address the Recovery Act, the timing from February 2009, or whether monthly job losses shrank and employment stopped falling within a year.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":-1,\\\"strength\\\":0.4,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"finding\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The article reports that in July 2010 the US lost 131,000 jobs and June was revised to a larger loss, which does not show that monthly job losses had sharply shrunk and employment had stopped falling within about a year of February 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"national institute of economic and social research\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"white house\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"societe generale\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2821, "completion_tokens": 317, "total_tokens": 3138, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00335355, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.331874Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official Federal Reserve publication, produced under the institution’s formal reporting standards and based on economic data and official records rather than anonymous sourcing. It is highly credible as a primary/official source, though it is still a policy report rather than a neutral archival record.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.35, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federal reserve board" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an official Federal Reserve publication, produced under the institution’s formal reporting standards and based on economic data and official records rather than anonymous sourcing. It is highly credible as a primary/official source, though it is still a policy report rather than a neutral archival record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.4,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses the economy’s recovery and notes stimulus from monetary and fiscal policies alongside ongoing labor-market weakness, but it does not directly isolate the Recovery Act’s incremental effect on employment relative to Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial-sector rescue measures.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.35,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The document says economic activity and consumer spending were supported by monetary and fiscal policies, implying the Recovery Act likely helped raise output and employment, but it does not isolate the Act from other policies or show how much employment exceeded a no-stimulus baseline.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"federal reserve board\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2737, "completion_tokens": 251, "total_tokens": 2988, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00309982, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.331988Z" }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official White House Council of Economic Advisers report, a primary government document with transparent accountability requirements and direct analysis of federal stimulus effects. It is not peer-reviewed, but it has strong institutional credibility and primary-source status for the topic.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "council of economic advisers" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\":0.9,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"This is an official White House Council of Economic Advisers report, a primary government document with transparent accountability requirements and direct analysis of federal stimulus effects. It is not peer-reviewed, but it has strong institutional credibility and primary-source status for the topic.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\":0.7,\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The report directly estimates the Recovery Act’s effect on employment relative to a counterfactual, but it does not specifically isolate that effect from Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial-sector rescue in the exact way the sub-claim frames it.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.7,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The report explicitly claims that ARRA changed the economy's trajectory and raised GDP and employment relative to what would otherwise have occurred, which supports the sub-claim, though it is presented as an estimate rather than direct observation and does not fully isolate ARRA from other policies.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"council of economic advisers\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of economic analysis\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3061, "completion_tokens": 1438, "total_tokens": 4499, "reasoning_tokens": 1142 }, "cost_usd": 0.00853773, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.332109Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The source is an official U.S. government agency (Bureau of Labor Statistics) providing primary economic data and official records, though the excerpt contains minor test artifacts.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an official U.S. government agency (Bureau of Labor Statistics) providing primary economic data and official records, though the excerpt contains minor test artifacts.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt discusses U.S. import and export prices, which are completely unrelated to monthly job losses or employment figures following the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided document contains information about import and export prices but does not address US monthly job losses or employment trends following the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 1908, "completion_tokens": 338, "total_tokens": 2246, "reasoning_tokens": 174 }, "cost_usd": 0.002000996, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.332238Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The source is an official U.S. government agency (Bureau of Labor Statistics) providing primary economic data and official records, though the excerpt contains minor test artifacts.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an official U.S. government agency (Bureau of Labor Statistics) providing primary economic data and official records, though the excerpt contains minor test artifacts.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt discusses U.S. import and export prices, which are completely unrelated to monthly job losses or employment figures following the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided text contains only general information about import and export prices and does not mention the Recovery Act, monthly job losses, or employment trends.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 551, "completion_tokens": 52, "total_tokens": 603, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0002953, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.332238Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Published by the Congressional Research Service, this official government research report provides authoritative documentation on federal legislation and fiscal stimulus provisions with rigorous institutional standards.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "american recovery and reinvestment act 2009" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Published by the Congressional Research Service, this official government research report provides authoritative documentation on federal legislation and fiscal stimulus provisions with rigorous institutional standards.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.2,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses unemployment insurance provisions in the Recovery Act rather than the broader macroeconomic trends of monthly job losses and overall employment levels.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses the unemployment insurance provisions of the Recovery Act but contains no data or statements regarding monthly job losses or whether employment stopped falling.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"american recovery and reinvestment act 2009\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3170, "completion_tokens": 623, "total_tokens": 3793, "reasoning_tokens": 440 }, "cost_usd": 0.00395926, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.332405Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The document is an official publication from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a primary statistical agency of the U.S. government, providing high-reliability employment data and methodology.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us constitution" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is an official publication from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a primary statistical agency of the U.S. government, providing high-reliability employment data and methodology.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses the impact of decennial census hiring on Bureau of Labor Statistics employment estimates and is entirely unrelated to the Recovery Act or monthly job loss trends in 2009.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided document discusses census workers and employment estimates but does not address monthly job losses or the Recovery Act of 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us constitution\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2848, "completion_tokens": 2651, "total_tokens": 5499, "reasoning_tokens": 2459 }, "cost_usd": 0.0130128, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.332527Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The document is an economic research paper authored by prominent economists Alan S. Blinder and Mark Zandi, utilizing a formal macroeconomic model to evaluate policy effects, reflecting high professional and academic standards.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "moodys analytics model" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "economycom" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is an economic research paper authored by prominent economists Alan S. Blinder and Mark Zandi, utilizing a formal macroeconomic model to evaluate policy effects, reflecting high professional and academic standards.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document addresses the macroeconomic and employment effects of the government's total policy response including the Recovery Act and financial policies, making it closely related to the sub-claim.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.8,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document uses an economic model to simulate and assert that the fiscal stimulus (Recovery Act) significantly boosted employment beyond what would have occurred otherwise, alongside other policies.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"moodys analytics model\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"alan blinder mark zandi\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"economycom\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3337, "completion_tokens": 1978, "total_tokens": 5315, "reasoning_tokens": 1757 }, "cost_usd": 0.0073933726, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.332634Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The source is reputable reporting by a recognized public policy organization summarizing official records and primary findings from the Congressional Budget Office regarding the ARRA.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is reputable reporting by a recognized public policy organization summarizing official records and primary findings from the Congressional Budget Office regarding the ARRA.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document addresses the employment and GDP impacts of ARRA as estimated by the CBO, which closely relates to the sub-claim's focus on employment effects, though it does not explicitly isolate the comparison against Federal Reserve policy and automatic stabilizers mentioned in the claim.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.8,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports CBO estimates that the Recovery Act raised GDP and employment beyond what would have occurred without it, though these are model-based projections rather than direct observations.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2784, "completion_tokens": 218, "total_tokens": 3002, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00165578, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.332739Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.3, "quality_rationale": "The source is an opinion or commentary piece published by a named author (Jared Bernstein) in a major newspaper (Washington Post) and hosted on a university server, relying on secondary interpretation of a study (Blinder and Zandi) rather than providing original peer-reviewed research or primary data.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.3, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an opinion or commentary piece published by a named author (Jared Bernstein) in a major newspaper (Washington Post) and hosted on a university server, relying on secondary interpretation of a study (Blinder and Zandi) rather than providing original peer-reviewed research or primary data.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt discusses the Blinder and Zandi study on the effectiveness of the Recovery Act, monetary policy, and bailouts during the Great Recession, which directly relates to evaluating the impact of the Recovery Act alongside other interventions.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt introduces the study and the policies but cuts off before presenting any findings or data regarding the specific causal impact of the Recovery Act on employment.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"blinder zandi 2015\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3019, "completion_tokens": 599, "total_tokens": 3618, "reasoning_tokens": 388 }, "cost_usd": 0.00372368, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.332843Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The document is an official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) monthly employment report, providing authoritative primary government data on employment statistics.", "directness": 1.0, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is an official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) monthly employment report, providing authoritative primary government data on employment statistics.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 1.0,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports monthly employment changes and data from late 2008 through October 2010, directly testing the timeline of job losses shrinking and employment stabilizing within a year of February 2009.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.8, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The BLS employment report data and charts show that monthly job losses shrank sharply and employment began to rise following early 2009, aligning with the timing of the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current population survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bls\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 4175, "completion_tokens": 1526, "total_tokens": 5701, "reasoning_tokens": 1314 }, "cost_usd": 0.007050512, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.332947Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The source is an official publication archive from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which produces primary government labor data and statistical reports, representing an official inquiry/primary document standard.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an official publication archive from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which produces primary government labor data and statistical reports, representing an official inquiry/primary document standard.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is merely an archive index of Monthly Labor Review articles from 2009 and does not contain any analysis or data addressing US monthly job losses or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is merely an index page listing article titles from 2009 and does not contain any content discussing monthly job losses or employment trends following the Recovery Act.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3676, "completion_tokens": 205, "total_tokens": 3881, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0019516800000000001, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.333072Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The source is an official publication archive from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which produces primary government labor data and statistical reports, representing an official inquiry/primary document standard.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an official publication archive from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which produces primary government labor data and statistical reports, representing an official inquiry/primary document standard.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is merely an archive index of Monthly Labor Review articles from 2009 and does not contain any analysis or data addressing US monthly job losses or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document only provides a list of titles and archive links for 2009 publications from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and contains no substantive content addressing monthly job losses or employment trends following the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 1074, "completion_tokens": 65, "total_tokens": 1139, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0004847, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.333072Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The source is an official working paper from the U.S. Census Bureau Center for Economic Studies, utilizing primary labor market datasets and rigorous empirical methodology.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "matched employer employee data" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an official working paper from the U.S. Census Bureau Center for Economic Studies, utilizing primary labor market datasets and rigorous empirical methodology.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses the 2007-2009 recession and labor market dynamics broadly, but it does not specifically examine US monthly job losses or the effects of the February 2009 Recovery Act.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses the 2007-2009 recession and labor market downturns generally, but does not mention the Recovery Act of February 2009 or provide specific monthly job loss data following its enactment.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"current population survey tenure supplements\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"matched employer employee data\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us census bureau\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2775, "completion_tokens": 271, "total_tokens": 3046, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00180604, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.333293Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The source is an official working paper from the U.S. Census Bureau Center for Economic Studies, utilizing primary labor market datasets and rigorous empirical methodology.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "matched employer employee data" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an official working paper from the U.S. Census Bureau Center for Economic Studies, utilizing primary labor market datasets and rigorous empirical methodology.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses the 2007-2009 recession and labor market dynamics broadly, but it does not specifically examine US monthly job losses or the effects of the February 2009 Recovery Act.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided text discusses the recession and job tenure distribution but does not contain information about monthly job losses shrinking or employment trends following the Recovery Act of February 2009.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"current population survey tenure supplements\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"matched employer employee data\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us census bureau\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 824, "completion_tokens": 69, "total_tokens": 893, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0004197, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.333293Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The document is a peer-reviewed academic study published in the American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, employing rigorous econometric methodology with instrumental variables.", "directness": 1.0, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.9, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "recoverygov" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "fhwa" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is a peer-reviewed academic study published in the American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, employing rigorous econometric methodology with instrumental variables.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 1.0,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly estimates the employment effects (jobs multiplier) of the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, specifically addressing its impact on US employment compared to a counterfactual.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.9, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The paper uses cross-state instrumental variables analysis to estimate that ARRA spending yielded significant positive employment effects, explicitly attempting to isolate these effects from other macroeconomic factors like monetary policy.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"recoverygov\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bls\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"fhwa\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3408, "completion_tokens": 3943, "total_tokens": 7351, "reasoning_tokens": 3734 }, "cost_usd": 0.014916284, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.333482Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The document is published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (bls.gov) and authored by a federal economist using official government survey data, representing a highly authoritative primary/official source.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": -1, "strength": 0.9, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bls monthly labor review" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (bls.gov) and authored by a federal economist using official government survey data, representing a highly authoritative primary/official source.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document provides employment trend data around the time of the Recovery Act's enactment, specifically noting the employment trough in February 2010 and subsequent job growth, which closely relates to the sub-claim about job losses shrinking and stopping within about a year of February 2009.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": -1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document states that nonfarm employment continued to fall until reaching a trough in February 2010, which is a full year after the Recovery Act's enactment in February 2009, contradicting the claim that employment stopped falling within about a year.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls current employment statistics survey\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls monthly labor review\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3334, "completion_tokens": 285, "total_tokens": 3619, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00204412, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.333611Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "Published in Finance & Development, a reputable magazine produced by the IMF, providing informed macroeconomic commentary and policy analysis with professional editorial standards.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "moodys analytics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bea nipa" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Published in Finance & Development, a reputable magazine produced by the IMF, providing informed macroeconomic commentary and policy analysis with professional editorial standards.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt discusses the broad effectiveness of fiscal and monetary policy responses to the Great Recession, which relates to the sub-claim about the Recovery Act's impact on employment, but only addresses the broader topic of overall policy rather than specifically isolating the Recovery Act's effects relative to other factors like the Fed or automatic stabilizers.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.8,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document asserts that aggressive fiscal and monetary policy responses, including the stimulus, were major causes of the economic recovery and improved employment trajectory beyond what would have happened without them.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"blinder zandi 2010\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"moodys analytics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bea nipa\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bls ces\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3073, "completion_tokens": 5599, "total_tokens": 8672, "reasoning_tokens": 5347 }, "cost_usd": 0.019190772, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.333725Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The source is an official government report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO), which represents an official inquiry and primary government document with rigorous methodological standards.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "government accountability office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an official government report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO), which represents an official inquiry and primary government document with rigorous methodological standards.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses automatic stabilizers and economic downturns more broadly, which only partly covers the specific sub-claim regarding the Recovery Act's impact on US employment between 2009 and 2012.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided document discusses automatic fiscal stabilizers and economic downturns generally, but does not mention the Recovery Act or US employment in 2009-2012.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"government accountability office\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2979, "completion_tokens": 1788, "total_tokens": 4767, "reasoning_tokens": 1608 }, "cost_usd": 0.0074779140000000004, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.333836Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The source is an official government report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO), which represents an official inquiry and primary government document with rigorous methodological standards.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "government accountability office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an official government report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO), which represents an official inquiry and primary government document with rigorous methodological standards.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses automatic stabilizers and economic downturns more broadly, which only partly covers the specific sub-claim regarding the Recovery Act's impact on US employment between 2009 and 2012.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided excerpt discusses automatic stabilizers and design considerations from a 2025 GAO report, but it does not mention the Recovery Act or US employment in 2009-2012.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"government accountability office\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 833, "completion_tokens": 76, "total_tokens": 909, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0004399, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.333836Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The source is a publication from the IMF eLibrary (Finance & Development), which features reputable reporting and analysis by named economists like Alan Blinder and Mark Zandi, though the provided text is an editorial overview rather than a primary peer-reviewed empirical study.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "imf researchers" }, { "type": "study", "id": "kose prasad emerging markets analysis" }, { "type": "study", "id": "arora vamvakidis china spillover analysis" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is a publication from the IMF eLibrary (Finance & Development), which features reputable reporting and analysis by named economists like Alan Blinder and Mark Zandi, though the provided text is an editorial overview rather than a primary peer-reviewed empirical study.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt discusses the broader topic of the positive effects of U.S. stimulus during the crisis by Alan Blinder and Mark Zandi, which partly covers the sub-claim without specifically isolating the Recovery Act's comparative impact against monetary policy and automatic stabilizers.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.5, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document briefly mentions that Alan Blinder and Mark Zandi argue for the positive effects of fiscal stimulus preventing a continued US recession, which aligns with the sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"blinder zandi stimulus analysis\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"imf researchers\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"kose prasad emerging markets analysis\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"arora vamvakidis china spillover analysis\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2824, "completion_tokens": 310, "total_tokens": 3134, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00194056, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.333983Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The source is an official government publication from Census.gov utilizing direct statistics from the Annual Survey of Public Employment & Payroll and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, representing primary federal data collection.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "annual survey of public employment payroll" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an official government publication from Census.gov utilizing direct statistics from the Annual Survey of Public Employment & Payroll and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, representing primary federal data collection.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses employment trends during the 2008-2009 economic downturn and recovery broadly, but does not specifically address monthly job losses or the effects of the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0.0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided excerpt discusses general employment trends during the recession and recovery periods, but does not specifically mention the Recovery Act's enactment or the monthly job loss figures within a year of February 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"annual survey of public employment payroll\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls current employment statistics\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"census bureau\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3209, "completion_tokens": 2079, "total_tokens": 5288, "reasoning_tokens": 2088 }, "cost_usd": 0.009761839999999999, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.334122Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The source is an institutional research brief from the UC Berkeley Labor Center that relies on official economic data and cites specific studies, representing reputable reporting and analysis.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "center on wage and employment dynamics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "economic policy institute" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an institutional research brief from the UC Berkeley Labor Center that relies on official economic data and cites specific studies, representing reputable reporting and analysis.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses overall employment losses and the recovery timeline during the Great Recession, which broadly touches upon the post-2009 employment trends without specifically focusing on monthly job loss velocity or the exact timeline around the Recovery Act's enactment.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided document excerpt discusses employment declines and the recovery period generally, but it does not specifically mention the Recovery Act of February 2009 or the rate at which job losses shrank within a year of its enactment.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"center on wage and employment dynamics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"economic policy institute\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3237, "completion_tokens": 7255, "total_tokens": 10492, "reasoning_tokens": 7794 }, "cost_usd": 0.03026517, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.334251Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The source is an institutional research brief from the UC Berkeley Labor Center that relies on official economic data and cites specific studies, representing reputable reporting and analysis.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "center on wage and employment dynamics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "economic policy institute" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an institutional research brief from the UC Berkeley Labor Center that relies on official economic data and cites specific studies, representing reputable reporting and analysis.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses overall employment losses and the recovery timeline during the Great Recession, which broadly touches upon the post-2009 employment trends without specifically focusing on monthly job loss velocity or the exact timeline around the Recovery Act's enactment.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided document does not discuss the Recovery Act or monthly job trends within a year of its enactment in February 2009.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"center on wage and employment dynamics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"economic policy institute\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 922, "completion_tokens": 63, "total_tokens": 985, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0004341, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.334251Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The source is an official government publication from the Bureau of Labor Statistics using primary economic data programs, representing high-authority official reporting.", "directness": 1.0, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.9, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an official government publication from the Bureau of Labor Statistics using primary economic data programs, representing high-authority official reporting.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 1.0,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports on US monthly payroll employment trends and job loss moderation throughout 2009, directly testing the sub-claim regarding job losses shrinking sharply within a year of February 2009.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.9, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document provides official BLS employment data showing that monthly job losses moderated substantially from 691,000 in Q1 2009 to 69,000 in Q4 2009, supporting the claim that job losses shrank sharply within about a year of the February 2009 Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics program\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2301, "completion_tokens": 3577, "total_tokens": 5878, "reasoning_tokens": 3344 }, "cost_usd": 0.011388528, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.334421Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Published by federalreservehistory.org, this piece serves as an authoritative institutional record backed by official economic data and historical analysis of the Federal Reserve's actions.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "author_group", "id": "nber business cycle dating committee" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federal reserve board" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Published by federalreservehistory.org, this piece serves as an authoritative institutional record backed by official economic data and historical analysis of the Federal Reserve's actions.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document mentions the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and Federal Reserve policy as responses to the recession, but discusses them only broadly rather than testing their specific employment impacts relative to each other or to automatic stabilizers.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document mentions the enactment of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 alongside other measures, but does not provide evidence or analysis regarding its specific causal impact on employment relative to other policies.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"nber business cycle dating committee\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of economic analysis\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"federal reserve board\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3398, "completion_tokens": 1253, "total_tokens": 4651, "reasoning_tokens": 1000 }, "cost_usd": 0.005267793, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.334549Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "Published on Liberty Street Economics (the blog of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York) by researchers drawing on empirical post-crisis academic literature, representing reputable expert reporting with named institutional backing.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "post crisis academic research on qe" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Published on Liberty Street Economics (the blog of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York) by researchers drawing on empirical post-crisis academic literature, representing reputable expert reporting with named institutional backing.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses the effects of quantitative easing rather than the employment impact of the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided document discusses the effects of quantitative easing (QE) by the Federal Reserve and does not mention or address the Recovery Act or its impact on US employment.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"post crisis academic research on qe\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2839, "completion_tokens": 171, "total_tokens": 3010, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0020082800000000003, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.336216Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The document is an official Monetary Policy Report submitted to Congress by the Federal Reserve, representing a primary governmental record and authoritative institutional source with rigorous fact-checking standards.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreserve" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is an official Monetary Policy Report submitted to Congress by the Federal Reserve, representing a primary governmental record and authoritative institutional source with rigorous fact-checking standards.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document provides general background on the economic and financial conditions in late 2008 leading up to early 2009, but it does not analyze or report on the specific employment effects of the Recovery Act for the 2009-2012 period relative to other policies.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided excerpt discusses the economic downturn in late 2008 and government interventions, but it does not evaluate or address whether the Recovery Act was a major cause of higher employment in 2009-2012 compared to other factors.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"federalreserve\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2947, "completion_tokens": 1244, "total_tokens": 4191, "reasoning_tokens": 1022 }, "cost_usd": 0.004772938, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.336402Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The document is an official Monetary Policy Report submitted to Congress by the Federal Reserve, representing a primary governmental record and authoritative institutional source with rigorous fact-checking standards.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreserve" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is an official Monetary Policy Report submitted to Congress by the Federal Reserve, representing a primary governmental record and authoritative institutional source with rigorous fact-checking standards.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document provides general background on the economic and financial conditions in late 2008 leading up to early 2009, but it does not analyze or report on the specific employment effects of the Recovery Act for the 2009-2012 period relative to other policies.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided excerpt discusses economic conditions and financial strains in late 2008 but does not mention the Recovery Act or its impact on US employment in 2009-2012.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"federalreserve\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 852, "completion_tokens": 65, "total_tokens": 917, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0004181, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.336402Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The source is an NBER working paper authored by reputable economists using formal economic simulations, though working papers have not yet undergone formal peer review.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "nber working paper 34411" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an NBER working paper authored by reputable economists using formal economic simulations, though working papers have not yet undergone formal peer review.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses fiscal stimulus and the Great Recession broadly, but focuses on simulating alternative automatic stabilizers rather than directly evaluating the specific employment effects of the Recovery Act relative to monetary policy and financial rescues.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt discusses simulating economic developments if discretionary fiscal stimulus had been replaced by automatic stabilizers, but does not specifically provide evidence regarding whether the Recovery Act caused higher employment beyond what other factors would have produced.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"nber working paper 34411\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3006, "completion_tokens": 209, "total_tokens": 3215, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00189498, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.336620Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The source is an official government press release relaying findings from a reputable primary source (the Congressional Budget Office), making it reliable official reporting despite its political framing.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an official government press release relaying findings from a reputable primary source (the Congressional Budget Office), making it reliable official reporting despite its political framing.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses the overall employment impact of the Recovery Act based on a CBO report, but addresses the broader effects rather than specifically testing whether monthly job losses shrank sharply within a year of enactment.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided document discusses the CBO's report on the employment impact of the Recovery Act in mid-2010 but does not contain content addressing the specific claim about monthly job losses shrinking sharply or employment stopping falling within about a year of enactment in February 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3040, "completion_tokens": 239, "total_tokens": 3279, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0018222, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.336751Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The source is an official government press release relaying findings from a reputable primary source (the Congressional Budget Office), making it reliable official reporting despite its political framing.", "directness": 1.0, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.9, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an official government press release relaying findings from a reputable primary source (the Congressional Budget Office), making it reliable official reporting despite its political framing.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 1.0,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly reports on CBO findings regarding the specific employment impact of the Recovery Act during the 2009-2012 timeframe relative to a baseline without it.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.9, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document cites a CBO report asserting that the Recovery Act significantly increased employment and lowered the unemployment rate during the specified period.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3084, "completion_tokens": 206, "total_tokens": 3290, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0017529, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.336865Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a working paper from the Center for Economic Studies at the U.S. Census Bureau authored by government researchers utilizing official Census microdata, representing high-rigor institutional research.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a working paper from the Center for Economic Studies at the U.S. Census Bureau authored by government researchers utilizing official Census microdata, representing high-rigor institutional research.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.2,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses job-to-job flows and labor market dynamics during recessions, which provides tangential background rather than directly addressing monthly employment totals or the Recovery Act.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses job flows and recessions generally, but does not provide specific content addressing US monthly job losses or employment trends in relation to the Recovery Act of February 2009.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us census bureau\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3204, "completion_tokens": 214, "total_tokens": 3418, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00179686, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.336984Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This document is an official congressional hearing record from the House Committee on the Budget, serving as a primary government record containing expert testimony and official data regarding the 2009 stimulus act.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "house committee on the budget hearing july 14 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document is an official congressional hearing record from the House Committee on the Budget, serving as a primary government record containing expert testimony and official data regarding the 2009 stimulus act.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is a congressional hearing record on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which addresses the broad topic of the legislation's impacts but does not specifically test the exact sub-claim regarding monthly job losses and employment trends within the excerpt provided.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided excerpt only contains the title page, publication details, and committee member lists for a hearing, and does not contain any content addressing the sub-claim about job losses or the Recovery Act.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"house committee on the budget hearing july 14 2010\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 4130, "completion_tokens": 235, "total_tokens": 4365, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0028106999999999997, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.337105Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, this document relies on authoritative government survey data and official economic records, representing an official inquiry and primary government statistical reporting.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "national bureau of economic research" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, this document relies on authoritative government survey data and official economic records, representing an official inquiry and primary government statistical reporting.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses overall employment trends and the timing of the labor market recovery following the Great Recession, which broadly covers the timeframe of the sub-claim but does not specifically test or report on monthly job loss trajectory relative to the Recovery Act's enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses employment trends during the Great Recession and recovery but does not provide specific data about the rate of job losses shrinking sharply or employment stopping falling within about a year of the February 2009 Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"current population survey\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"national bureau of economic research\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3198, "completion_tokens": 6081, "total_tokens": 9279, "reasoning_tokens": 6588 }, "cost_usd": 0.02560486, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.337221Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This document is an official statutory report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), representing a primary government inquiry with high methodological standards and institutional oversight.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document is an official statutory report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), representing a primary government inquiry with high methodological standards and institutional oversight.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses the overall employment impacts of the Recovery Act evaluated in 2010, which is adjacent to the sub-claim about monthly job losses shrinking and employment stopping its fall within a year of enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses CBO estimates of ARRA's overall impact on employment and economic output in mid-2010 but does not provide content addressing monthly job losses or employment trends in the year following February 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2061, "completion_tokens": 212, "total_tokens": 2273, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00135948, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.337339Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This document is an official statutory report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), representing a primary government inquiry with high methodological standards and institutional oversight.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document is an official statutory report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), representing a primary government inquiry with high methodological standards and institutional oversight.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses the overall employment impacts of the Recovery Act evaluated in 2010, which is adjacent to the sub-claim about monthly job losses shrinking and employment stopping its fall within a year of enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided excerpt discusses the estimated impact of the Recovery Act in mid-2010 but does not contain information about the trajectory of monthly job losses or employment figures within a year of its February 2009 enactment.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 647, "completion_tokens": 70, "total_tokens": 717, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0003691, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.337339Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This document is an official statutory report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), representing a primary government inquiry with high methodological standards and institutional oversight.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document is an official statutory report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), representing a primary government inquiry with high methodological standards and institutional oversight.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document addresses the employment impact of the Recovery Act specifically, but does not explicitly evaluate its effects relative to the specific counterfactual baseline of automatic stabilizers, Federal Reserve policy, and the financial-sector rescue mentioned in the sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.8, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document asserts that the Recovery Act had a positive impact on employment based on economic models and past policies, aligning with the sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2105, "completion_tokens": 198, "total_tokens": 2303, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00133768, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.337525Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This document is an official government publication from the White House detailing the implementation and impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, serving as a primary administrative record while incorporating data from official bodies like the CBO.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "congressional budget office" }, { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "white house" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document is an official government publication from the White House detailing the implementation and impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, serving as a primary administrative record while incorporating data from official bodies like the CBO.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt discusses the economic crisis, the enactment date of the Recovery Act, and overall job growth trends, but it addresses the broader question of the Act's overall impact rather than specifically detailing the monthly job loss shrinkage within a year of enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided excerpt mentions the enactment date of the Recovery Act and general economic crisis conditions, but it does not contain specific data regarding the monthly reduction in job losses or employment stabilization within about a year of enactment.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office recovery act estimate\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"blinder zandi economic analysis\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"the white house\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2933, "completion_tokens": 259, "total_tokens": 3192, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0022332, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.337632Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The source is an official Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, which represents an authoritative official inquiry and review of federal economic data and studies.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "studies gao reviewed" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an official Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, which represents an authoritative official inquiry and review of federal economic data and studies.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses automatic stabilizers, which are explicitly mentioned in the sub-claim as a comparative factor, but it focuses on their effects rather than the Recovery Act's specific employment impact.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses the effects of automatic stabilizers and the difficulty of isolating them from discretionary changes, but it does not evaluate the specific impact of the Recovery Act relative to Federal Reserve policy or the financial-sector rescue on US employment.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"studies gao reviewed\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"congressional budget office\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2720, "completion_tokens": 2713, "total_tokens": 5433, "reasoning_tokens": 2510 }, "cost_usd": 0.010389289999999999, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.337747Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The source is an official U.S. government publication from the Bureau of Labor Statistics presenting primary QCEW employment and wage data, representing an official inquiry/record.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "qcew" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an official U.S. government publication from the Bureau of Labor Statistics presenting primary QCEW employment and wage data, representing an official inquiry/record.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document provides background on employment data sources like the QCEW for the 2008-2010 period, addressing the broader context of employment statistics rather than specifically analyzing monthly job loss trends relative to the Recovery Act.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt provides introductory information about QCEW and BED data publications and access channels, but contains no actual employment data or analysis regarding job losses or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"qcew\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3048, "completion_tokens": 3350, "total_tokens": 6398, "reasoning_tokens": 3153 }, "cost_usd": 0.011087688, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.337860Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The source is an official U.S. government publication from the Bureau of Labor Statistics presenting primary QCEW employment and wage data, representing an official inquiry/record.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "qcew" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an official U.S. government publication from the Bureau of Labor Statistics presenting primary QCEW employment and wage data, representing an official inquiry/record.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document provides background on employment data sources like the QCEW for the 2008-2010 period, addressing the broader context of employment statistics rather than specifically analyzing monthly job loss trends relative to the Recovery Act.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided excerpt discusses the publication details of employment and wage data but does not contain actual employment data or analysis regarding job losses and the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"qcew\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 869, "completion_tokens": 53, "total_tokens": 922, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0003932, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.337860Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The Bureau of Labor Statistics is an official U.S. government agency providing authoritative primary economic data and official records on employment, meeting the criteria for an official inquiry or primary document.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The Bureau of Labor Statistics is an official U.S. government agency providing authoritative primary economic data and official records on employment, meeting the criteria for an official inquiry or primary document.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.2,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is merely a general index page of 2010 publication archives from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, providing tangential background rather than directly addressing monthly job loss trends or the Recovery Act.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided excerpt only lists archive titles and dates from a BLS publication index and does not contain any text or data addressing the sub-claim about job losses and the Recovery Act.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 4212, "completion_tokens": 454, "total_tokens": 4666, "reasoning_tokens": 242 }, "cost_usd": 0.0032427572, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.338015Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This document is an official government report published by the Council of Economic Advisers, representing a primary-source policy document with explicit methodology, though it originates from an administration with a vested interest in the policy's evaluation.", "directness": 1.0, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "romer and bernstein 2009" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "omb" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document is an official government report published by the Council of Economic Advisers, representing a primary-source policy document with explicit methodology, though it originates from an administration with a vested interest in the policy's evaluation.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 1.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document specifically evaluates the aggregate employment impacts of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which directly addresses the core proposition under test.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.8,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document asserts that the Recovery Act (ARRA) was designed and estimated to have a major positive impact on US employment during the downturn beyond other factors, relying on economic models and methodologies rather than direct empirical post-period measurement of all effects.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"romer and bernstein 2009\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"omb\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3039, "completion_tokens": 3535, "total_tokens": 6574, "reasoning_tokens": 3674 }, "cost_usd": 0.01543606, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.338144Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This document is an official government report published by the Council of Economic Advisers, representing a primary-source policy document with explicit methodology, though it originates from an administration with a vested interest in the policy's evaluation.", "directness": 1.0, "direction": -1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "romer and bernstein 2009" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "omb" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document is an official government report published by the Council of Economic Advisers, representing a primary-source policy document with explicit methodology, though it originates from an administration with a vested interest in the policy's evaluation.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 1.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document specifically evaluates the aggregate employment impacts of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which directly addresses the core proposition under test.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": -1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.8,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document asserts that the Recovery Act was a major cause of job creation and higher employment, which contradicts the sub-claim's denial of that proposition.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"romer and bernstein 2009\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"omb\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 874, "completion_tokens": 67, "total_tokens": 941, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0004297, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.338144Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "The source is an educational textbook excerpt that explains macroeconomic concepts like fiscal stimulus and automatic stabilizers but lacks original empirical research or rigorous primary sourcing on the 2009-2012 period.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "lumen learning macroeconomics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.5,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an educational textbook excerpt that explains macroeconomic concepts like fiscal stimulus and automatic stabilizers but lacks original empirical research or rigorous primary sourcing on the 2009-2012 period.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses discretionary fiscal policy and the 2009 stimulus package alongside automatic stabilizers, addressing a broader or adjacent topic that only partly covers the specific net employment impacts compared to monetary policy and financial rescues.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document mentions the 2009 stimulus package as an example of discretionary fiscal policy, but it does not discuss or provide evidence regarding its specific effects on employment or compare its impact relative to monetary policy and automatic stabilizers.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"lumen learning macroeconomics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2663, "completion_tokens": 219, "total_tokens": 2882, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0016171800000000002, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.338312Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "The source is an educational textbook excerpt that explains macroeconomic concepts like fiscal stimulus and automatic stabilizers but lacks original empirical research or rigorous primary sourcing on the 2009-2012 period.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "lumen learning macroeconomics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.5,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an educational textbook excerpt that explains macroeconomic concepts like fiscal stimulus and automatic stabilizers but lacks original empirical research or rigorous primary sourcing on the 2009-2012 period.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses discretionary fiscal policy and the 2009 stimulus package alongside automatic stabilizers, addressing a broader or adjacent topic that only partly covers the specific net employment impacts compared to monetary policy and financial rescues.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided excerpt mentions the 2009 stimulus package as an example of discretionary fiscal policy but does not discuss its overall impact on employment relative to Federal Reserve policy or other factors for the 2009-2012 period.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"lumen learning macroeconomics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 801, "completion_tokens": 74, "total_tokens": 875, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0004253, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.338312Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Published on FederalReserveHistory.org, this source provides an authoritative historical overview backed by the institutional expertise and official records of the Federal Reserve.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreservehistory org" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Published on FederalReserveHistory.org, this source provides an authoritative historical overview backed by the institutional expertise and official records of the Federal Reserve.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt discusses the timing of the broader economic contraction and bottoming out around mid-2009, but it does not mention the Recovery Act or monthly employment trends specifically.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt mentions the timing of the recession and recovery broadly but does not discuss the Recovery Act or specific monthly job loss figures.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"federalreservehistory.org\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2824, "completion_tokens": 182, "total_tokens": 3006, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00203218, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.338485Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The document is an official monthly analytical report directly from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) regarding employment survey trends, representing a primary-source government document of high reliability.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "employment situation news release" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is an official monthly analytical report directly from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) regarding employment survey trends, representing a primary-source government document of high reliability.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses monthly employment trends from BLS surveys, which covers the general employment data relevant to the timeframe, but it does not specifically address the Recovery Act or its impact.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt introduces a report on BLS employment surveys but cuts off before presenting any trend data or addressing job losses following the Recovery Act.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current population survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"employment situation news release\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2887, "completion_tokens": 1172, "total_tokens": 4059, "reasoning_tokens": 948 }, "cost_usd": 0.00652949, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.338629Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The source is an official government publication from the Bureau of Labor Statistics written by an agency economist, representing primary agency data and analysis with high editorial standards.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "national bureau of economic research" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an official government publication from the Bureau of Labor Statistics written by an agency economist, representing primary agency data and analysis with high editorial standards.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses US employment trends and job losses following the 2007-2009 recession, but focuses on the specific impact of 2010 Census hiring rather than evaluating the effects of the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.8, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document notes that the rate of job losses slowed in the second half of 2009 and employment growth subsequently resumed in 2010, supporting the claim that monthly job losses shrank sharply within about a year of February 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"national bureau of economic research\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3401, "completion_tokens": 4221, "total_tokens": 7622, "reasoning_tokens": 4649 }, "cost_usd": 0.0183279, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.338744Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "The source is an open-access educational textbook (Pressbooks) providing a standard secondary overview of economic principles rather than original primary research or peer-reviewed empirical analysis.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.3, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "pressbooks" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.5, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an open-access educational textbook (Pressbooks) providing a standard secondary overview of economic principles rather than original primary research or peer-reviewed empirical analysis.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses discretionary fiscal policy and the 2009 stimulus package alongside automatic stabilizers in a general educational context, which only partly covers the specific causal impact of the Recovery Act on US employment during 2009-2012 relative to other factors.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.3,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt briefly mentions the 2009 stimulus package as an example of discretionary fiscal policy used to stabilize the economy, which aligns with the sub-claim without providing a detailed causal analysis of employment data.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"pressbooks\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2677, "completion_tokens": 216, "total_tokens": 2893, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00160676, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.338856Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The document is published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (bls.gov) and authored by government economists using official federal employment surveys, representing a highly authoritative primary-source statistical report.", "directness": 1.0, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.9, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "national income and product accounts" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "conference board composite index of economic indicators" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "nber business cycle dating committee" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (bls.gov) and authored by government economists using official federal employment surveys, representing a highly authoritative primary-source statistical report.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 1.0,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports on US monthly job losses and employment trends throughout 2009, directly testing whether losses shrank and employment stopped falling within about a year of February 2009.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The BLS document reports direct employment data showing that the largest monthly job loss occurred in January 2009 and that job losses subsequently moderated throughout the rest of the year, supporting the sub-claim.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"current employment statistics survey\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"national income and product accounts\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"conference board composite index of economic indicators\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"nber business cycle dating committee\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3430, "completion_tokens": 5815, "total_tokens": 9245, "reasoning_tokens": 5545 }, "cost_usd": 0.021132119999999997, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.338964Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The source is an institutional working paper from the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment that cites official government statistics (Bureau of Labor Statistics) and academic literature, representing reputable reporting and analysis.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "study", "id": "von wachter 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The source is an institutional working paper from the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment that cites official government statistics (Bureau of Labor Statistics) and academic literature, representing reputable reporting and analysis.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses the timing of the recession's peak and subsequent recovery phase, which relates to the employment timeline, but it primarily focuses on long-term unemployment rather than monthly job loss rates or employment figures around the Recovery Act's enactment.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses unemployment rates and long-term unemployment during the recession and recovery, but does not address monthly job losses or employment figures shrinking or stopping their fall in relation to the Recovery Act.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"von wachter 2010\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3087, "completion_tokens": 629, "total_tokens": 3716, "reasoning_tokens": 397 }, "cost_usd": 0.0038767000000000003, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.339085Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This document is an official government report produced by the Council of Economic Advisers, serving as a primary administrative document mandated by the ARRA itself.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "council of economic advisers" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "department of the treasury" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document is an official government report produced by the Council of Economic Advisers, serving as a primary administrative document mandated by the ARRA itself.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.4,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt discusses the overall economic impact and employment effects of the Recovery Act through mid-2010, which partly covers the timeframe and outcomes of the sub-claim regarding job losses and employment trends.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt mentions that the trajectory of the economy changed and GDP began to grow, but it cuts off before discussing monthly job losses or employment trends.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"council of economic advisers\\\"},\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of economic analysis\\\"},\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"department of the treasury\\\"}\\n]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3268, "completion_tokens": 4980, "total_tokens": 8248, "reasoning_tokens": 4742 }, "cost_usd": 0.01827674, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.339211Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The document is reputable reporting from a major news organization citing official government employment data and named financial analysts.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "national institute of economic and social research" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "white house" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "societe generale" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is reputable reporting from a major news organization citing official government employment data and named financial analysts.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses US employment trends and job losses in mid-2010, which is roughly a year and a half after the Recovery Act, addressing the broader question of the post-recession labor market recovery rather than specifically testing whether job losses shrank and employment stopped falling within the exact one-year window.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 0,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.0,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses recent monthly job figures for July 2010 but does not provide historical data or analysis regarding whether employment stopped falling within a year of the Recovery Act's enactment in February 2009.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"national institute of economic and social research\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"white house\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"societe generale\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2977, "completion_tokens": 299, "total_tokens": 3276, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.0019642, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.339321Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This document is an official government publication from the Federal Reserve, representing a primary-source congressional report with high institutional credibility and rigorous standards.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federal reserve board" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document is an official government publication from the Federal Reserve, representing a primary-source congressional report with high institutional credibility and rigorous standards.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses fiscal and monetary policies supporting economic recovery and mentions labor market conditions, but it addresses the broader economic recovery rather than specifically isolating the employment impact of the Recovery Act from other factors.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.5, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document asserts that fiscal policy (which includes the Recovery Act) along with monetary policy supported economic activity and consumer spending during the recovery, though it does not isolate the Recovery Act's specific employment impact from other factors.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"federal reserve board\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2832, "completion_tokens": 196, "total_tokens": 3028, "reasoning_tokens": 0 }, "cost_usd": 0.00161952, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.339435Z" }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This document is an official government report published by the Council of Economic Advisers, representing a primary-source institutional assessment with explicit methodologies and transparency provisions.", "directness": 1.0, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.9, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "council of economic advisers" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This document is an official government report published by the Council of Economic Advisers, representing a primary-source institutional assessment with explicit methodologies and transparency provisions.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 1.0,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly reports on the Council of Economic Advisers' assessment of whether the Recovery Act caused higher employment and GDP than would have occurred without it, comparing the outcomes against a counterfactual baseline.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document asserts that the Recovery Act significantly raised GDP and employment relative to what would have occurred without it, using macroeconomic models and outside analyst estimates.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"council of economic advisers\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of economic analysis\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3256, "completion_tokens": 1395, "total_tokens": 4651, "reasoning_tokens": 1142 }, "cost_usd": 0.00701458, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.339565Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The Bureau of Labor Statistics is the official U.S. federal statistical agency, making this a primary government source with authoritative data collection and publication standards. The excerpt itself is generic website navigation and import/export price data, but the source's institutional authority as an official primary record is high.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The Bureau of Labor Statistics is the official U.S. federal statistical agency, making this a primary government source with authoritative data collection and publication standards. The excerpt itself is generic website navigation and import/export price data, but the source's institutional authority as an official primary record is high.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses import/export prices and BLS data resources, with no mention of US monthly job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt reports import and export price changes, not monthly job losses or employment levels, so it does not address the sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 1925, "completion_tokens": 442, "total_tokens": 2367, "reasoning_tokens": 246 }, "cost_usd": 0.001861896, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.339684Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The Bureau of Labor Statistics is the official U.S. federal statistical agency, making this a primary government source with authoritative data collection and publication standards. The excerpt itself is generic website navigation and import/export price data, but the source's institutional authority as an official primary record is high.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The Bureau of Labor Statistics is the official U.S. federal statistical agency, making this a primary government source with authoritative data collection and publication standards. The excerpt itself is generic website navigation and import/export price data, but the source's institutional authority as an official primary record is high.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses import/export prices and BLS data resources, with no mention of US monthly job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document excerpt discusses import and export prices and BLS regional data, with no mention of US monthly job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act, so it neither supports nor contradicts the sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 558, "completion_tokens": 648, "total_tokens": 1206, "reasoning_tokens": 627 }, "cost_usd": 0.000945, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.339684Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a Congressional Research Service report published on congress.gov, an official nonpartisan legislative-branch research document with detailed statutory analysis and authoritative sourcing, though not peer-reviewed.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "american recovery and reinvestment act 2009" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a Congressional Research Service report published on congress.gov, an official nonpartisan legislative-branch research document with detailed statutory analysis and authoritative sourcing, though not peer-reviewed.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document describes unemployment insurance provisions in the ARRA, not monthly job losses or employment trends, so it is only tangential background to the sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document describes only ARRA's unemployment insurance provisions (benefit increases, EUC08/EB extensions, tax and loan relief) and contains no data or discussion of monthly job losses or employment levels, so it neither supports nor contradicts the sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"american recovery and reinvestment act 2009\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3099, "completion_tokens": 1210, "total_tokens": 4309, "reasoning_tokens": 1004 }, "cost_usd": 0.00422575, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.339850Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, an official U.S. government statistical agency, this is an authoritative primary-source explanation of CES methodology and census employment effects. It is not peer-reviewed and does not directly address 2009–2012 federal fiscal stimulus, but its sourcing and publisher are highly reliable.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us constitution" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, an official U.S. government statistical agency, this is an authoritative primary-source explanation of CES methodology and census employment effects. It is not peer-reviewed and does not directly address 2009–2012 federal fiscal stimulus, but its sourcing and publisher are highly reliable.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses how 2020 census hiring affects CES employment estimates, with no mention of the Recovery Act, 2009, or monthly job losses, so it does not bear on the sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses 2020 census hiring effects on CES employment estimates and does not address the Recovery Act, 2009 monthly job losses, or whether employment stopped falling.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us constitution\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2901, "completion_tokens": 4087, "total_tokens": 6988, "reasoning_tokens": 3884 }, "cost_usd": 0.01429345, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.339958Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is a named-author analytical report by a Princeton economist and Moody's Analytics chief economist using a proprietary macroeconomic model, giving it credible expertise and transparent methodology, but it is not peer-reviewed and is published by a commercial analytics firm with potential institutional interests in the findings.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "moodys analytics model" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "economycom" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a named-author analytical report by a Princeton economist and Moody's Analytics chief economist using a proprietary macroeconomic model, giving it credible expertise and transparent methodology, but it is not peer-reviewed and is published by a commercial analytics firm with potential institutional interests in the findings.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly simulates the employment effects of fiscal stimulus versus financial-market policies, closely addressing the Recovery Act's counterfactual jobs impact, but it does not isolate the Recovery Act from other fiscal measures, automatic stabilizers, or cover the full 2009–2012 period.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.6, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document's authors estimate via model simulation that the fiscal stimulus (Recovery Act) alone had positive effects on jobs, supporting the sub-claim, though this is a model-based estimate rather than direct observation and the excerpt notes financial policies were more powerful.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"moodys analytics model\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"alan blinder mark zandi\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"economycom\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3285, "completion_tokens": 2875, "total_tokens": 6160, "reasoning_tokens": 2771 }, "cost_usd": 0.0080934726, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.340074Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "Secondary summary by an advocacy-oriented fiscal policy group, but it directly cites and quotes the CBO report and its director, an official primary source, with specific figures and caveats.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.4, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Secondary summary by an advocacy-oriented fiscal policy group, but it directly cites and quotes the CBO report and its director, an official primary source, with specific figures and caveats.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly reports CBO estimates of ARRA's effect on employment and GDP relative to no stimulus, which is the core of the sub-claim, but it does not isolate that effect from Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, or financial-sector rescue measures.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.4, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports CBO estimates that ARRA raised GDP and created or retained jobs relative to no stimulus, which supports the claim that ARRA increased employment, but it does not isolate ARRA's effect from Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, or the financial rescue and covers only 2009 Q3.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2784, "completion_tokens": 2740, "total_tokens": 5524, "reasoning_tokens": 2535 }, "cost_usd": 0.00452285, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.340308Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "This is a Washington Post opinion/commentary column by Jared Bernstein, a former administration economist and CBPP senior fellow, summarizing the Blinder-Zandi study; it is a secondary, advocacy-tinged source with a named primary reference but no peer review or original methodology.", "directness": 1.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.5, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a Washington Post opinion/commentary column by Jared Bernstein, a former administration economist and CBPP senior fellow, summarizing the Blinder-Zandi study; it is a secondary, advocacy-tinged source with a named primary reference but no peer review or original methodology.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 1.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports on a study that quantifies the impact of the Recovery Act and other counter-cyclical policies, directly addressing the sub-claim's proposition about the Recovery Act's effect on employment beyond other interventions.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt only generally discusses counter-cyclical interventions and asks whether they worked, without reporting any finding on the Recovery Act's employment effect relative to Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, or the financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"blinder zandi 2015\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3002, "completion_tokens": 3469, "total_tokens": 6471, "reasoning_tokens": 3243 }, "cost_usd": 0.00583524, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.340530Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 1.0, "quality_rationale": "This is the official Bureau of Labor Statistics monthly employment situation release, a primary government document reporting original survey data with named technical contacts and standard methodology. As the definitive primary record from the authoritative statistical agency, it merits the highest source-quality rating.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 1.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is the official Bureau of Labor Statistics monthly employment situation release, a primary government document reporting original survey data with named technical contacts and standard methodology. As the definitive primary record from the authoritative statistical agency, it merits the highest source-quality rating.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The BLS release reports monthly payroll employment changes and the unemployment rate for October 2008–October 2010, covering the period after the Recovery Act's February 2009 enactment and showing job losses shrinking and employment turning positive, but it does not explicitly frame or test the claim about the Recovery Act's effect.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.5, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS data show nonfarm payroll employment has risen since December 2009, about 10 months after the Recovery Act's enactment, supporting that employment stopped falling within a year, though the excerpt does not quantify the sharp shrinkage in monthly job losses or mention the Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current population survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bls\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3825, "completion_tokens": 2464, "total_tokens": 6289, "reasoning_tokens": 2199 }, "cost_usd": 0.0070184919999999994, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.340710Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The Bureau of Labor Statistics is an authoritative official statistical agency and a primary source for US employment data, with strong editorial and methodological standards. However, this specific document is only an archive index page, not a substantive study or dataset directly analyzing federal fiscal stimulus.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The Bureau of Labor Statistics is an authoritative official statistical agency and a primary source for US employment data, with strong editorial and methodological standards. However, this specific document is only an archive index page, not a substantive study or dataset directly analyzing federal fiscal stimulus.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is only a 2009 BLS article archive listing and does not directly report on monthly job losses, the Recovery Act, or whether employment stopped falling within a year of its enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is only an archive listing of article titles and provides no data or findings on monthly job losses or the Recovery Act's effects.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3338, "completion_tokens": 1690, "total_tokens": 5028, "reasoning_tokens": 1551 }, "cost_usd": 0.00340868, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.340912Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The Bureau of Labor Statistics is an authoritative official statistical agency and a primary source for US employment data, with strong editorial and methodological standards. However, this specific document is only an archive index page, not a substantive study or dataset directly analyzing federal fiscal stimulus.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The Bureau of Labor Statistics is an authoritative official statistical agency and a primary source for US employment data, with strong editorial and methodological standards. However, this specific document is only an archive index page, not a substantive study or dataset directly analyzing federal fiscal stimulus.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is only a 2009 BLS article archive listing and does not directly report on monthly job losses, the Recovery Act, or whether employment stopped falling within a year of its enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is merely an archive index of BLS Monthly Labor Review articles from 2009 and contains no data or findings on monthly job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 960, "completion_tokens": 562, "total_tokens": 1522, "reasoning_tokens": 498 }, "cost_usd": 0.0009624, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.340912Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The publisher is the U.S. Census Bureau, an official statistical agency, and the document is a government research/analysis product rather than anonymous or advocacy material. It provides original labor-market analysis from an official source, though it is not a direct primary record of federal fiscal stimulus itself.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "matched employer employee data" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The publisher is the U.S. Census Bureau, an official statistical agency, and the document is a government research/analysis product rather than anonymous or advocacy material. It provides original labor-market analysis from an official source, though it is not a direct primary record of federal fiscal stimulus itself.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses labor market dynamics and unemployment during the 2007-09 recession but does not mention the Recovery Act, monthly job losses, or the timing of employment stabilization.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses unemployment cyclicality and job tenure shifts but does not mention monthly job losses, employment stopping falling, or the Recovery Act timeline.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"current population survey tenure supplements\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"matched employer employee data\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us census bureau\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2740, "completion_tokens": 1291, "total_tokens": 4031, "reasoning_tokens": 1087 }, "cost_usd": 0.0027458, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.341168Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The publisher is the U.S. Census Bureau, an official statistical agency, and the document is a government research/analysis product rather than anonymous or advocacy material. It provides original labor-market analysis from an official source, though it is not a direct primary record of federal fiscal stimulus itself.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "matched employer employee data" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The publisher is the U.S. Census Bureau, an official statistical agency, and the document is a government research/analysis product rather than anonymous or advocacy material. It provides original labor-market analysis from an official source, though it is not a direct primary record of federal fiscal stimulus itself.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses labor market dynamics and unemployment during the 2007-09 recession but does not mention the Recovery Act, monthly job losses, or the timing of employment stabilization.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt discusses unemployment patterns and job tenure but never addresses monthly job losses or the timing of employment recovery relative to the February 2009 Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"current population survey tenure supplements\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"matched employer employee data\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us census bureau\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 834, "completion_tokens": 378, "total_tokens": 1212, "reasoning_tokens": 321 }, "cost_usd": 0.00066861, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.341168Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The document is a peer-reviewed article in the American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, with a named author, transparent empirical methodology, and use of official ARRA state-level allocation data; the frbsf.org hosting is consistent with a working-paper version but does not undermine the peer-reviewed publication.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "recoverygov" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "fhwa" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is a peer-reviewed article in the American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, with a named author, transparent empirical methodology, and use of official ARRA state-level allocation data; the frbsf.org hosting is consistent with a working-paper version but does not undermine the peer-reviewed publication.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The paper directly estimates ARRA's jobs multiplier, which bears closely on whether the Recovery Act raised employment, but it focuses on first-year state-level effects rather than the full 2009–2012 counterfactual net of Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.5, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The paper's cross-state IV estimates that ARRA spending created about eight jobs per million dollars in its first year and claims to isolate ARRA from other macro factors like monetary policy, supporting a positive employment effect but not fully covering 2009-2012 or automatic stabilizers/financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"recoverygov\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bls\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"fhwa\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3280, "completion_tokens": 5314, "total_tokens": 8594, "reasoning_tokens": 5207 }, "cost_usd": 0.016313784, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.341464Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Published in the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Monthly Labor Review, an official government publication, and authored by a BLS economist using the agency's own Current Employment Statistics survey data, making it a primary/official source with strong institutional credibility.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bls monthly labor review" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Published in the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Monthly Labor Review, an official government publication, and authored by a BLS economist using the agency's own Current Employment Statistics survey data, making it a primary/official source with strong institutional credibility.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports the employment trough in February 2010 and subsequent job growth, which is relevant to the timing of when employment stopped falling, but it does not mention the Recovery Act or the sharp shrinkage of monthly job losses, so it only partly covers the sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.5, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The BLS article reports CES payroll data showing nonfarm employment troughed in February 2010, about a year after the February 2009 Recovery Act, indicating employment stopped falling within that timeframe, though it does not directly quantify sharply shrinking monthly job losses or attribute them to the Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls current employment statistics survey\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls monthly labor review\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3168, "completion_tokens": 2826, "total_tokens": 5994, "reasoning_tokens": 2548 }, "cost_usd": 0.00359192, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.341685Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "Finance & Development is a reputable IMF publication with editorial standards, but this is an analytical magazine article rather than a peer-reviewed study or primary official record. It presents the authors' estimates and policy interpretation, so it is stronger than ordinary journalism but below peer-reviewed or definitive primary evidence.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.2, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "moodys analytics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bea nipa" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Finance & Development is a reputable IMF publication with editorial standards, but this is an analytical magazine article rather than a peer-reviewed study or primary official record. It presents the authors' estimates and policy interpretation, so it is stronger than ordinary journalism but below peer-reviewed or definitive primary evidence.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document argues that combined fiscal and monetary policy responses prevented a worse recession and enabled recovery, but it does not isolate the Recovery Act's specific employment effect beyond Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.2,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The article asserts that aggressive fiscal and monetary policy responses caused a faster recovery and that inaction would have left the economy shrinking, which broadly favors the stimulus claim but does not isolate the Recovery Act's employment effects from other policies.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"blinder zandi 2010\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"moodys analytics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bea nipa\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bls ces\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3070, "completion_tokens": 8833, "total_tokens": 11903, "reasoning_tokens": 8630 }, "cost_usd": 0.022490371999999998, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.341809Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official U.S. Government Accountability Office report to Congress, synthesizing a literature review and 21 expert interviews with named contact information, giving it high evidentiary authority as an official inquiry, though it is a secondary synthesis rather than a definitive primary record.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "government accountability office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official U.S. Government Accountability Office report to Congress, synthesizing a literature review and 21 expert interviews with named contact information, giving it high evidentiary authority as an official inquiry, though it is a secondary synthesis rather than a definitive primary record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses automatic stabilizers' general effectiveness in downturns and design considerations, but does not address the Recovery Act specifically or its incremental employment effects relative to Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt discusses automatic stabilizers generally and does not address the Recovery Act or its employment effects beyond Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"government accountability office\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3028, "completion_tokens": 2549, "total_tokens": 5577, "reasoning_tokens": 2452 }, "cost_usd": 0.008082899000000001, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.341937Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official U.S. Government Accountability Office report to Congress, synthesizing a literature review and 21 expert interviews with named contact information, giving it high evidentiary authority as an official inquiry, though it is a secondary synthesis rather than a definitive primary record.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "government accountability office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official U.S. Government Accountability Office report to Congress, synthesizing a literature review and 21 expert interviews with named contact information, giving it high evidentiary authority as an official inquiry, though it is a secondary synthesis rather than a definitive primary record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses automatic stabilizers' general effectiveness in downturns and design considerations, but does not address the Recovery Act specifically or its incremental employment effects relative to Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses automatic stabilizers generally and does not mention the Recovery Act or estimate its incremental employment effects beyond Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"government accountability office\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 840, "completion_tokens": 852, "total_tokens": 1692, "reasoning_tokens": 798 }, "cost_usd": 0.0012744, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.341937Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The document is an IMF eLibrary publication (Finance & Development) with editorial standards and named authors, but it is a secondary magazine issue overview rather than a peer-reviewed study or primary record. It relays findings from Blinder and Zandi, providing reputable reporting with named sources.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.3, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "imf researchers" }, { "type": "study", "id": "kose prasad emerging markets analysis" }, { "type": "study", "id": "arora vamvakidis china spillover analysis" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is an IMF eLibrary publication (Finance & Development) with editorial standards and named authors, but it is a secondary magazine issue overview rather than a peer-reviewed study or primary record. It relays findings from Blinder and Zandi, providing reputable reporting with named sources.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document summarizes Blinder and Zandi's analysis of the positive effects of US stimulus and the counterfactual without it, which closely relates to whether stimulus raised employment, but it does not explicitly isolate the Recovery Act, employment outcomes in 2009-2012, or effects beyond Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.3, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document relays Blinder and Zandi's claim that US stimulus had positive effects and that without it the United States would still be in recession, which weakly supports the idea that stimulus raised employment, but it does not specifically address the Recovery Act, employment levels, or the incremental effect beyond Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"blinder zandi stimulus analysis\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"imf researchers\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"kose prasad emerging markets analysis\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"arora vamvakidis china spillover analysis\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2852, "completion_tokens": 2785, "total_tokens": 5637, "reasoning_tokens": 2484 }, "cost_usd": 0.00465376, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.342146Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official U.S. Census Bureau publication reporting directly from the Annual Survey of Public Employment & Payroll and BLS data, giving it strong authoritative sourcing and no apparent conflicts of interest. It is not peer-reviewed and addresses fiscal stimulus only indirectly, but as an official statistical source it is highly reliable.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "annual survey of public employment payroll" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official U.S. Census Bureau publication reporting directly from the Annual Survey of Public Employment & Payroll and BLS data, giving it strong authoritative sourcing and no apparent conflicts of interest. It is not peer-reviewed and addresses fiscal stimulus only indirectly, but as an official statistical source it is highly reliable.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses broader public- and private-sector employment trends during and after the recession but does not mention the Recovery Act, monthly job losses, or whether employment stopped falling within about a year of February 2009.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports annual public/private employment trends and never mentions monthly job losses or the Recovery Act, so it neither supports nor contradicts the sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"annual survey of public employment payroll\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls current employment statistics\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"census bureau\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3081, "completion_tokens": 5029, "total_tokens": 8110, "reasoning_tokens": 5021 }, "cost_usd": 0.01274004, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.342291Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The UC Berkeley Labor Center is a reputable academic research center, and the report cites official employment statistics and other named research; however, it is a secondary policy report, not peer-reviewed, and may reflect an institutional labor-policy perspective.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.2, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "center on wage and employment dynamics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "economic policy institute" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The UC Berkeley Labor Center is a reputable academic research center, and the report cites official employment statistics and other named research; however, it is a secondary policy report, not peer-reviewed, and may reflect an institutional labor-policy perspective.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses Great Recession employment losses and recovery timing broadly, but does not specifically address whether monthly job losses shrank sharply or employment stopped falling within about a year of the Recovery Act's February 2009 enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.2, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt reports aggregate job losses ending in February 2010, about a year after the Recovery Act, which indirectly supports the timing of employment ceasing to fall but does not address monthly job loss trends.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"center on wage and employment dynamics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"economic policy institute\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3150, "completion_tokens": 10521, "total_tokens": 13671, "reasoning_tokens": 11056 }, "cost_usd": 0.033821315, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.342510Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "The UC Berkeley Labor Center is a reputable academic research center, and the report cites official employment statistics and other named research; however, it is a secondary policy report, not peer-reviewed, and may reflect an institutional labor-policy perspective.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "center on wage and employment dynamics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "economic policy institute" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The UC Berkeley Labor Center is a reputable academic research center, and the report cites official employment statistics and other named research; however, it is a secondary policy report, not peer-reviewed, and may reflect an institutional labor-policy perspective.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses Great Recession employment losses and recovery timing broadly, but does not specifically address whether monthly job losses shrank sharply or employment stopped falling within about a year of the Recovery Act's February 2009 enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports aggregate job losses and recovery timelines but does not address monthly job loss trends or the timing of employment stabilization relative to the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"center on wage and employment dynamics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"economic policy institute\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 885, "completion_tokens": 3484, "total_tokens": 4369, "reasoning_tokens": 3428 }, "cost_usd": 0.0044463, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.342510Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official Bureau of Labor Statistics publication reporting primary Current Employment Statistics data, with named program and release sourcing; it is a government statistical summary rather than raw microdata or a peer-reviewed study.", "directness": 1.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official Bureau of Labor Statistics publication reporting primary Current Employment Statistics data, with named program and release sourcing; it is a government statistical summary rather than raw microdata or a peer-reviewed study.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 1.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly reports monthly US payroll job losses over 2009 and December 2009, exactly covering whether losses shrank sharply and whether employment had stopped falling about a year after February 2009.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS data show monthly job losses moderated sharply from Q1 to Q4 2009, but payroll employment was still edging down in December 2009, so the document supports the shrinking-losses part while contradicting that employment had stopped falling within about a year.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics program\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2222, "completion_tokens": 5400, "total_tokens": 7622, "reasoning_tokens": 5219 }, "cost_usd": 0.013267038, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.342741Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The document is an official Federal Reserve History publication, giving it strong institutional authority and reliance on official economic data and records. It is an official historical account rather than a peer-reviewed study or the underlying primary data itself, so it merits 0.9.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "author_group", "id": "nber business cycle dating committee" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federal reserve board" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is an official Federal Reserve History publication, giving it strong institutional authority and reliance on official economic data and records. It is an official historical account rather than a peer-reviewed study or the underlying primary data itself, so it merits 0.9.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document only mentions the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act as one of several fiscal stimulus programs and does not assess its employment effects or isolate its impact from Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, or financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document only notes that the ARRA was enacted as fiscal stimulus; it provides no evidence or assessment of its employment effects relative to a counterfactual or beyond other policies.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"nber business cycle dating committee\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of economic analysis\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"federal reserve board\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3276, "completion_tokens": 2270, "total_tokens": 5546, "reasoning_tokens": 2006 }, "cost_usd": 0.005861193, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.342871Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Liberty Street Economics is the official research blog of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, publishing analysis by named Fed economists drawing on peer-reviewed academic research and official data, giving it strong institutional credibility and primary-source proximity. It is a blog rather than a formal peer-reviewed study, so it falls just short of the top tier.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "post crisis academic research on qe" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Liberty Street Economics is the official research blog of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, publishing analysis by named Fed economists drawing on peer-reviewed academic research and official data, giving it strong institutional credibility and primary-source proximity. It is a blog rather than a formal peer-reviewed study, so it falls just short of the top tier.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document addresses whether QE (Federal Reserve monetary policy) worked, which is one of the counterfactual factors in the sub-claim, but it does not test the Recovery Act's employment effects or compare them against Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt discusses quantitative easing and Federal Reserve unconventional monetary policy, never mentioning the Recovery Act or fiscal stimulus effects on employment, so it does not address the sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"post crisis academic research on qe\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2885, "completion_tokens": 489, "total_tokens": 3374, "reasoning_tokens": 250 }, "cost_usd": 0.002065335, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.342995Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official Federal Reserve Monetary Policy Report submitted to Congress, making it a primary government document with high institutional authority and named official sourcing. It is not a peer-reviewed study or a definitive raw data record, but it is a strong primary source for the period.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreserve" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official Federal Reserve Monetary Policy Report submitted to Congress, making it a primary government document with high institutional authority and named official sourcing. It is not a peer-reviewed study or a definitive raw data record, but it is a strong primary source for the period.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document provides background on the 2008-09 financial crisis and Federal Reserve monetary policy but does not mention the Recovery Act or assess its incremental employment effects relative to other policies.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt describes economic weakness and Federal Reserve/Treasury actions but does not mention the Recovery Act or assess its employment effects relative to other policies.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"federalreserve\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2971, "completion_tokens": 2021, "total_tokens": 4992, "reasoning_tokens": 1866 }, "cost_usd": 0.005572508, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.343157Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official Federal Reserve Monetary Policy Report submitted to Congress, making it a primary government document with high institutional authority and named official sourcing. It is not a peer-reviewed study or a definitive raw data record, but it is a strong primary source for the period.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreserve" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official Federal Reserve Monetary Policy Report submitted to Congress, making it a primary government document with high institutional authority and named official sourcing. It is not a peer-reviewed study or a definitive raw data record, but it is a strong primary source for the period.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document provides background on the 2008-09 financial crisis and Federal Reserve monetary policy but does not mention the Recovery Act or assess its incremental employment effects relative to other policies.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses the weak economy and financial turmoil in late 2008 and early 2009 but does not mention the Recovery Act or assess its employment effects relative to other policies.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"federalreserve\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 850, "completion_tokens": 339, "total_tokens": 1189, "reasoning_tokens": 318 }, "cost_usd": 0.00063974, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.343157Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.8, "quality_rationale": "NBER working paper by named academic economists with no disclosed funding conflicts, using simulation methods and citing empirical literature; however, it is explicitly not peer-reviewed and is a secondary analysis rather than a primary record.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.2, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "nber working paper 34411" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.8, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"NBER working paper by named academic economists with no disclosed funding conflicts, using simulation methods and citing empirical literature; however, it is explicitly not peer-reviewed and is a secondary analysis rather than a primary record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The paper simulates the unemployment effects of removing discretionary fiscal stimulus after the Great Recession, closely addressing the Recovery Act's counterfactual employment impact relative to automatic stabilizers, but it does not isolate effects beyond Federal Reserve policy or the financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.2, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The paper's simulation suggests more sustained fiscal stimulus would have lowered unemployment after the Great Recession, indirectly supporting a positive employment effect of discretionary stimulus, but it does not isolate the Recovery Act or assess effects beyond Federal Reserve policy and the financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"nber working paper 34411\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2933, "completion_tokens": 2346, "total_tokens": 5279, "reasoning_tokens": 2319 }, "cost_usd": 0.0042112799999999995, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.343382Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is an official White House statement, a primary record of the administration’s position, and it directly cites the Congressional Budget Office report and its figures. However, it is political advocacy with a clear conflict of interest rather than the underlying CBO study itself, so it is only moderately strong evidence on the economic impact.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official White House statement, a primary record of the administration’s position, and it directly cites the Congressional Budget Office report and its figures. However, it is political advocacy with a clear conflict of interest rather than the underlying CBO study itself, so it is only moderately strong evidence on the economic impact.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports CBO estimates of the Recovery Act's aggregate employment and unemployment effects in mid-2010, which broadly relates to employment trends but does not specifically address monthly job losses shrinking or the timing of when employment stopped falling.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports CBO estimates of employment gains in Q2 2010 but does not address monthly job losses or the timing of when employment stopped falling.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3065, "completion_tokens": 2049, "total_tokens": 5114, "reasoning_tokens": 1803 }, "cost_usd": 0.003481375, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.343555Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "This is an official White House statement, a primary record of the administration’s position, and it directly cites the Congressional Budget Office report and its figures. However, it is political advocacy with a clear conflict of interest rather than the underlying CBO study itself, so it is only moderately strong evidence on the economic impact.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official White House statement, a primary record of the administration’s position, and it directly cites the Congressional Budget Office report and its figures. However, it is political advocacy with a clear conflict of interest rather than the underlying CBO study itself, so it is only moderately strong evidence on the economic impact.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports CBO estimates that the Recovery Act increased employment in 2010, directly addressing the Act's employment impact but not the full 2009-2012 period or the claim that it exceeded effects of Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.5, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The statement relays CBO estimates that the Recovery Act increased employment by 1.4–3.3 million and lowered unemployment in Q2 2010, directly supporting a causal jobs effect but only for one quarter and without explicitly isolating it from other policies.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3062, "completion_tokens": 2475, "total_tokens": 5537, "reasoning_tokens": 2198 }, "cost_usd": 0.0036919, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.343671Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.8, "quality_rationale": "This is an official U.S. Census Bureau working paper using confidential Census microdata, giving it strong primary-source and institutional credibility. However, it is explicitly not peer-reviewed and is a research paper rather than a definitive official record, so it falls short of the highest tier.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.8, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official U.S. Census Bureau working paper using confidential Census microdata, giving it strong primary-source and institutional credibility. However, it is explicitly not peer-reviewed and is a research paper rather than a definitive official record, so it falls short of the highest tier.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document analyzes job-to-job flows and gross employment flows during recessions, but does not directly test or report on monthly job losses shrinking or employment stabilizing after the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document excerpt addresses job-to-job flows and recessions from 1998 to 2010 but does not report monthly job losses or employment stopping falling relative to the February 2009 Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us census bureau\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3026, "completion_tokens": 1262, "total_tokens": 4288, "reasoning_tokens": 1042 }, "cost_usd": 0.0026929096, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.343787Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official congressional hearing transcript published by the U.S. Government Printing Office via congress.gov, constituting a primary document and official inquiry with named participants and proceedings. It is not peer-reviewed and contains political testimony, but its provenance and sourcing are authoritative.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "house committee on the budget hearing july 14 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official congressional hearing transcript published by the U.S. Government Printing Office via congress.gov, constituting a primary document and official inquiry with named participants and proceedings. It is not peer-reviewed and contains political testimony, but its provenance and sourcing are authoritative.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is a congressional hearing providing an update on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which closely relates to the sub-claim about employment trends following the Act's enactment, but it is not a direct statistical test or report on the specific proposition that monthly job losses shrank sharply and employment stopped falling within a year.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt only contains front matter and the hearing title, providing no data or claims about monthly job losses or employment trends following the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"house committee on the budget hearing july 14 2010\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 4076, "completion_tokens": 1482, "total_tokens": 5558, "reasoning_tokens": 1292 }, "cost_usd": 0.0039173346, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.343897Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official Bureau of Labor Statistics publication drawing on Current Population Survey data, an authoritative primary statistical source with strong methodological and editorial standards. It is not peer-reviewed and does not directly evaluate federal fiscal stimulus, but it provides high-quality official employment evidence.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.4, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "national bureau of economic research" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official Bureau of Labor Statistics publication drawing on Current Population Survey data, an authoritative primary statistical source with strong methodological and editorial standards. It is not peer-reviewed and does not directly evaluate federal fiscal stimulus, but it provides high-quality official employment evidence.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The article discusses employment changes and the recovery beginning in 2010 after the Great Recession, but does not specifically report on monthly job losses or tie the timing to the Recovery Act's enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.4, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"CPS data show the unemployment rate peaked in October 2009 and the labor market began recovering in 2010 with the rate trending down from April 2010, roughly a year after the Recovery Act, consistent with employment ceasing to fall—though the document never mentions the Act and speaks of employment decline and recovery rather than explicitly 'monthly job losses shrinking sharply.'\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"current population survey\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"national bureau of economic research\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3191, "completion_tokens": 7353, "total_tokens": 10544, "reasoning_tokens": 7822 }, "cost_usd": 0.0269733246, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.344008Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official Congressional Budget Office report issued under a statutory requirement, providing modeled estimates of ARRA’s employment and output effects. It is a primary official document with transparent methodology, though its estimates are analytical rather than a definitive raw data record.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official Congressional Budget Office report issued under a statutory requirement, providing modeled estimates of ARRA’s employment and output effects. It is a primary official document with transparent methodology, though its estimates are analytical rather than a definitive raw data record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The report estimates ARRA's impact on employment and output in a specific 2010 quarter, addressing the broader question of ARRA's employment effects but not the specific claim about the timing and sharpness of monthly job losses shrinking within about a year of enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt only describes CBO's modeled estimates of ARRA's employment and output impact in Q2 2010 and does not address the trajectory of monthly job losses or when employment stopped falling, so it neither supports nor contradicts the sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2084, "completion_tokens": 653, "total_tokens": 2737, "reasoning_tokens": 410 }, "cost_usd": 0.0015810604, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.344132Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official Congressional Budget Office report issued under a statutory requirement, providing modeled estimates of ARRA’s employment and output effects. It is a primary official document with transparent methodology, though its estimates are analytical rather than a definitive raw data record.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official Congressional Budget Office report issued under a statutory requirement, providing modeled estimates of ARRA’s employment and output effects. It is a primary official document with transparent methodology, though its estimates are analytical rather than a definitive raw data record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The report estimates ARRA's impact on employment and output in a specific 2010 quarter, addressing the broader question of ARRA's employment effects but not the specific claim about the timing and sharpness of monthly job losses shrinking within about a year of enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt only describes CBO's modeled estimates of ARRA's impact in Q2 2010 and does not address whether monthly job losses shrank sharply or employment stopped falling within about a year of enactment.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 647, "completion_tokens": 413, "total_tokens": 1060, "reasoning_tokens": 381 }, "cost_usd": 0.00066671, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.344132Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official Congressional Budget Office report issued under a statutory requirement, providing modeled estimates of ARRA’s employment and output effects. It is a primary official document with transparent methodology, though its estimates are analytical rather than a definitive raw data record.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official Congressional Budget Office report issued under a statutory requirement, providing modeled estimates of ARRA’s employment and output effects. It is a primary official document with transparent methodology, though its estimates are analytical rather than a definitive raw data record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The CBO report estimates ARRA's overall impact on employment in Q2 2010, which closely addresses the ARRA employment effect but does not cover the full 2009-2012 period or isolate the effect beyond Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.5, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The CBO report estimates that ARRA had a positive overall impact on employment in Q2 2010, supporting the claim that it raised employment, but it covers only a narrow period and does not isolate effects from other policies.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2126, "completion_tokens": 1347, "total_tokens": 3473, "reasoning_tokens": 1167 }, "cost_usd": 0.00271678, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.344290Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "This is an official White House communication and thereby a primary document for the administration's claims, but it is self-interested advocacy rather than independent analysis, with no methodology and selective citation of CBO and economists. It has some named sourcing, so it is not pure unsupported opinion, but its conflict of interest and lack of peer review limit its evidentiary value.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.4, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "congressional budget office" }, { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "white house" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.5, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official White House communication and thereby a primary document for the administration's claims, but it is self-interested advocacy rather than independent analysis, with no methodology and selective citation of CBO and economists. It has some named sourcing, so it is not pure unsupported opinion, but its conflict of interest and lack of peer review limit its evidentiary value.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document broadly discusses the Recovery Act's job effects and contrasts early job losses with later job gains, but it does not directly report whether monthly job losses shrank sharply or employment stopped falling within about a year of enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.4, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document states the economy was losing over 700,000 jobs monthly at the outset and later added private-sector jobs for 47 consecutive months by Jan 2014, implying employment bottomed around early 2010, but it does not directly document the monthly job-loss trajectory.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office recovery act estimate\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"blinder zandi economic analysis\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"the white house\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2942, "completion_tokens": 3153, "total_tokens": 6095, "reasoning_tokens": 2902 }, "cost_usd": 0.0055429746, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.344409Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is a U.S. GAO report, an official government inquiry that synthesizes studies and official data on automatic stabilizers, giving it high evidentiary standing. It is not a definitive primary record, but it meets the rubric's 0.9 category for official inquiries.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "studies gao reviewed" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a U.S. GAO report, an official government inquiry that synthesizes studies and official data on automatic stabilizers, giving it high evidentiary standing. It is not a definitive primary record, but it meets the rubric's 0.9 category for official inquiries.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses the economic effects of automatic stabilizers, which are part of the sub-claim's counterfactual baseline, but it does not address the Recovery Act's incremental employment impact in 2009-2012 or compare it against Federal Reserve and financial-rescue effects.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"The excerpt discusses automatic stabilizers generally and notes difficulty isolating their effects, but never addresses the Recovery Act or compares its employment impact against Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial-sector rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"studies gao reviewed\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"congressional budget office\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2813, "completion_tokens": 3936, "total_tokens": 6749, "reasoning_tokens": 3734 }, "cost_usd": 0.01176063, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.344557Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publication providing primary QCEW employment and wage data, with authoritative methodology and government sourcing; it is a primary official record, though not directly an analysis of federal fiscal stimulus.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "qcew" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publication providing primary QCEW employment and wage data, with authoritative methodology and government sourcing; it is a primary official record, though not directly an analysis of federal fiscal stimulus.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is a BLS publication describing QCEW annual employment and wage data and related news releases, which provides only tangential background on employment trends and does not directly report monthly job losses or the timing of employment stabilization after the February 2009 Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt only describes BLS publication details and data availability, not monthly job losses or employment trends after the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"qcew\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3050, "completion_tokens": 4527, "total_tokens": 7577, "reasoning_tokens": 4332 }, "cost_usd": 0.0121842726, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.344674Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publication providing primary QCEW employment and wage data, with authoritative methodology and government sourcing; it is a primary official record, though not directly an analysis of federal fiscal stimulus.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "qcew" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publication providing primary QCEW employment and wage data, with authoritative methodology and government sourcing; it is a primary official record, though not directly an analysis of federal fiscal stimulus.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is a BLS publication describing QCEW annual employment and wage data and related news releases, which provides only tangential background on employment trends and does not directly report monthly job losses or the timing of employment stabilization after the February 2009 Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt only describes BLS QCEW/BED publications and data programs and provides no information about monthly job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act, so it does not address the sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"qcew\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 882, "completion_tokens": 550, "total_tokens": 1432, "reasoning_tokens": 481 }, "cost_usd": 0.00087837, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.344674Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The Bureau of Labor Statistics is an authoritative official source for US employment data, with strong methodological and editorial standards and no evident conflicts of interest. However, this specific excerpt is an archive/index listing rather than a substantive study or dataset directly addressing federal fiscal stimulus.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The Bureau of Labor Statistics is an authoritative official source for US employment data, with strong methodological and editorial standards and no evident conflicts of interest. However, this specific excerpt is an archive/index listing rather than a substantive study or dataset directly addressing federal fiscal stimulus.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is only a 2010 BLS Monthly Labor Review archive listing of articles and does not itself report or test the specific claim about monthly job losses shrinking and employment stabilizing after the February 2009 Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is only a 2010 BLS article archive listing and does not report or assess monthly job losses or employment trends around the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3822, "completion_tokens": 1563, "total_tokens": 5385, "reasoning_tokens": 1356 }, "cost_usd": 0.0040966818, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.344837Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official White House Council of Economic Advisers report using documented methodology and OMB estimates; it is a primary government source, though it is an executive-branch estimate rather than independent peer-reviewed research.", "directness": 1.0, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.3, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "romer and bernstein 2009" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "omb" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official White House Council of Economic Advisers report using documented methodology and OMB estimates; it is a primary government source, though it is an executive-branch estimate rather than independent peer-reviewed research.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 1.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is the CEA's official report estimating the employment effects of the Recovery Act, which directly addresses the proposition that the Act raised employment relative to without it.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.3, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt describes CEA estimates that ARRA was designed to save and create jobs, supporting the general claim that ARRA raised employment, but it provides no actual results and does not address the counterfactual beyond other policies.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"romer and bernstein 2009\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"omb\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3122, "completion_tokens": 9141, "total_tokens": 12263, "reasoning_tokens": 9297 }, "cost_usd": 0.019355396, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.345025Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official White House Council of Economic Advisers report using documented methodology and OMB estimates; it is a primary government source, though it is an executive-branch estimate rather than independent peer-reviewed research.", "directness": 1.0, "direction": -1, "strength": 0.2, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "romer and bernstein 2009" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "omb" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official White House Council of Economic Advisers report using documented methodology and OMB estimates; it is a primary government source, though it is an executive-branch estimate rather than independent peer-reviewed research.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 1.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is the CEA's official report estimating the employment effects of the Recovery Act, which directly addresses the proposition that the Act raised employment relative to without it.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": -1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.2, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document presents CEA estimates of ARRA's employment effects, implying ARRA created jobs, which weakly contradicts the sub-claim that ARRA was not a major cause beyond other policies, though the excerpt lacks specific estimates or counterfactual analysis.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"romer and bernstein 2009\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"omb\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 894, "completion_tokens": 3493, "total_tokens": 4387, "reasoning_tokens": 3414 }, "cost_usd": 0.0044598, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.345025Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "This is an open educational resource textbook excerpt from Lumen Learning, a secondary educational publisher with editorial standards but no peer review or named primary sourcing. It synthesizes standard macroeconomic concepts and references the 2009 stimulus package only as an illustrative example, without citing specific data, studies, or official records.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "lumen learning macroeconomics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.5, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an open educational resource textbook excerpt from Lumen Learning, a secondary educational publisher with editorial standards but no peer review or named primary sourcing. It synthesizes standard macroeconomic concepts and references the 2009 stimulus package only as an illustrative example, without citing specific data, studies, or official records.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document explains automatic stabilizers and mentions the 2009 stimulus package as an example of discretionary fiscal policy, but it does not test or report on the Recovery Act's employment effects relative to Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt only defines discretionary fiscal policy and automatic stabilizers and mentions the 2009 stimulus as an example, without assessing its employment impact or isolating it from Fed, stabilizer, or rescue effects.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"lumen learning macroeconomics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2706, "completion_tokens": 755, "total_tokens": 3461, "reasoning_tokens": 515 }, "cost_usd": 0.0020561154, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.345235Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "This is an open educational resource textbook excerpt from Lumen Learning, a secondary educational publisher with editorial standards but no peer review or named primary sourcing. It synthesizes standard macroeconomic concepts and references the 2009 stimulus package only as an illustrative example, without citing specific data, studies, or official records.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "lumen learning macroeconomics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.5, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an open educational resource textbook excerpt from Lumen Learning, a secondary educational publisher with editorial standards but no peer review or named primary sourcing. It synthesizes standard macroeconomic concepts and references the 2009 stimulus package only as an illustrative example, without citing specific data, studies, or official records.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document explains automatic stabilizers and mentions the 2009 stimulus package as an example of discretionary fiscal policy, but it does not test or report on the Recovery Act's employment effects relative to Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt only mentions the 2009 stimulus package as an example of discretionary fiscal policy and explains automatic stabilizers, without addressing whether the Recovery Act raised employment beyond what Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, and the financial-sector rescue would have produced.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"lumen learning macroeconomics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 838, "completion_tokens": 537, "total_tokens": 1375, "reasoning_tokens": 460 }, "cost_usd": 0.00103017, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.345235Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The document is an official historical account published by the Federal Reserve, an authoritative institutional source with editorial standards and citations. It is a secondary narrative rather than a peer-reviewed study or raw primary record, but its official provenance makes it highly reliable evidence.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreservehistory org" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is an official historical account published by the Federal Reserve, an authoritative institutional source with editorial standards and citations. It is a secondary narrative rather than a peer-reviewed study or raw primary record, but its official provenance makes it highly reliable evidence.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses the Great Recession timeline and notes the economy bottomed out in mid-2009, which is adjacent to but does not directly test the specific claim about monthly job losses shrinking and employment stabilizing within a year of the Recovery Act's enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt only mentions that the economy bottomed out in mid-2009 and the subsequent recovery was slow, with no data or claim about monthly job losses or employment stopping falling, so it neither supports nor contradicts the sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"federalreservehistory.org\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2806, "completion_tokens": 1384, "total_tokens": 4190, "reasoning_tokens": 1222 }, "cost_usd": 0.003133625, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.345402Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The document is a Bureau of Labor Statistics report, an official government primary source with rigorous methodology and no apparent conflicts of interest, though the hosting site economicpopulist.org is a secondary republisher.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "employment situation news release" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is a Bureau of Labor Statistics report, an official government primary source with rigorous methodology and no apparent conflicts of interest, though the hosting site economicpopulist.org is a secondary republisher.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports BLS payroll and household employment trends in the period after early 2009, which closely relates to whether monthly job losses shrank and employment stopped falling, but it does not mention the Recovery Act or directly test the claim's timing relative to its enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt only describes BLS survey methodology and lacks any data or statement about monthly job losses shrinking or employment stabilizing after the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current population survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"employment situation news release\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2856, "completion_tokens": 3061, "total_tokens": 5917, "reasoning_tokens": 2826 }, "cost_usd": 0.0084307496, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.345541Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "The document is an official Bureau of Labor Statistics Monthly Labor Review article by a BLS economist, based on the agency's Current Employment Statistics program and official Census employment data. It is a government primary/official source with strong sourcing, though it is an analytical article rather than a peer-reviewed academic study or raw definitive record.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "national bureau of economic research" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is an official Bureau of Labor Statistics Monthly Labor Review article by a BLS economist, based on the agency's Current Employment Statistics program and official Census employment data. It is a government primary/official source with strong sourcing, though it is an analytical article rather than a peer-reviewed academic study or raw definitive record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports on employment trends during the recession and recovery, including slowing job losses in late 2009 and growth in 2010, but does not mention the Recovery Act or directly test the claim about its timing.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.6, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The BLS article reports CES-based findings that the rate of job losses slowed in the second half of 2009 and employment growth resumed in 2010, which supports the claim that monthly job losses shrank and employment stopped falling within about a year of February 2009, though it does not mention the Recovery Act itself.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"national bureau of economic research\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3254, "completion_tokens": 5812, "total_tokens": 9066, "reasoning_tokens": 6191 }, "cost_usd": 0.0196159746, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.345663Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "It is a secondary educational textbook chapter on Pressbooks, an open publishing platform, with no named primary sources or citations in the excerpt. It provides general background rather than direct, sourced evidence on US employment and federal fiscal stimulus.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "pressbooks" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.5, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"It is a secondary educational textbook chapter on Pressbooks, an open publishing platform, with no named primary sources or citations in the excerpt. It provides general background rather than direct, sourced evidence on US employment and federal fiscal stimulus.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses automatic stabilizers and mentions the 2009 stimulus package as an example of discretionary fiscal policy, which is adjacent to the sub-claim, but it does not test or report on the Recovery Act's employment effects relative to Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, or the financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt only cites the 2009 stimulus package as an example of discretionary fiscal policy and does not evaluate its employment effects, the Recovery Act's causal role, or any counterfactual relative to Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"pressbooks\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2694, "completion_tokens": 1211, "total_tokens": 3905, "reasoning_tokens": 978 }, "cost_usd": 0.00249662, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.345780Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, an official statistical agency, and authored by BLS economists analyzing Current Employment Statistics survey data, making it an authoritative primary/official source on U.S. employment. It is not peer-reviewed in the academic sense but carries strong government editorial and data-integrity standards.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "national income and product accounts" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "conference board composite index of economic indicators" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "nber business cycle dating committee" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, an official statistical agency, and authored by BLS economists analyzing Current Employment Statistics survey data, making it an authoritative primary/official source on U.S. employment. It is not peer-reviewed in the academic sense but carries strong government editorial and data-integrity standards.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports on the moderation of US monthly job losses during 2009, which is the core phenomenon in the sub-claim, but it does not explicitly link this trend to the Recovery Act's enactment or assess the timing relative to February 2009.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document supports that monthly job losses shrank sharply after January 2009, but it also reports that nonfarm payroll employment still declined by 4.7 million in 2009 and does not state that employment stopped falling, so the compound sub-claim is mixed.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"current employment statistics survey\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"national income and product accounts\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"conference board composite index of economic indicators\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"nber business cycle dating committee\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3301, "completion_tokens": 8558, "total_tokens": 11859, "reasoning_tokens": 8257 }, "cost_usd": 0.02397585, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.345887Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.8, "quality_rationale": "Published by an academic labor-research institute and based on official BLS data plus cited research, giving it strong sourcing, though it appears to be a policy brief rather than a peer-reviewed study.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "study", "id": "von wachter 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.8, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Published by an academic labor-research institute and based on official BLS data plus cited research, giving it strong sourcing, though it appears to be a policy brief rather than a peer-reviewed study.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses long-term unemployment and the unemployment rate after the Great Recession, but does not report on monthly job losses or whether employment stopped falling after the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"mixed\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports unemployment rate data and long-term unemployment trends, but does not address monthly job losses or whether employment stopped falling, leaving the sub-claim unaddressed.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"von wachter 2010\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3060, "completion_tokens": 3572, "total_tokens": 6632, "reasoning_tokens": 3416 }, "cost_usd": 0.0070795596, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.346001Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official Council of Economic Advisers report to Congress mandated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, making it a primary government document with named authorship, methodology, and official data, though it reflects the executive branch's perspective.", "directness": 1.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "council of economic advisers" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "department of the treasury" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official Council of Economic Advisers report to Congress mandated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, making it a primary government document with named authorship, methodology, and official data, though it reflects the executive branch's perspective.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 1.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is a CEA quarterly report specifically assessing the ARRA's impact on employment, directly addressing the sub-claim about US job losses and employment trends after enactment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt discusses ARRA spending and overall GDP effects but does not address monthly job losses or whether employment stopped falling within about a year.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"council of economic advisers\\\"},\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of economic analysis\\\"},\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"department of the treasury\\\"}\\n]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3211, "completion_tokens": 7129, "total_tokens": 10340, "reasoning_tokens": 6931 }, "cost_usd": 0.020445774599999997, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.346111Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "Reputable newspaper report with editorial standards, quoting official government jobs data and named economists; it is secondary journalism rather than a peer-reviewed study or primary document.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": -1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "national institute of economic and social research" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "white house" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "societe generale" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Reputable newspaper report with editorial standards, quoting official government jobs data and named economists; it is secondary journalism rather than a peer-reviewed study or primary document.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports US monthly job losses and private-sector hiring in July 2010, which is adjacent to the claim about employment trends after the February 2009 Recovery Act but does not directly compare the period to the Act's enactment or assess whether losses shrank sharply within about a year.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": -1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.5, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The article reports that the US lost 131,000 jobs in July 2010 and revised June losses up to 221,000, showing employment was still falling well over a year after the Recovery Act, which contradicts the claim that losses shrank sharply and employment stopped falling within about a year.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"national institute of economic and social research\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"white house\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"societe generale\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2914, "completion_tokens": 2215, "total_tokens": 5129, "reasoning_tokens": 1907 }, "cost_usd": 0.0038558796, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.346220Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official Federal Reserve Monetary Policy Report, a primary government document with institutional authority and named official sourcing, though it is a policy report rather than a definitive raw data record.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federal reserve board" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official Federal Reserve Monetary Policy Report, a primary government document with institutional authority and named official sourcing, though it is a policy report rather than a definitive raw data record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document broadly credits monetary and fiscal stimulus with supporting the 2009 recovery while noting continued employment contraction, but it does not mention the Recovery Act specifically or isolate its employment effects from Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, or financial rescue measures.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document states that monetary and fiscal policies supported activity and consumer spending, but it does not specifically credit the Recovery Act, isolate its employment effects, or compare them with what Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial rescue would have produced alone.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"federal reserve board\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2831, "completion_tokens": 1691, "total_tokens": 4522, "reasoning_tokens": 1467 }, "cost_usd": 0.003372295, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.346333Z" }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "This is an official primary document from the Executive Office of the President's Council of Economic Advisers, a government body statutorily charged with reporting to Congress, using independent estimation methods and outside analysts. It is a formal official inquiry with named institutional authorship, though it is an interested party defending its own stimulus program, which is a potential conflict of interest.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.2, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "council of economic advisers" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is an official primary document from the Executive Office of the President's Council of Economic Advisers, a government body statutorily charged with reporting to Congress, using independent estimation methods and outside analysts. It is a formal official inquiry with named institutional authorship, though it is an interested party defending its own stimulus program, which is a potential conflict of interest.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document directly estimates the ARRA's impact on employment relative to a no-ARRA counterfactual, but it does not specifically isolate that effect from Federal Reserve policy, automatic stabilizers, or financial-sector rescue measures.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.2, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The report asserts that CEA methods estimate ARRA raised GDP relative to a no-policy counterfactual, indirectly supporting a positive employment effect, but it does not isolate employment effects from the Fed, automatic stabilizers, or the financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"council of economic advisers\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of economic analysis\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3183, "completion_tokens": 2721, "total_tokens": 5904, "reasoning_tokens": 2498 }, "cost_usd": 0.008198525, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.346441Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "BLS is the official US statistical agency and primary source for employment data with strong editorial standards and no conflicts; the excerpt itself is off-topic and contains anomalous test text but does not change the publisher's track record for official records.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS is the official US statistical agency and primary source for employment data with strong editorial standards and no conflicts; the excerpt itself is off-topic and contains anomalous test text but does not change the publisher's track record for official records.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt reports only on import/export price changes and general BLS data browsing, with no mention of employment, job losses, or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document excerpt addresses only import/export prices and contains no data or statements on employment or job losses.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2467, "completion_tokens": 2058, "total_tokens": 4525, "reasoning_tokens": 1887 }, "cost_usd": 0.007640396, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.346574Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "BLS is the official US statistical agency and primary source for employment data with strong editorial standards and no conflicts; the excerpt itself is off-topic and contains anomalous test text but does not change the publisher's track record for official records.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS is the official US statistical agency and primary source for employment data with strong editorial standards and no conflicts; the excerpt itself is off-topic and contains anomalous test text but does not change the publisher's track record for official records.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt reports only on import/export price changes and general BLS data browsing, with no mention of employment, job losses, or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document excerpt discusses only import/export prices with no mention of employment or job losses.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 733, "completion_tokens": 419, "total_tokens": 1152, "reasoning_tokens": 379 }, "cost_usd": 0.00176215, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.346574Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "CRS report published via congress.gov; authoritative secondary analysis of primary legislation (P.L. 111-5) with direct citations to statutes and programs, produced under strict nonpartisan congressional standards with no conflicts of interest.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "american recovery and reinvestment act 2009" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"CRS report published via congress.gov; authoritative secondary analysis of primary legislation (P.L. 111-5) with direct citations to statutes and programs, produced under strict nonpartisan congressional standards with no conflicts of interest.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document details ARRA unemployment insurance provisions and enactment date but reports nothing on job losses, employment levels, or post-Act labor market trends.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt addresses only UI benefit extensions and financing under ARRA with no data or statements on job losses or employment levels.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"american recovery and reinvestment act 2009\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3508, "completion_tokens": 1940, "total_tokens": 5448, "reasoning_tokens": 1762 }, "cost_usd": 0.009367509999999999, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.346737Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "BLS is the definitive primary producer of CES employment statistics with no conflicts and strong editorial standards; this is an official agency explanatory article drawing directly on its own records and historical methodology.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us constitution" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.9,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS is the definitive primary producer of CES employment statistics with no conflicts and strong editorial standards; this is an official agency explanatory article drawing directly on its own records and historical methodology.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document discusses only census-related temporary employment effects on CES data in 2020 and decennial census years, with no reference to 2009, the Recovery Act, or post-2009 job-loss trends.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document discusses 2020 census hiring effects on CES data and makes no reference to 2009 employment trends or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us constitution\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3380, "completion_tokens": 3980, "total_tokens": 7360, "reasoning_tokens": 3778 }, "cost_usd": 0.018373399999999998, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.346848Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "Reputable analysis by named academic and Moody's chief economist using proprietary model; published by economy.com/Moody's Analytics but not peer-reviewed or primary data.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "moodys analytics model" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "economycom" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Reputable analysis by named academic and Moody's chief economist using proprietary model; published by economy.com/Moody's Analytics but not peer-reviewed or primary data.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document simulates effects of fiscal stimulus (including Recovery Act) on employment while separating financial policies and Fed actions, directly addressing a closely related counterfactual question.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.7, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Model simulation estimates substantial positive GDP/employment effects from fiscal stimulus separate from financial policies and Fed actions.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"moodys analytics model\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"alan blinder mark zandi\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"economycom\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3760, "completion_tokens": 3644, "total_tokens": 7404, "reasoning_tokens": 3462 }, "cost_usd": 0.013768972599999998, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.346962Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "Secondary summary by a reputable fiscal-policy organization that directly cites and quotes the CBO's official estimates and multipliers as its primary source, with transparent discussion of methodological limits.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Secondary summary by a reputable fiscal-policy organization that directly cites and quotes the CBO's official estimates and multipliers as its primary source, with transparent discussion of methodological limits.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document reports CBO estimates of ARRA's incremental effects on 2009 employment and GDP but does not address isolation from Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, or financial rescues nor cover the full 2009-2012 period.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":1,\\\"strength\\\":0.6,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"Document reports CBO estimates that ARRA raised 2009 employment by 600k-1.5M and GDP by 1.2-3.2pp relative to baseline without it.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3285, "completion_tokens": 1691, "total_tokens": 4976, "reasoning_tokens": 1495 }, "cost_usd": 0.00738608, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.347066Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "Secondary commentary by a think-tank economist (former Biden advisor) published in Washington Post and hosted on faculty.fiu.edu; cites Blinder & Zandi (2015) but offers no primary data, peer review, or original records itself.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.5, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Secondary commentary by a think-tank economist (former Biden advisor) published in Washington Post and hosted on faculty.fiu.edu; cites Blinder & Zandi (2015) but offers no primary data, peer review, or original records itself.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt discusses the Recovery Act alongside Fed policy and bailouts, references Blinder-Zandi 2015 on quantifying their separate impacts, and poses the exact question of whether these interventions succeeded.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Excerpt describes Recovery Act and other policies but poses unanswered questions on impacts without any data, estimate, or conclusion on employment effects net of Fed, stabilizers, or rescues.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"blinder zandi 2015\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3467, "completion_tokens": 2200, "total_tokens": 5667, "reasoning_tokens": 2002 }, "cost_usd": 0.00988253, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.347168Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 1.0, "quality_rationale": "BLS.gov is the official U.S. statistical agency producing primary employment data via standardized household and establishment surveys; this is a direct monthly release (USDL-10-1519) with transparent methodology and no intermediary interpretation.", "directness": 1.0, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 1.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS.gov is the official U.S. statistical agency producing primary employment data via standardized household and establishment surveys; this is a direct monthly release (USDL-10-1519) with transparent methodology and no intermediary interpretation.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 1.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS October 2010 jobs report supplies the exact monthly payroll change series (with chart) covering Feb 2009–Feb 2010 and the subsequent turning point.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.8,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS data show nonfarm payrolls rising since Dec 2009 (within ~10 months of Feb 2009) after earlier sharp declines, with Oct 2010 adding 151k.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current population survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bls\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 4328, "completion_tokens": 2941, "total_tokens": 7269, "reasoning_tokens": 2722 }, "cost_usd": 0.013135862, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.347276Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "BLS is the official US statistical agency with primary responsibility for employment data collection via surveys like CPS and CES; the listed items are its own analyses and data releases with transparent methodology and no evident conflicts.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS is the official US statistical agency with primary responsibility for employment data collection via surveys like CPS and CES; the listed items are its own analyses and data releases with transparent methodology and no evident conflicts.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided document is merely a 2009 archive index of BLS article titles with no data, analysis, or reporting on monthly job losses or employment trends after February 2009.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is merely a 2009 archive index of BLS article titles with no data or statements on post-February 2009 monthly job losses or employment trends.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3848, "completion_tokens": 2255, "total_tokens": 6103, "reasoning_tokens": 2060 }, "cost_usd": 0.009416230000000001, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.347389Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "BLS is the official US statistical agency with primary responsibility for employment data collection via surveys like CPS and CES; the listed items are its own analyses and data releases with transparent methodology and no evident conflicts.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS is the official US statistical agency with primary responsibility for employment data collection via surveys like CPS and CES; the listed items are its own analyses and data releases with transparent methodology and no evident conflicts.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The provided document is merely a 2009 archive index of BLS article titles with no data, analysis, or reporting on monthly job losses or employment trends after February 2009.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is merely a 2009 archive index of article titles on projections and unrelated labor topics, with no data or statements on monthly job losses or employment trends after February 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 1126, "completion_tokens": 541, "total_tokens": 1667, "reasoning_tokens": 479 }, "cost_usd": 0.0025584, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.347389Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "U.S. Census Bureau CES working paper using primary matched employer-employee microdata; high editorial standards and track record for official statistical research.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "matched employer employee data" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"U.S. Census Bureau CES working paper using primary matched employer-employee microdata; high editorial standards and track record for official statistical research.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document discusses 2007-09 recession unemployment causes and job tenure shifts but makes no reference to post-2009 employment recovery timing or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document discusses cyclic vs structural unemployment causes in 2007-09 recession but does not address job loss timing or employment recovery after Feb 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"current population survey tenure supplements\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"matched employer employee data\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us census bureau\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3250, "completion_tokens": 1924, "total_tokens": 5174, "reasoning_tokens": 1709 }, "cost_usd": 0.00794149, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.347567Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "U.S. Census Bureau CES working paper using primary matched employer-employee microdata; high editorial standards and track record for official statistical research.", "directness": 0.0, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "matched employer employee data" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"U.S. Census Bureau CES working paper using primary matched employer-employee microdata; high editorial standards and track record for official statistical research.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.0, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document discusses 2007-09 recession unemployment causes and job tenure shifts but makes no reference to post-2009 employment recovery timing or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\":0,\\\"strength\\\":0,\\\"basis\\\":\\\"assertion\\\",\\\"rationale\\\":\\\"Document addresses 2007-09 recession unemployment causes but contains no data or statements on monthly job-loss timing or stabilization near early 2010.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"current population survey tenure supplements\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"matched employer employee data\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us census bureau\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 977, "completion_tokens": 567, "total_tokens": 1544, "reasoning_tokens": 521 }, "cost_usd": 0.00243715, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.347567Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Peer-reviewed article in American Economic Journal: Economic Policy (top field journal) by FRBSF economist, drawing on official ARRA administrative allocations and exogenous formula factors as instruments.", "directness": 1.0, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "recoverygov" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "fhwa" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Peer-reviewed article in American Economic Journal: Economic Policy (top field journal) by FRBSF economist, drawing on official ARRA administrative allocations and exogenous formula factors as instruments.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 1.0,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The paper directly estimates ARRA's state-level jobs multiplier via exogenous allocation variation, isolating its employment effects from monetary policy and other macro factors in 2009.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": 1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.8,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Paper's cross-state IV estimates find ARRA spending produced ~8 jobs per $1M (positive multiplier) after isolating from monetary policy and other macro factors via exogenous allocation formulas.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"recoverygov\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bls\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"fhwa\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3774, "completion_tokens": 5186, "total_tokens": 8960, "reasoning_tokens": 4972 }, "cost_usd": 0.020234384, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.347718Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "BLS.gov publication (Monthly Labor Review) by agency economist using agency's own CES primary survey data; official government statistical source with strong track record and no evident conflicts.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bls monthly labor review" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS.gov publication (Monthly Labor Review) by agency economist using agency's own CES primary survey data; official government statistical source with strong track record and no evident conflicts.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document reports the Feb 2010 employment trough and subsequent growth but contains no reference to the Recovery Act or any policy timing, addressing only the raw employment-turnaround fact.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.8, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS CES data show nonfarm employment reached its trough in Feb 2010 (one year after Recovery Act) after which it rose steadily, confirming losses ended within the stated window.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls current employment statistics survey\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls monthly labor review\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3688, "completion_tokens": 1943, "total_tokens": 5631, "reasoning_tokens": 1727 }, "cost_usd": 0.00846927, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.347865Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.3, "quality_rationale": "IMF's Finance & Development is a general-audience magazine, not a peer-reviewed journal or primary data source; the excerpt presents interpretive advocacy with no visible citations, methods, or named records.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "moodys analytics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bea nipa" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.3, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"IMF's Finance & Development is a general-audience magazine, not a peer-reviewed journal or primary data source; the excerpt presents interpretive advocacy with no visible citations, methods, or named records.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document evaluates combined fiscal/monetary/financial policies (including ARRA stimulus) as key to faster recovery and resumed job growth versus no aggressive response, but does not isolate Recovery Act effects on 2009-2012 employment net of Fed, stabilizers, and rescues.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document attributes recovery to combined monetary/fiscal/financial policies without isolating Recovery Act effects beyond Fed, stabilizers, and rescues.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"blinder zandi 2010\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"moodys analytics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bea nipa\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bls ces\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3584, "completion_tokens": 7368, "total_tokens": 10952, "reasoning_tokens": 7143 }, "cost_usd": 0.025735321999999998, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.348043Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "GAO report to Congress using literature review, 21 expert interviews, agency consultations, and evaluation of primary studies; official nonpartisan inquiry with transparent methods and high editorial standards.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "government accountability office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"GAO report to Congress using literature review, 21 expert interviews, agency consultations, and evaluation of primary studies; official nonpartisan inquiry with transparent methods and high editorial standards.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document discusses automatic stabilizers' general effects in downturns but makes no reference to the Recovery Act or its incremental employment impact beyond stabilizers, Fed policy, or financial rescues.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document addresses only automatic stabilizers and makes no reference to the Recovery Act or its incremental effects beyond them.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"government accountability office\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3475, "completion_tokens": 3344, "total_tokens": 6819, "reasoning_tokens": 3184 }, "cost_usd": 0.013397114, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.348221Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "GAO report to Congress using literature review, 21 expert interviews, agency consultations, and evaluation of primary studies; official nonpartisan inquiry with transparent methods and high editorial standards.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "government accountability office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"GAO report to Congress using literature review, 21 expert interviews, agency consultations, and evaluation of primary studies; official nonpartisan inquiry with transparent methods and high editorial standards.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document discusses automatic stabilizers' general effects in downturns but makes no reference to the Recovery Act or its incremental employment impact beyond stabilizers, Fed policy, or financial rescues.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document discusses automatic stabilizers' effects but makes no reference to the Recovery Act or its incremental impact beyond stabilizers.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"government accountability office\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 991, "completion_tokens": 500, "total_tokens": 1491, "reasoning_tokens": 455 }, "cost_usd": 0.00228715, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.348221Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "IMF eLibrary F&D is a reputable institutional magazine featuring named economists (Blinder/Zandi) but functions as secondary reporting rather than primary data, peer-reviewed research, or official statistical records.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.3, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "imf researchers" }, { "type": "study", "id": "kose prasad emerging markets analysis" }, { "type": "study", "id": "arora vamvakidis china spillover analysis" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\n \\\"quality\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"IMF eLibrary F&D is a reputable institutional magazine featuring named economists (Blinder/Zandi) but functions as secondary reporting rather than primary data, peer-reviewed research, or official statistical records.\\\"\\n}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document summarizes Blinder-Zandi analysis of US stimulus effects (preventing recession), which directly addresses fiscal stimulus impact but only as part of the broader stimulus package rather than isolating the Recovery Act's employment effects from Fed/automatic-stabilizer/financial-rescue policies.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.3, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt relays Blinder and Zandi's claim of positive US stimulus effects that prevented ongoing recession but does not address the Recovery Act, employment levels, or isolation from Fed/automatic-stabilizer/financial-rescue policies.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"blinder zandi stimulus analysis\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"imf researchers\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"kose prasad emerging markets analysis\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"arora vamvakidis china spillover analysis\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3368, "completion_tokens": 2425, "total_tokens": 5793, "reasoning_tokens": 2125 }, "cost_usd": 0.00934576, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.348391Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Census.gov article drawing directly on its own Annual Survey of Public Employment & Payroll (ASPEP) primary data plus BLS records; official statistical agency with rigorous collection standards, though the piece is a summary rather than raw tabulated records.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "annual survey of public employment payroll" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Census.gov article drawing directly on its own Annual Survey of Public Employment & Payroll (ASPEP) primary data plus BLS records; official statistical agency with rigorous collection standards, though the piece is a summary rather than raw tabulated records.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document reports 2009-2010 employment decline timelines for public vs. private sectors but does not examine monthly job-loss shrinkage, overall US employment stabilization, or any link to the February 2009 Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document discusses timing of public/private employment declines around 2009-2010 but does not address overall US job losses stopping or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"annual survey of public employment payroll\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls current employment statistics\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"census bureau\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3603, "completion_tokens": 3984, "total_tokens": 7587, "reasoning_tokens": 4000 }, "cost_usd": 0.01668349, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.348518Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "UC Berkeley Labor Center is a reputable academic publisher with strong editorial standards and labor-economics track record; the excerpt relies on official employment statistics and cites named secondary briefs rather than presenting primary fiscal-stimulus data or peer-reviewed analysis.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "center on wage and employment dynamics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "economic policy institute" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"UC Berkeley Labor Center is a reputable academic publisher with strong editorial standards and labor-economics track record; the excerpt relies on official employment statistics and cites named secondary briefs rather than presenting primary fiscal-stimulus data or peer-reviewed analysis.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document reports US nonfarm job losses continuing through February 2010 (exactly one year after Feb 2009) before recovery began, directly addressing the employment stabilization timing in the sub-claim though without any mention of the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document states total job losses through Feb 2010 and later recovery but never mentions the Recovery Act, monthly loss rates, or any sharp shrinkage after Feb 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"center on wage and employment dynamics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"economic policy institute\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3626, "completion_tokens": 9548, "total_tokens": 13174, "reasoning_tokens": 10095 }, "cost_usd": 0.03816672, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.348663Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "UC Berkeley Labor Center is a reputable academic publisher with strong editorial standards and labor-economics track record; the excerpt relies on official employment statistics and cites named secondary briefs rather than presenting primary fiscal-stimulus data or peer-reviewed analysis.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "center on wage and employment dynamics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "economic policy institute" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"UC Berkeley Labor Center is a reputable academic publisher with strong editorial standards and labor-economics track record; the excerpt relies on official employment statistics and cites named secondary briefs rather than presenting primary fiscal-stimulus data or peer-reviewed analysis.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document reports US nonfarm job losses continuing through February 2010 (exactly one year after Feb 2009) before recovery began, directly addressing the employment stabilization timing in the sub-claim though without any mention of the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.8, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document reports 8.7M jobs lost through Feb 2010 (one year after Feb 2009) with full nonfarm recovery only in 2014, directly showing losses did not stop quickly.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"center on wage and employment dynamics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"economic policy institute\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 1045, "completion_tokens": 561, "total_tokens": 1606, "reasoning_tokens": 493 }, "cost_usd": 0.00250715, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.348663Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official BLS publication presenting primary data from its own Current Employment Statistics survey; authoritative government statistical agency with transparent methodology and no conflicts of interest.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official BLS publication presenting primary data from its own Current Employment Statistics survey; authoritative government statistical agency with transparent methodology and no conflicts of interest.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The BLS report directly documents the sharp moderation in monthly job losses throughout 2009 (from 691k in Q1 to 69k in Q4) but does not address whether losses reached zero or reference the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document shows sharp moderation in losses (691k to 69k monthly) but continued decline through Dec 2009, so addresses only the first half of the 'and' claim.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics program\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2744, "completion_tokens": 5369, "total_tokens": 8113, "reasoning_tokens": 5174 }, "cost_usd": 0.017433428, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.348831Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "federalreservehistory.org is an official institutional site with strong track record for factual summaries drawing on primary government data (BEA, BLS, etc.); the piece is secondary historical narrative rather than peer-reviewed research or raw primary records.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "author_group", "id": "nber business cycle dating committee" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federal reserve board" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"federalreservehistory.org is an official institutional site with strong track record for factual summaries drawing on primary government data (BEA, BLS, etc.); the piece is secondary historical narrative rather than peer-reviewed research or raw primary records.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Mentions ARRA 2009 and Fed actions as responses to the recession but provides no analysis of employment effects or counterfactuals isolating the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document mentions enactment of the Recovery Act among other policies but offers no observation or estimate of its causal effects on employment.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"nber business cycle dating committee\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of economic analysis\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"federal reserve board\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3778, "completion_tokens": 2778, "total_tokens": 6556, "reasoning_tokens": 2554 }, "cost_usd": 0.011298892999999999, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.348960Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "Liberty Street Economics is a reputable NY Fed blog with economist authors and editorial standards; the post is secondary analysis summarizing academic research rather than a primary record or peer-reviewed study.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "post crisis academic research on qe" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Liberty Street Economics is a reputable NY Fed blog with economist authors and editorial standards; the post is secondary analysis summarizing academic research rather than a primary record or peer-reviewed study.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document examines effects of QE/Fed policy in 2008-09 recession but contains no reference to the Recovery Act or fiscal stimulus impacts on employment.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document discusses only QE and Fed monetary policy effects with no mention of the Recovery Act or fiscal stimulus.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"post crisis academic research on qe\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3379, "completion_tokens": 2084, "total_tokens": 5463, "reasoning_tokens": 1922 }, "cost_usd": 0.00871138, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.349069Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official Monetary Policy Report submitted to Congress by the Federal Reserve pursuant to statute; primary institutional document from a publisher with impeccable track record and no evident conflicts.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreserve" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official Monetary Policy Report submitted to Congress by the Federal Reserve pursuant to statute; primary institutional document from a publisher with impeccable track record and no evident conflicts.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document is a Feb 2009 Fed monetary-policy outlook report focused on 2008 financial crisis and Fed actions; it predates or coincides with but never mentions the Recovery Act or its employment effects.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The Feb 2009 Fed report discusses 2008 economic conditions and monetary policy but makes no reference to the Recovery Act or its later employment effects.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"federalreserve\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3464, "completion_tokens": 2898, "total_tokens": 6362, "reasoning_tokens": 2722 }, "cost_usd": 0.010948438000000001, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.349172Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official Monetary Policy Report submitted to Congress by the Federal Reserve pursuant to statute; primary institutional document from a publisher with impeccable track record and no evident conflicts.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreserve" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official Monetary Policy Report submitted to Congress by the Federal Reserve pursuant to statute; primary institutional document from a publisher with impeccable track record and no evident conflicts.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document is a Feb 2009 Fed monetary-policy outlook report focused on 2008 financial crisis and Fed actions; it predates or coincides with but never mentions the Recovery Act or its employment effects.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The Feb 2009 Fed monetary policy report discusses 2008 financial events and outlook but makes no reference to the Recovery Act or its employment effects.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"federalreserve\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 1017, "completion_tokens": 522, "total_tokens": 1539, "reasoning_tokens": 468 }, "cost_usd": 0.00237465, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.349172Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "NBER working paper from a leading economics research organization with transparent author disclosures and no conflicts, but explicitly not peer-reviewed and positioned as preliminary discussion draft rather than final publication; relies on secondary simulation calibrated to empirical literature rather than new primary data.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "nber working paper 34411" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"NBER working paper from a leading economics research organization with transparent author disclosures and no conflicts, but explicitly not peer-reviewed and positioned as preliminary discussion draft rather than final publication; relies on secondary simulation calibrated to empirical literature rather than new primary data.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The paper simulates the Great Recession counterfactual without discretionary fiscal stimulus (such as the Recovery Act) while enhancing automatic stabilizers, directly addressing their relative employment effects beyond other policies.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.6, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The paper's simulation of the Great Recession without discretionary fiscal stimulus (such as the Recovery Act) finds that more sustained stimulus would have reduced unemployment more rapidly, implying the actual stimulus raised employment beyond automatic stabilizers alone.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"nber working paper 34411\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3425, "completion_tokens": 2182, "total_tokens": 5607, "reasoning_tokens": 1969 }, "cost_usd": 0.00887658, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.349365Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.3, "quality_rationale": "White House press statement (advocacy document) that quotes and links to a CBO report but adds partisan framing; secondary source with no original data, methods, or primary records of its own.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.3, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"White House press statement (advocacy document) that quotes and links to a CBO report but adds partisan framing; secondary source with no original data, methods, or primary records of its own.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports CBO estimates of the Recovery Act's effects on employment levels and unemployment in mid-2010 but does not address monthly job-loss trajectories or the timing of employment stabilization within one year of February 2009.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document cites CBO estimates of higher employment levels in mid-2010 due to the Act but does not address monthly job-loss trends or when employment stopped falling after Feb 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3504, "completion_tokens": 1769, "total_tokens": 5273, "reasoning_tokens": 1551 }, "cost_usd": 0.0077497, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.349549Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.3, "quality_rationale": "White House press statement (advocacy document) that quotes and links to a CBO report but adds partisan framing; secondary source with no original data, methods, or primary records of its own.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.3, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"White House press statement (advocacy document) that quotes and links to a CBO report but adds partisan framing; secondary source with no original data, methods, or primary records of its own.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document reports CBO estimates of ARRA's direct effects on 2010 employment and unemployment but does not isolate those effects from Fed policy, automatic stabilizers or financial rescues.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.5, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"CBO estimate cited in the statement attributes 1.4-3.3M jobs and 0.7-1.8pp lower unemployment directly to the Recovery Act in 2010 but does not reference or isolate effects beyond Fed policy, stabilizers or financial rescue.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3544, "completion_tokens": 2007, "total_tokens": 5551, "reasoning_tokens": 1780 }, "cost_usd": 0.0080587, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.349647Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "Census Bureau CES working paper using primary administrative records on job flows; authors are agency staff but paper carries explicit disclaimer that it has not undergone Census review or endorsement and represents only authors' views.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Census Bureau CES working paper using primary administrative records on job flows; authors are agency staff but paper carries explicit disclaimer that it has not undergone Census review or endorsement and represents only authors' views.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The paper analyzes job-to-job flows and nonemployment rates through 2010 in the context of the 2008-09 recession but makes no reference to monthly job losses, the Recovery Act, or the specific post-February 2009 timing of employment stabilization.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document analyzes job-to-job flows and recessionary drops through 2010 but makes no statements on post-Feb 2009 job-loss shrinkage or employment stabilization timing.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us census bureau\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3497, "completion_tokens": 2504, "total_tokens": 6001, "reasoning_tokens": 2295 }, "cost_usd": 0.00957971, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.349788Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official congressional hearing record (House Budget Committee, Serial No. 111-29) published by GPO and hosted on congress.gov; constitutes a primary government document from an official inquiry into the 2009 stimulus.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "house committee on the budget hearing july 14 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official congressional hearing record (House Budget Committee, Serial No. 111-29) published by GPO and hosted on congress.gov; constitutes a primary government document from an official inquiry into the 2009 stimulus.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Hearing titled as 2010 update on the Recovery Act's effects directly encompasses employment outcomes as a core topic.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt contains only hearing metadata and no data or statements on employment trends.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"house committee on the budget hearing july 14 2010\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 4413, "completion_tokens": 1576, "total_tokens": 5989, "reasoning_tokens": 1411 }, "cost_usd": 0.0089037, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.349961Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "BLS is the official US statistical agency producing primary CPS employment data with rigorous methodology and no conflicts; this is an official analysis of those records rather than raw tables or peer-reviewed academic work.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.4, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "national bureau of economic research" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS is the official US statistical agency producing primary CPS employment data with rigorous methodology and no conflicts; this is an official analysis of those records rather than raw tables or peer-reviewed academic work.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document reports CPS data on the exact 2009-2010 employment and unemployment turning points but does not reference the Recovery Act or test the sub-claim's timing attribution.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.4, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document reports unemployment peaking Oct 2009 then trending down from Apr 2010 and labor market recovery beginning in 2010, consistent with employment losses ending within ~1 year of Feb 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"current population survey\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"national bureau of economic research\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3653, "completion_tokens": 8067, "total_tokens": 11720, "reasoning_tokens": 8589 }, "cost_usd": 0.03252696, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.350121Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official CBO report fulfilling statutory requirement, using models and historical evidence from a nonpartisan government agency with strong editorial standards; not raw primary data.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official CBO report fulfilling statutory requirement, using models and historical evidence from a nonpartisan government agency with strong editorial standards; not raw primary data.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The CBO report estimates ARRA's overall effects on US employment levels in Q2 2010 (roughly 14 months after enactment), directly addressing employment outcomes in the relevant post-2009 window though not the precise monthly trajectory of job losses.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document discusses CBO estimates of ARRA's effects on employment but reports no actual data on job losses or employment levels over time.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2564, "completion_tokens": 1565, "total_tokens": 4129, "reasoning_tokens": 1376 }, "cost_usd": 0.00625838, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.350245Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official CBO report fulfilling statutory requirement, using models and historical evidence from a nonpartisan government agency with strong editorial standards; not raw primary data.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official CBO report fulfilling statutory requirement, using models and historical evidence from a nonpartisan government agency with strong editorial standards; not raw primary data.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The CBO report estimates ARRA's overall effects on US employment levels in Q2 2010 (roughly 14 months after enactment), directly addressing employment outcomes in the relevant post-2009 window though not the precise monthly trajectory of job losses.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document provides model-based estimates of ARRA's employment effects in 2010 but contains no data or statements on actual job-loss trends or when employment stopped falling after Feb 2009.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 809, "completion_tokens": 458, "total_tokens": 1267, "reasoning_tokens": 397 }, "cost_usd": 0.00195465, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.350245Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official CBO report fulfilling statutory requirement, using models and historical evidence from a nonpartisan government agency with strong editorial standards; not raw primary data.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official CBO report fulfilling statutory requirement, using models and historical evidence from a nonpartisan government agency with strong editorial standards; not raw primary data.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document reports CBO estimates of ARRA's isolated effects on 2010 employment/output using models of past policies, directly addressing ARRA's employment impact but only for one quarter within the 2009-2012 window and without explicit mention of the listed counterfactual policies.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document estimates ARRA's 2010Q2 employment effects via models but does not address the 2009-2012 period, compare against Fed/automatic-stabilizer/TARP counterfactuals, or claim effects were major.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 2604, "completion_tokens": 1863, "total_tokens": 4467, "reasoning_tokens": 1649 }, "cost_usd": 0.00691898, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.350376Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.3, "quality_rationale": "White House promotional page (advocacy document) with named citations to CBO and private economists but no primary data, methods, or raw records; inherent conflict of interest as self-reported success narrative from the policy's sponsor.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "congressional budget office" }, { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "white house" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.3, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"White House promotional page (advocacy document) with named citations to CBO and private economists but no primary data, methods, or raw records; inherent conflict of interest as self-reported success narrative from the policy's sponsor.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document discusses initial job losses, Recovery Act enactment date, and later overall growth/job gains but does not report or test the specific timing or sharp shrinkage of monthly losses within one year.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document asserts overall success and later job gains but supplies no data or timeline on monthly job-loss shrinkage or employment stabilization by early 2010.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"congressional budget office recovery act estimate\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"blinder zandi economic analysis\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"the white house\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3429, "completion_tokens": 1934, "total_tokens": 5363, "reasoning_tokens": 1714 }, "cost_usd": 0.008422849999999999, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.350491Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "U.S. GAO report is an official congressional inquiry that reviews and cites multiple studies and official records; GAO maintains high editorial standards as a nonpartisan primary government source with no evident conflicts.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "studies gao reviewed" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "congressional budget office" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"U.S. GAO report is an official congressional inquiry that reviews and cites multiple studies and official records; GAO maintains high editorial standards as a nonpartisan primary government source with no evident conflicts.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document examines effects of automatic stabilizers and notes difficulty separating them from discretionary policies but does not address the Recovery Act or its incremental employment impact.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document addresses only automatic stabilizers and notes difficulty isolating them from discretionary policy but makes no reference to the Recovery Act or its incremental effects beyond stabilizers.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"studies gao reviewed\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"congressional budget office\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3265, "completion_tokens": 4074, "total_tokens": 7339, "reasoning_tokens": 3895 }, "cost_usd": 0.015772039999999998, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.350649Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "BLS is the official US statistical agency producing primary QCEW employment and wage records via mandatory employer reporting; this is an official government data publication rather than analysis or secondary reporting.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "qcew" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS is the official US statistical agency producing primary QCEW employment and wage records via mandatory employer reporting; this is an official government data publication rather than analysis or secondary reporting.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document supplies 2010 national employment aggregates that temporally overlap the post-2009 period but contains no analysis of monthly job-loss trends or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt describes a data publication but provides no employment figures, trends, or analysis addressing job losses or employment changes around 2009-2010.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"qcew\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3523, "completion_tokens": 5135, "total_tokens": 8658, "reasoning_tokens": 4967 }, "cost_usd": 0.017672838, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.350799Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "BLS is the official US statistical agency producing primary QCEW employment and wage records via mandatory employer reporting; this is an official government data publication rather than analysis or secondary reporting.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "qcew" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS is the official US statistical agency producing primary QCEW employment and wage records via mandatory employer reporting; this is an official government data publication rather than analysis or secondary reporting.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document supplies 2010 national employment aggregates that temporally overlap the post-2009 period but contains no analysis of monthly job-loss trends or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Excerpt describes publication format and access but contains no data, observations, or statements on job losses or employment trends around 2009-2010.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"qcew\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 1021, "completion_tokens": 691, "total_tokens": 1712, "reasoning_tokens": 638 }, "cost_usd": 0.00280215, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.350799Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Bureau of Labor Statistics is the official US statistical agency producing primary employment data via standardized surveys with transparent methods and no commercial conflicts; the excerpt is an official archive index of BLS reports rather than secondary journalism or advocacy.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Bureau of Labor Statistics is the official US statistical agency producing primary employment data via standardized surveys with transparent methods and no commercial conflicts; the excerpt is an official archive index of BLS reports rather than secondary journalism or advocacy.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The BLS archive lists 2010 articles on recession-era employment and unemployment trends but contains no reference to the Recovery Act or the specific post-February 2009 job-loss trajectory described in the sub-claim.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document is merely an index of BLS article titles with no data or statements on job losses, employment trends, or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 4279, "completion_tokens": 2286, "total_tokens": 6565, "reasoning_tokens": 2098 }, "cost_usd": 0.0102961072, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.351259Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official White House CEA report drawing on OMB spend-out data and named primary fiscal categories; constitutes an official inquiry from the administering agency rather than peer-reviewed academic work or raw administrative records.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.4, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "romer and bernstein 2009" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "omb" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official White House CEA report drawing on OMB spend-out data and named primary fiscal categories; constitutes an official inquiry from the administering agency rather than peer-reviewed academic work or raw administrative records.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports CEA estimates of ARRA's aggregate employment effects using fiscal multipliers, directly addressing the Recovery Act's incremental job impact but without explicit isolation from Fed policy, stabilizers, or financial rescues.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.4, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document presents pre-data estimates and multipliers projecting positive ARRA employment effects but does not report observed outcomes or isolate effects beyond Fed policy, stabilizers, or financial rescues.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"romer and bernstein 2009\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"omb\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3576, "completion_tokens": 5280, "total_tokens": 8856, "reasoning_tokens": 5452 }, "cost_usd": 0.02199586, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.351358Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official White House CEA report drawing on OMB spend-out data and named primary fiscal categories; constitutes an official inquiry from the administering agency rather than peer-reviewed academic work or raw administrative records.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": -1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "study", "id": "romer and bernstein 2009" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "omb" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official White House CEA report drawing on OMB spend-out data and named primary fiscal categories; constitutes an official inquiry from the administering agency rather than peer-reviewed academic work or raw administrative records.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document reports CEA estimates of ARRA's aggregate employment effects using fiscal multipliers, directly addressing the Recovery Act's incremental job impact but without explicit isolation from Fed policy, stabilizers, or financial rescues.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": -1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.6, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The document presents CEA estimates and methodology asserting that ARRA had substantial positive effects on job creation and retention, directly implying it was a major cause of higher employment.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"study\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"romer and bernstein 2009\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"omb\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 1048, "completion_tokens": 614, "total_tokens": 1662, "reasoning_tokens": 556 }, "cost_usd": 0.0026434, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.351358Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "Secondary educational textbook material from an open course platform with no primary data, citations, or original analysis on 2009-2012 stimulus and employment; standard explanatory content with general references only.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "lumen learning macroeconomics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.5, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Secondary educational textbook material from an open course platform with no primary data, citations, or original analysis on 2009-2012 stimulus and employment; standard explanatory content with general references only.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document defines discretionary fiscal policy and cites the 2009 stimulus only as an illustrative example while explaining automatic stabilizers, without any analysis of employment effects or counterfactuals.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document mentions 2009 stimulus only as example of discretionary policy and explains automatic stabilizers without assessing Recovery Act employment effects beyond them.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"lumen learning macroeconomics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3207, "completion_tokens": 1855, "total_tokens": 5062, "reasoning_tokens": 1674 }, "cost_usd": 0.007705180000000001, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.351529Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "Secondary educational textbook material from an open course platform with no primary data, citations, or original analysis on 2009-2012 stimulus and employment; standard explanatory content with general references only.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "lumen learning macroeconomics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": true, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.5, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Secondary educational textbook material from an open course platform with no primary data, citations, or original analysis on 2009-2012 stimulus and employment; standard explanatory content with general references only.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document defines discretionary fiscal policy and cites the 2009 stimulus only as an illustrative example while explaining automatic stabilizers, without any analysis of employment effects or counterfactuals.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Textbook explains automatic stabilizers separately from the 2009 stimulus example but makes no claim about the Recovery Act's employment effects relative to other policies.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"lumen learning macroeconomics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 976, "completion_tokens": 636, "total_tokens": 1612, "reasoning_tokens": 583 }, "cost_usd": 0.0026084, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.351529Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.8, "quality_rationale": "Official history from federalreservehistory.org, an authoritative institutional publisher with access to primary records and high editorial standards; secondary synthesis with citations rather than raw data or peer-reviewed analysis.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreservehistory org" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.8, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official history from federalreservehistory.org, an authoritative institutional publisher with access to primary records and high editorial standards; secondary synthesis with citations rather than raw data or peer-reviewed analysis.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document discusses recession timing and bottoming in mid-2009 but omits any reference to the Recovery Act, job losses, or employment trends.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document discusses recession timing and bottoming in mid-2009 but never mentions jobs, employment, or the Recovery Act.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"federalreservehistory.org\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3305, "completion_tokens": 1996, "total_tokens": 5301, "reasoning_tokens": 1821 }, "cost_usd": 0.00854558, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.351658Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "Published on economicpopulist.org (non-official blog), the PDF is a secondary summary/explanation of BLS household and payroll survey methods and data with direct references to official records but no peer review or primary status.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "employment situation news release" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.5, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Published on economicpopulist.org (non-official blog), the PDF is a secondary summary/explanation of BLS household and payroll survey methods and data with direct references to official records but no peer review or primary status.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document reports BLS employment and payroll trends through early 2010 but makes no reference to the Recovery Act or the specific timing of job-loss changes relative to February 2009.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt describes BLS survey methods and differences but provides no data, observations, or statements on post-2009 job loss or employment trends.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current population survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics survey\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"employment situation news release\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3339, "completion_tokens": 3172, "total_tokens": 6511, "reasoning_tokens": 2957 }, "cost_usd": 0.01351699, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.351747Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "BLS Monthly Labor Review article by CES program economist drawing directly on official BLS survey records; primary statistical agency with strong track record and editorial standards.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "national bureau of economic research" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS Monthly Labor Review article by CES program economist drawing directly on official BLS survey records; primary statistical agency with strong track record and editorial standards.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.2, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document reports 2009-2010 employment trends and slowdown in losses but focuses on census effects with no mention of the Recovery Act or its timing.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document reports BLS employment data and timing but makes no reference to the Recovery Act or its enactment.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"dataset\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"current employment statistics\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"us census bureau\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"author_group\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"national bureau of economic research\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"primary_source\\\",\\\"id\\\":\\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3734, "completion_tokens": 6194, "total_tokens": 9928, "reasoning_tokens": 6676 }, "cost_usd": 0.0254915, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.351842Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "This is a secondary educational textbook chapter from an open Pressbooks platform with no citations, primary data, or named sources shown; it illustrates standard concepts using the 2009 stimulus only as an example.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "pressbooks" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.5, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is a secondary educational textbook chapter from an open Pressbooks platform with no citations, primary data, or named sources shown; it illustrates standard concepts using the 2009 stimulus only as an example.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document explains automatic stabilizers and cites the 2009 stimulus as discretionary policy in the recession context but does not examine employment effects or isolate the Recovery Act's incremental impact.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The excerpt defines discretionary policy and names the 2009 stimulus only as an example, without any data, estimate, or claim about its net employment effects beyond automatic stabilizers or other policies.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"pressbooks\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3214, "completion_tokens": 1803, "total_tokens": 5017, "reasoning_tokens": 1619 }, "cost_usd": 0.00690861, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.351933Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "BLS.gov is the official U.S. statistical agency producing primary employment data via the CES survey; this Monthly Labor Review article is an in-house analysis by BLS economists directly from those official records with transparent methodology and no evident conflicts.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "national income and product accounts" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "conference board composite index of economic indicators" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "nber business cycle dating committee" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"BLS.gov is the official U.S. statistical agency producing primary employment data via the CES survey; this Monthly Labor Review article is an in-house analysis by BLS economists directly from those official records with transparent methodology and no evident conflicts.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document reports 2009 payroll data showing job losses moderating after Jan 2009 peak but never mentions the Recovery Act, the one-year timeframe, or employment ceasing to fall.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document shows job losses moderated after early 2009 but continued falling through year-end with no data on whether they stopped by early 2010.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"current employment statistics survey\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"national income and product accounts\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"conference board composite index of economic indicators\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"nber business cycle dating committee\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3778, "completion_tokens": 7533, "total_tokens": 11311, "reasoning_tokens": 7294 }, "cost_usd": 0.02737232, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.352062Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.7, "quality_rationale": "Institute for Research on Labor and Employment publication citing named primary BLS data and academic references; academic research institute with editorial standards but not a peer-reviewed journal or official primary record.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "study", "id": "von wachter 2010" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Institute for Research on Labor and Employment publication citing named primary BLS data and academic references; academic research institute with editorial standards but not a peer-reviewed journal or official primary record.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document covers 2009-2010 unemployment rate trends and long-term joblessness but never mentions job losses, employment levels, or the Recovery Act itself.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document discusses unemployment rate peaking Oct 2009 then stabilizing near 9.7% and rising long-term unemployment share, without addressing monthly job losses or employment levels.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [{\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bls\\\"}, {\\\"type\\\": \\\"study\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"von wachter 2010\\\"}]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3535, "completion_tokens": 2332, "total_tokens": 5867, "reasoning_tokens": 2142 }, "cost_usd": 0.0099954, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.352203Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.85, "quality_rationale": "Official quarterly report from the White House Council of Economic Advisers (Executive Office of the President), using government data and mandated by ARRA statute; high editorial standards as a primary government analysis but not peer-reviewed academic work and carries institutional conflict as an administration self-assessment.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "council of economic advisers" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "department of the treasury" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.85, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official quarterly report from the White House Council of Economic Advisers (Executive Office of the President), using government data and mandated by ARRA statute; high editorial standards as a primary government analysis but not peer-reviewed academic work and carries institutional conflict as an administration self-assessment.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Report evaluates ARRA effects on employment through mid-2010 and notes post-enactment change in economic trajectory, addressing the employment sub-claim as a core part of its analysis.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Excerpt addresses GDP trajectory post-ARRA but provides no data or statements on job losses or employment levels.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"council of economic advisers\\\"},\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of economic analysis\\\"},\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"},\\n {\\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\", \\\"id\\\": \\\"department of the treasury\\\"}\\n]}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3621, "completion_tokens": 6733, "total_tokens": 10354, "reasoning_tokens": 6496 }, "cost_usd": 0.02475219, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.352312Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5", "leaf_id": "outcome", "quality": 0.5, "quality_rationale": "This is ordinary journalism from a reputable outlet that relays official US government employment statistics without naming the primary source (e.g., BLS) or providing direct data access; it is secondary reporting with added commentary rather than a primary record or peer-reviewed analysis.", "directness": 0.2, "direction": -1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, { "type": "author_group", "id": "national institute of economic and social research" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "white house" }, { "type": "primary_source", "id": "societe generale" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.5, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"This is ordinary journalism from a reputable outlet that relays official US government employment statistics without naming the primary source (e.g., BLS) or providing direct data access; it is secondary reporting with added commentary rather than a primary record or peer-reviewed analysis.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\n \\\"directness\\\": 0.2,\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Article reports July 2010 US job figures (17+ months post-Act) without referencing the Recovery Act or the specific one-year timeline in the sub-claim.\\\"\\n}\", \"direction\": \"{\\n \\\"direction\\\": -1,\\n \\\"strength\\\": 0.7,\\n \\\"basis\\\": \\\"finding\\\",\\n \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"August 2010 report of 131k net job losses in July 2010 (plus June revision to 221k) shows employment still falling well after the one-year mark from Feb 2009.\\\"\\n}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"us bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"author_group\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"national institute of economic and social research\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"white house\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"societe generale\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3410, "completion_tokens": 1826, "total_tokens": 5236, "reasoning_tokens": 1538 }, "cost_usd": 0.0078198, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.352419Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official Monetary Policy Report from the Federal Reserve Board (federalreserve.gov), an authoritative government institution with rigorous internal standards and no conflicts of interest; it draws directly on primary economic data and official records for its analysis of employment, GDP, and fiscal/monetary stimulus.", "directness": 0.4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federal reserve board" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official Monetary Policy Report from the Federal Reserve Board (federalreserve.gov), an authoritative government institution with rigorous internal standards and no conflicts of interest; it draws directly on primary economic data and official records for its analysis of employment, GDP, and fiscal/monetary stimulus.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.4, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The report attributes part of the 2009 upturn and slower employment decline to general fiscal stimulus alongside monetary policy, but does not isolate the Recovery Act, examine 2009-2012 employment counterfactuals, or separate it from Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, or financial rescues.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 0, \\\"strength\\\": 0, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Document attributes 2009 output pickup partly to unspecified fiscal stimulus alongside monetary policy but does not mention the Recovery Act, address employment causation, or isolate effects beyond Fed policy and rescues.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"federal reserve board\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3338, "completion_tokens": 1853, "total_tokens": 5191, "reasoning_tokens": 1624 }, "cost_usd": 0.00785027, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.352538Z" }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "quality_v1+directness_v1+direction_v2+roots_v1", "item_id": "ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5", "leaf_id": "cause", "quality": 0.9, "quality_rationale": "Official quarterly report from the Council of Economic Advisers (Executive Office of the President) fulfilling a statutory mandate under ARRA, drawing on government data and multiple estimation methods; produced by the administering administration so some institutional perspective is inherent, but it qualifies as an official inquiry with transparent sourcing.", "directness": 0.7, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "roots": [ { "type": "primary_source", "id": "council of economic advisers" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" } ], "roots_model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813", "flipped": false, "raw_response": "{\"quality\": \"{\\\"quality\\\": 0.9, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"Official quarterly report from the Council of Economic Advisers (Executive Office of the President) fulfilling a statutory mandate under ARRA, drawing on government data and multiple estimation methods; produced by the administering administration so some institutional perspective is inherent, but it qualifies as an official inquiry with transparent sourcing.\\\"}\", \"directness\": \"{\\\"directness\\\": 0.7, \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The CEA report directly estimates ARRA's effects on employment and GDP through 2011 relative to a no-ARRA counterfactual, using multiple methods that isolate fiscal stimulus impacts.\\\"}\", \"direction\": \"{\\\"direction\\\": 1, \\\"strength\\\": 0.6, \\\"basis\\\": \\\"assertion\\\", \\\"rationale\\\": \\\"The report's model-based estimates attribute 2.0-2.9% higher GDP (and associated employment gains) through mid-2011 to ARRA relative to the no-ARRA counterfactual.\\\"}\", \"roots\": \"{\\n \\\"roots\\\": [\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"primary_source\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"council of economic advisers\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of economic analysis\\\"\\n },\\n {\\n \\\"type\\\": \\\"dataset\\\",\\n \\\"id\\\": \\\"bureau of labor statistics\\\"\\n }\\n ]\\n}\"}", "usage": { "prompt_tokens": 3625, "completion_tokens": 3167, "total_tokens": 6792, "reasoning_tokens": 2903 }, "cost_usd": 0.01361073, "params_hash": "561a1a429326a491", "created_at": "2026-09-17T04:05:24.352644Z" } ], "runs": [ { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "leaf_results": [ { "leaf_id": "outcome", "prior": 0.5, "log_odds": 3.3809954106668814, "probability": 0.9671052865822657, "evidence_mass": 3.926125, "mass_for": 2.771750000000001, "mass_against": 0.0, "mass_mixed": 0.33599999999999997, "contested_shrink": 0.8918831952377123, "one_sided": true, "insufficient": false, "leave_one_cluster_out_spread": 0.1163211168667666, "leave_one_backend_out_spread": 0.0, "clusters": [ { "id": "outcome:c1", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, "member_item_ids": [ "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c", "cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1", "fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5", "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1", "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c2", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, "member_item_ids": [ "4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe", "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e", "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c3", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, "member_item_ids": [ "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c4", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "congressional budget office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8", "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c5", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, "member_item_ids": [ "f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c6", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c7", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "annual survey of public employment payroll" }, "member_item_ids": [ "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c8", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "house committee on the budget hearing july 14 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c9", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "qcew" }, "member_item_ids": [ "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c10", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "american recovery and reinvestment act 2009" }, "member_item_ids": [ "0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c11", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreservehistory org" }, "member_item_ids": [ "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4" ] } ], "items": [ { "item_id": "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.63, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.8819999999999999, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.63, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.44099999999999995, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.63, "independence": 0.25, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 3, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.22049999999999997, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.63, "independence": 0.125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.11024999999999999, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.27999999999999997, "independence": 0.0625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 5, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.024499999999999997, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 0.03125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 6, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.18000000000000002, "independence": 0.015625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.055999999999999994, "independence": 0.0078125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 8, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 0.00390625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 9, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 0.001953125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 10, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 0.0009765625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 11, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.63, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.8819999999999999, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.63, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.44099999999999995, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.5599999999999999, "independence": 0.25, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 3, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 0.125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.34, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c3", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c4", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "outcome:c4", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c5", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.3024, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c6", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.23519999999999996, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.18000000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c7", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.252, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.126, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c8", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.126, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c9", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c10", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.06400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c11", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false } ] }, { "leaf_id": "cause", "prior": 0.5, "log_odds": 2.1220967095851213, "probability": 0.8930323839556485, "evidence_mass": 2.697, "mass_for": 1.8659999999999997, "mass_against": 0.0, "mass_mixed": 0.23099999999999998, "contested_shrink": 0.8898426323319027, "one_sided": true, "insufficient": false, "leave_one_cluster_out_spread": 0.04907238952824022, "leave_one_backend_out_spread": 0.0, "clusters": [ { "id": "cause:c1", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491", "652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d", "48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5" ] }, { "id": "cause:c2", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b" ] }, { "id": "cause:c3", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, "member_item_ids": [ "5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b" ] }, { "id": "cause:c4", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, "member_item_ids": [ "ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5" ] }, { "id": "cause:c5", "root": { "type": "author_group", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e" ] }, { "id": "cause:c6", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "nber working paper 34411" }, "member_item_ids": [ "81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923" ] }, { "id": "cause:c7", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501" ] }, { "id": "cause:c8", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "omb" }, "member_item_ids": [ "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2" ] }, { "id": "cause:c9", "root": { "type": "author_group", "id": "congressional budget office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62" ] }, { "id": "cause:c10", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federal reserve board" }, "member_item_ids": [ "feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f" ] }, { "id": "cause:c11", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, "member_item_ids": [ "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709" ] }, { "id": "cause:c12", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "lumen learning macroeconomics" }, "member_item_ids": [ "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630" ] }, { "id": "cause:c13", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "government accountability office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909" ] }, { "id": "cause:c14", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreserve" }, "member_item_ids": [ "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826" ] }, { "id": "cause:c15", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "post crisis academic research on qe" }, "member_item_ids": [ "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23" ] }, { "id": "cause:c16", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "pressbooks" }, "member_item_ids": [ "e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8" ] } ], "items": [ { "item_id": "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.23519999999999996, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "cause:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.11759999999999998, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.13999999999999999, "independence": 0.25, "cluster_id": "cause:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 3, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.3024, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "cause:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.1372, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c3", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.3024, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.238, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c4", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.33319999999999994, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c5", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.2744, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c6", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.23519999999999996, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c7", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.2744, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c8", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": true }, { "item_id": "bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c9", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c10", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.1728, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.136, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c11", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.08000000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c12", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c13", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c14", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.055999999999999994, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c15", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.04000000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c16", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false } ] } ], "node_results": [ { "node_id": "root", "probability": 0.8636563396126714, "from_children": [ "outcome", "cause" ] } ], "verdict": { "label": "supported", "probability": 0.8636563396126714, "log_odds": 1.8459963215323687, "evidence_mass": 2.697, "insufficient": false, "refused": false, "refusal_reason": null }, "cost_usd": 0.0, "api_calls": 0, "cache_hits": 0 }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "leaf_results": [ { "leaf_id": "outcome", "prior": 0.5, "log_odds": 3.0246, "probability": 0.9536731811002249, "evidence_mass": 2.9142187500000003, "mass_for": 2.0805000000000002, "mass_against": 0.0, "mass_mixed": 0.0, "contested_shrink": 1.0, "one_sided": true, "insufficient": false, "leave_one_cluster_out_spread": 0.1520611796892849, "leave_one_backend_out_spread": 0.0, "clusters": [ { "id": "outcome:c1", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, "member_item_ids": [ "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c", "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1", "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1", "fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c2", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, "member_item_ids": [ "4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe", "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e", "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c3", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "annual survey of public employment payroll" }, "member_item_ids": [ "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c4", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c5", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, "member_item_ids": [ "f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c6", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, "member_item_ids": [ "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c7", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c8", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreservehistory org" }, "member_item_ids": [ "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c9", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "house committee on the budget hearing july 14 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c10", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "american recovery and reinvestment act 2009" }, "member_item_ids": [ "0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c11", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "qcew" }, "member_item_ids": [ "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a" ] } ], "items": [ { "item_id": "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.63, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.85, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 1.071, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.36000000000000004, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.92, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.33120000000000005, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.36000000000000004, "independence": 0.25, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 3, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.126, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.36000000000000004, "independence": 0.125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.07200000000000001, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.27999999999999997, "independence": 0.0625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 5, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.027999999999999997, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.27999999999999997, "independence": 0.03125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 6, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.18000000000000002, "independence": 0.015625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.18000000000000002, "independence": 0.0078125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 8, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 0.00390625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 9, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 0.001953125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 10, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 0.0009765625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 11, "direction": -1, "strength": 0.4, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": -0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.38, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.45599999999999996, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.38, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.78, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.2964, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 0.25, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 3, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.126, "independence": 0.125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.36000000000000004, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c3", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c4", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "outcome:c4", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.1008, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c5", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.252, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.18000000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c6", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.11199999999999999, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c7", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.1344, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.11199999999999999, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c8", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.15679999999999997, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c9", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c10", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c11", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false } ] }, { "leaf_id": "cause", "prior": 0.5, "log_odds": 1.8386875949367087, "probability": 0.862793417645298, "evidence_mass": 2.442, "mass_for": 1.7560000000000002, "mass_against": 0.0, "mass_mixed": 0.13999999999999999, "contested_shrink": 0.9261603375527426, "one_sided": true, "insufficient": false, "leave_one_cluster_out_spread": 0.04619623280898644, "leave_one_backend_out_spread": 0.0, "clusters": [ { "id": "cause:c1", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5", "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491", "652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d" ] }, { "id": "cause:c2", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b", "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05" ] }, { "id": "cause:c3", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, "member_item_ids": [ "5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b" ] }, { "id": "cause:c4", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "omb" }, "member_item_ids": [ "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2" ] }, { "id": "cause:c5", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, "member_item_ids": [ "ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5" ] }, { "id": "cause:c6", "root": { "type": "author_group", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e" ] }, { "id": "cause:c7", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501" ] }, { "id": "cause:c8", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federal reserve board" }, "member_item_ids": [ "feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f" ] }, { "id": "cause:c9", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, "member_item_ids": [ "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709" ] }, { "id": "cause:c10", "root": { "type": "author_group", "id": "congressional budget office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62" ] }, { "id": "cause:c11", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "nber working paper 34411" }, "member_item_ids": [ "81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923" ] }, { "id": "cause:c12", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "government accountability office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909" ] }, { "id": "cause:c13", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreserve" }, "member_item_ids": [ "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826" ] }, { "id": "cause:c14", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "post crisis academic research on qe" }, "member_item_ids": [ "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23" ] }, { "id": "cause:c15", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "lumen learning macroeconomics" }, "member_item_ids": [ "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630" ] }, { "id": "cause:c16", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "pressbooks" }, "member_item_ids": [ "e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8" ] } ], "items": [ { "item_id": "48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.13999999999999999, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.11199999999999999, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "cause:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.07839999999999998, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.11199999999999999, "independence": 0.25, "cluster_id": "cause:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 3, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0336, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.23519999999999996, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "cause:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.3, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0432, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c3", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.55, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.2772, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c4", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.4, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.2016, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": true }, { "item_id": "ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c5", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.3528, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c6", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.75, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.294, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c7", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.74, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.29007999999999995, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c8", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.35, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.1008, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.13999999999999999, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c9", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.126, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c10", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.11199999999999999, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c11", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.35, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.07839999999999998, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c12", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c13", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.055999999999999994, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c14", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.04000000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c15", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.04000000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c16", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false } ] } ], "node_results": [ { "node_id": "root", "probability": 0.8228229432381263, "from_children": [ "outcome", "cause" ] } ], "verdict": { "label": "leans_supported", "probability": 0.8228229432381263, "log_odds": 1.535591488458854, "evidence_mass": 2.442, "insufficient": false, "refused": false, "refusal_reason": null }, "cost_usd": 0.0, "api_calls": 0, "cache_hits": 0 }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "leaf_results": [ { "leaf_id": "outcome", "prior": 0.5, "log_odds": 3.6585, "probability": 0.9748763252907717, "evidence_mass": 4.727421875, "mass_for": 2.295, "mass_against": 0.1575, "mass_mixed": 0.0, "contested_shrink": 1.0, "one_sided": true, "insufficient": false, "leave_one_cluster_out_spread": 0.16642167385223916, "leave_one_backend_out_spread": 0.0, "clusters": [ { "id": "outcome:c1", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, "member_item_ids": [ "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c", "fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5", "cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1", "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1", "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c2", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, "member_item_ids": [ "4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe", "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c3", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "congressional budget office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8", "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c4", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "qcew" }, "member_item_ids": [ "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c5", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "annual survey of public employment payroll" }, "member_item_ids": [ "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c6", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreservehistory org" }, "member_item_ids": [ "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c7", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, "member_item_ids": [ "f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c8", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c9", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "house committee on the budget hearing july 14 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c10", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "american recovery and reinvestment act 2009" }, "member_item_ids": [ "0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c11", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, "member_item_ids": [ "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb" ] } ], "items": [ { "item_id": "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.9, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.9, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 1.62, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.9, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.9, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.81, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.63, "independence": 0.25, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 3, "direction": -1, "strength": 0.9, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": -0.28350000000000003, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.36000000000000004, "independence": 0.125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.07200000000000001, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 0.0625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 5, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 0.03125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 6, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 0.015625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.126, "independence": 0.0078125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 8, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 0.00390625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 9, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 0.001953125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 10, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 0.0009765625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 11, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.9, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 1.4400000000000002, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 0.25, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 3, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 0.125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c3", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "outcome:c3", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.36000000000000004, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c4", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c5", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c6", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c7", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c8", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c9", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.126, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c10", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.126, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c11", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false } ] }, { "leaf_id": "cause", "prior": 0.5, "log_odds": 4.704264013722128, "probability": 0.9910247081420976, "evidence_mass": 4.147, "mass_for": 2.894, "mass_against": 0.0, "mass_mixed": 0.021, "contested_shrink": 0.9927958833619213, "one_sided": true, "insufficient": false, "leave_one_cluster_out_spread": 0.03471731283018176, "leave_one_backend_out_spread": 0.0, "clusters": [ { "id": "cause:c1", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, "member_item_ids": [ "5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b" ] }, { "id": "cause:c2", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b" ] }, { "id": "cause:c3", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "omb" }, "member_item_ids": [ "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2" ] }, { "id": "cause:c4", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, "member_item_ids": [ "ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5" ] }, { "id": "cause:c5", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491", "652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d", "48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5" ] }, { "id": "cause:c6", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501" ] }, { "id": "cause:c7", "root": { "type": "author_group", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e" ] }, { "id": "cause:c8", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "government accountability office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909" ] }, { "id": "cause:c9", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, "member_item_ids": [ "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709" ] }, { "id": "cause:c10", "root": { "type": "author_group", "id": "congressional budget office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62" ] }, { "id": "cause:c11", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federal reserve board" }, "member_item_ids": [ "feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f" ] }, { "id": "cause:c12", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "lumen learning macroeconomics" }, "member_item_ids": [ "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630" ] }, { "id": "cause:c13", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreserve" }, "member_item_ids": [ "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826" ] }, { "id": "cause:c14", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "nber working paper 34411" }, "member_item_ids": [ "81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923" ] }, { "id": "cause:c15", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "post crisis academic research on qe" }, "member_item_ids": [ "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23" ] }, { "id": "cause:c16", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "pressbooks" }, "member_item_ids": [ "e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8" ] } ], "items": [ { "item_id": "5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.9, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.9, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 1.62, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.4032, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "cause:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.1568, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.36000000000000004, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c3", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.5760000000000001, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.36000000000000004, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c4", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.9, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.6480000000000001, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.11199999999999999, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c5", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.1792, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.11199999999999999, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "cause:c5", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.055999999999999994, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.084, "independence": 0.25, "cluster_id": "cause:c5", "rank_in_cluster": 3, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.27999999999999997, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c6", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.9, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.504, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c7", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.4032, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c8", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c9", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c10", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c11", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.14400000000000002, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.13999999999999999, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c12", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.126, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c13", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.11199999999999999, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c14", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.09799999999999999, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c15", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.08000000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c16", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.3, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.04800000000000001, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false } ] } ], "node_results": [ { "node_id": "root", "probability": 0.9661265257459277, "from_children": [ "outcome", "cause" ] } ], "verdict": { "label": "supported", "probability": 0.9661265257459277, "log_odds": 3.3506625669532433, "evidence_mass": 4.147, "insufficient": false, "refused": false, "refusal_reason": null }, "cost_usd": 0.0, "api_calls": 0, "cache_hits": 0 }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "leaf_results": [ { "leaf_id": "outcome", "prior": 0.5, "log_odds": 0.37054533024821207, "probability": 0.5915907428714474, "evidence_mass": 3.77084375, "mass_for": 1.0725, "mass_against": 0.008749999999999999, "mass_mixed": 1.8900000000000001, "contested_shrink": 0.363904080774085, "one_sided": true, "insufficient": false, "leave_one_cluster_out_spread": 0.08726842819773062, "leave_one_backend_out_spread": 0.0, "clusters": [ { "id": "outcome:c1", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, "member_item_ids": [ "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5", "e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c", "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1", "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c2", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, "member_item_ids": [ "4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe", "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e", "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c3", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, "member_item_ids": [ "f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c4", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "house committee on the budget hearing july 14 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c5", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c6", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "annual survey of public employment payroll" }, "member_item_ids": [ "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c7", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreservehistory org" }, "member_item_ids": [ "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c8", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c9", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "american recovery and reinvestment act 2009" }, "member_item_ids": [ "0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c10", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "qcew" }, "member_item_ids": [ "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c11", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, "member_item_ids": [ "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb" ] } ], "items": [ { "item_id": "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.9, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.63, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.36000000000000004, "independence": 0.25, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 3, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.09000000000000001, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.36000000000000004, "independence": 0.125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 4, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.054000000000000006, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.27999999999999997, "independence": 0.0625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 5, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.2, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.006999999999999999, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": true }, { "item_id": "fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.27999999999999997, "independence": 0.03125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 6, "direction": -1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": -0.008749999999999999, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.11200000000000002, "independence": 0.015625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "mixed", "basis_factor": 0.7, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 0.0078125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 8, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 0.00390625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 9, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 0.001953125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 10, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 0.0009765625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 11, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.7, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.7, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.36000000000000004, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.4, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.14400000000000002, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 0.25, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 3, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 0.125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.36000000000000004, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c3", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c4", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c5", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.08000000000000002, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "outcome:c5", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.4, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.03200000000000001, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.18000000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c6", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c7", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.11199999999999999, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c8", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c9", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c10", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.06400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c11", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false } ] }, { "leaf_id": "cause", "prior": 0.5, "log_odds": 1.7205651144435676, "probability": 0.848201612332064, "evidence_mass": 3.27, "mass_for": 2.3340000000000005, "mass_against": 0.0, "mass_mixed": 0.2, "contested_shrink": 0.9210734017363853, "one_sided": true, "insufficient": false, "leave_one_cluster_out_spread": 0.0964533919164915, "leave_one_backend_out_spread": 0.0, "clusters": [ { "id": "cause:c1", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, "member_item_ids": [ "5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b" ] }, { "id": "cause:c2", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5", "652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d", "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491" ] }, { "id": "cause:c3", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b" ] }, { "id": "cause:c4", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "omb" }, "member_item_ids": [ "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2" ] }, { "id": "cause:c5", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, "member_item_ids": [ "ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5" ] }, { "id": "cause:c6", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "nber working paper 34411" }, "member_item_ids": [ "81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923" ] }, { "id": "cause:c7", "root": { "type": "author_group", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e" ] }, { "id": "cause:c8", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501" ] }, { "id": "cause:c9", "root": { "type": "author_group", "id": "congressional budget office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62" ] }, { "id": "cause:c10", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federal reserve board" }, "member_item_ids": [ "feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f" ] }, { "id": "cause:c11", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "lumen learning macroeconomics" }, "member_item_ids": [ "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630" ] }, { "id": "cause:c12", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "pressbooks" }, "member_item_ids": [ "e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8" ] }, { "id": "cause:c13", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "government accountability office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909" ] }, { "id": "cause:c14", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, "member_item_ids": [ "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709" ] }, { "id": "cause:c15", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "post crisis academic research on qe" }, "member_item_ids": [ "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23" ] }, { "id": "cause:c16", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreserve" }, "member_item_ids": [ "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826" ] } ], "items": [ { "item_id": "5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.63, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.63, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.2, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "cause:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.3, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.05879999999999999, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.11199999999999999, "independence": 0.25, "cluster_id": "cause:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 3, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.2, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0112, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c3", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.252, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "cause:c3", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.4, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0784, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.36000000000000004, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c4", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.3, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.21600000000000003, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c5", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.2, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.1008, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.22399999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c6", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.2, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0896, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c7", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.23519999999999996, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c8", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.19599999999999998, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c9", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c10", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.08000000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c11", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.08000000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c12", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c13", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c14", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c15", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c16", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false } ] } ], "node_results": [ { "node_id": "root", "probability": 0.5017882219442852, "from_children": [ "outcome", "cause" ] } ], "verdict": { "label": "unclear", "probability": 0.5017882219442852, "log_odds": 0.007152918274786917, "evidence_mass": 3.27, "insufficient": false, "refused": false, "refusal_reason": null }, "cost_usd": 0.0, "api_calls": 0, "cache_hits": 0 }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "leaf_results": [ { "leaf_id": "outcome", "prior": 0.5, "log_odds": 1.1053014477263894, "probability": 0.7512521187492406, "evidence_mass": 3.5653125, "mass_for": 1.4949999999999999, "mass_against": 0.003125, "mass_mixed": 1.3965, "contested_shrink": 0.5175540873170099, "one_sided": true, "insufficient": false, "leave_one_cluster_out_spread": 0.24303273926631153, "leave_one_backend_out_spread": 0.0, "clusters": [ { "id": "outcome:c1", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, "member_item_ids": [ "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c", "fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5", "cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1", "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1", "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c2", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "current population survey" }, "member_item_ids": [ "4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe", "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e", "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c3", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c4", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "house committee on the budget hearing july 14 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c5", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, "member_item_ids": [ "f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c6", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "annual survey of public employment payroll" }, "member_item_ids": [ "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c7", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "qcew" }, "member_item_ids": [ "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c8", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "american recovery and reinvestment act 2009" }, "member_item_ids": [ "0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c9", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreservehistory org" }, "member_item_ids": [ "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c10", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "us census bureau" }, "member_item_ids": [ "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb" ] }, { "id": "outcome:c11", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501" ] } ], "items": [ { "item_id": "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.63, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.36000000000000004, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.28800000000000003, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.36000000000000004, "independence": 0.25, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 3, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 0.125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": true }, { "item_id": "e936a6676f78c162101ae55493aa319615fa8b0229e6a69f990baf02c1a1813c", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.11199999999999999, "independence": 0.0625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 5, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "fa2eae7984803fb70b6e6948099dc99f85c3eed277615c396d0c287dcb0b8ea5", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.1, "independence": 0.03125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 6, "direction": -1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": -0.0043749999999999995, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "cd2ced99e67a3f3a34e768ef8594b5ce130d9ade6089b9855e12c271ef562bb1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 0.015625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 7, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 0.0078125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 8, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "08fd16b0369e9df2ea16503bc53f22bc595a04e53cddc01e25a56c9ef74e69b1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 0.00390625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 9, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "31befb6335416baaee3bb04ea4422458bfb85a9ff3a80524a0c7784844cf66e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 0.001953125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 10, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "50b89906d4a5631e70f15f622a2a273848cc41245a8ec2f9adf14c945f8e7bfa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 0.0009765625, "cluster_id": "outcome:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 11, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "4d899ad9d2818a18983aa37e1e79f9facbf520d52b00bda2ea4508e2083134fe", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 1.0, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 1.6, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.63, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.4, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 0.252, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.08000000000000002, "independence": 0.25, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 3, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "5552bd5ecf5becf7f2f635ec11536586e83e03ca3ad49c0b3164bf522afef209", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.0, "independence": 0.125, "cluster_id": "outcome:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 4, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c3", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.048, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "outcome:c3", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "9d650864c37ec69e20d6354b79777239decb2832b676da95204d9bd8b4801044", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c4", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "f16c36c3d45cc5ffa1e6d88cf8612e621ae626b660bcf97456d7261260c879fa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.238, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c5", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c6", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "c9fc861fbf5cc906a9ef19fc3d7802075a1c1c743203e37ecc1e48a8d861c38a", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c7", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "0f786a65fcbcf867c46a8b8c02c92d5aad2af05d694027709d4a32fe76b75d83", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c8", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.06400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c9", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.055999999999999994, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c10", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "outcome", "weight": 0.048, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "outcome:c11", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false } ] }, { "leaf_id": "cause", "prior": 0.5, "log_odds": 2.3949412793007547, "probability": 0.9164407364680818, "evidence_mass": 3.237, "mass_for": 2.174, "mass_against": 0.0, "mass_mixed": 0.343, "contested_shrink": 0.8637266587206992, "one_sided": true, "insufficient": false, "leave_one_cluster_out_spread": 0.17564954438078595, "leave_one_backend_out_spread": 0.0, "clusters": [ { "id": "cause:c1", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of labor statistics" }, "member_item_ids": [ "5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b" ] }, { "id": "cause:c2", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "congressional budget office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b" ] }, { "id": "cause:c3", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d", "48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5", "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491" ] }, { "id": "cause:c4", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "omb" }, "member_item_ids": [ "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2" ] }, { "id": "cause:c5", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, "member_item_ids": [ "ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5" ] }, { "id": "cause:c6", "root": { "type": "author_group", "id": "blinder zandi 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e" ] }, { "id": "cause:c7", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "nber working paper 34411" }, "member_item_ids": [ "81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923" ] }, { "id": "cause:c8", "root": { "type": "author_group", "id": "congressional budget office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62" ] }, { "id": "cause:c9", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federal reserve board" }, "member_item_ids": [ "feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f" ] }, { "id": "cause:c10", "root": { "type": "dataset", "id": "bureau of economic analysis" }, "member_item_ids": [ "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709" ] }, { "id": "cause:c11", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "cbo estimated impact of the american recovery and reinvestment act april june 2010" }, "member_item_ids": [ "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501" ] }, { "id": "cause:c12", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "pressbooks" }, "member_item_ids": [ "e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8" ] }, { "id": "cause:c13", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "government accountability office" }, "member_item_ids": [ "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909" ] }, { "id": "cause:c14", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "federalreserve" }, "member_item_ids": [ "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826" ] }, { "id": "cause:c15", "root": { "type": "study", "id": "post crisis academic research on qe" }, "member_item_ids": [ "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23" ] }, { "id": "cause:c16", "root": { "type": "primary_source", "id": "lumen learning macroeconomics" }, "member_item_ids": [ "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630" ] } ], "items": [ { "item_id": "5e77d36e05157ca663e058ca4dcf6999635fc445961a8b737c77c9dd0a35769b", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.9, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c1", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.8, "basis": "finding", "basis_factor": 1.0, "llr": 1.4400000000000002, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "3e5bca57cc77b3c389a23ffe2a11f1939b8c892aa06efb8f1e7ebca42132738b", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "cause:c2", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.11759999999999998, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "652474842860d6c3c249761eaf3d86647074354a990d91bb18b813c0e94da70d", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c3", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.3, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.11759999999999998, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "48ea63703776889d29e3b968286c8d5594ad472e0af77bc05008d8f7537eb5b5", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.13999999999999999, "independence": 0.5, "cluster_id": "cause:c3", "rank_in_cluster": 2, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.084, "independence": 0.25, "cluster_id": "cause:c3", "rank_in_cluster": 3, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c4", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.4, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.2016, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "ff54cb35fd51e7ebde571255a0a7ff636702c2b9986c2284357c7a26e8d332c5", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.252, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c5", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.3024, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c6", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.7, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.2744, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "81ff6cefd5d1fd15c4b27a0ade54591ce04dc342e694a7d753b4889711056923", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.19599999999999998, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c7", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.6, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.23519999999999996, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "bd840066556ff86564d785e55a2a43b08ac53d7196ea11d7f2b084729392fe62", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c8", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "feb6da308981c8b213f6f54fbbda4c58cc10a23374074a8b4b3276f7c1fbbc2f", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.14400000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c9", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.11199999999999999, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c10", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.084, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c11", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 1, "strength": 0.5, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.084, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "e5d9668d403da5c707c01e67d19d526cf194b04cf173df62516ae12c28dd51f8", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.08000000000000002, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c12", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "64fb256337cc4e5bed90d6f347b2328c81cb5c3781f2c26b3162a1598dd08909", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c13", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "7fe31b5937d120000ae6faf8282e59edf9e68d9d0163e34a3cb715428b6d6826", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.07200000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c14", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.055999999999999994, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c15", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": false, "inconsistent": false }, { "item_id": "ddd1a2437c0c5b5a18e0d5f2beaa33de1c73e99288f227fb5716c7b68ec5f630", "leaf_id": "cause", "weight": 0.04000000000000001, "independence": 1.0, "cluster_id": "cause:c16", "rank_in_cluster": 1, "direction": 0, "strength": 0.0, "basis": "assertion", "basis_factor": 0.4, "llr": 0.0, "polarity_checked": true, "inconsistent": false } ] } ], "node_results": [ { "node_id": "root", "probability": 0.6884780449797608, "from_children": [ "outcome", "cause" ] } ], "verdict": { "label": "leans_supported", "probability": 0.6884780449797608, "log_odds": 0.7930136121185014, "evidence_mass": 3.237, "insufficient": false, "refused": false, "refusal_reason": null }, "cost_usd": 0.0, "api_calls": 0, "cache_hits": 0 } ], "comparison": { "models": [ "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "x-ai/grok-4.3" ], "per_model": [ { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "label": "supported", "probability": 0.8636563396126714, "log_odds": 1.8459963215323687, "cost_usd": 0.0, "api_calls": 0, "judgments": 44, "items_scored": 42, "polarity_checked": 10, "polarity_inconsistent": 1, "polarity_rate": 0.1 }, { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "label": "leans_supported", "probability": 0.8228229432381263, "log_odds": 1.535591488458854, "cost_usd": 0.0, "api_calls": 0, "judgments": 44, "items_scored": 42, "polarity_checked": 10, "polarity_inconsistent": 1, "polarity_rate": 0.1 }, { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "label": "supported", "probability": 0.9661265257459277, "log_odds": 3.3506625669532433, "cost_usd": 0.0, "api_calls": 0, "judgments": 44, "items_scored": 42, "polarity_checked": 10, "polarity_inconsistent": 0, "polarity_rate": 0.0 }, { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "label": "unclear", "probability": 0.5017882219442852, "log_odds": 0.007152918274786917, "cost_usd": 0.0, "api_calls": 0, "judgments": 44, "items_scored": 42, "polarity_checked": 10, "polarity_inconsistent": 1, "polarity_rate": 0.1 }, { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "label": "leans_supported", "probability": 0.6884780449797608, "log_odds": 0.7930136121185014, "cost_usd": 0.0, "api_calls": 0, "judgments": 44, "items_scored": 42, "polarity_checked": 10, "polarity_inconsistent": 1, "polarity_rate": 0.1 } ], "leaves": [ { "leaf_id": "outcome", "log_odds": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 3.3809954106668814, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 3.0246, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 3.6585, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.37054533024821207, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 1.1053014477263894 }, "probability": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.9671052865822657, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.9536731811002249, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.9748763252907717, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.5915907428714474, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.7512521187492406 }, "evidence_mass": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 3.926125, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 2.9142187500000003, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 4.727421875, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 3.77084375, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 3.5653125 }, "spread": 3.287954669751788, "mean_pairwise_disagreement": 1.7703206604888138, "consensus_log_odds": 3.0246, "consensus_probability": 0.9536731811002249, "consensus_mass": 3.77084375, "consensus_insufficient": false }, { "leaf_id": "cause", "log_odds": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 2.1220967095851213, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 1.8386875949367087, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 4.704264013722128, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 1.7205651144435676, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 2.3949412793007547 }, "probability": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.8930323839556485, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.862793417645298, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.9910247081420976, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.848201612332064, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.9164407364680818 }, "evidence_mass": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 2.697, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 2.442, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 4.147, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 3.27, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 3.237 }, "spread": 2.98369889927856, "mean_pairwise_disagreement": 1.3047302965842333, "consensus_log_odds": 2.1220967095851213, "consensus_probability": 0.8930323839556485, "consensus_mass": 3.237, "consensus_insufficient": false } ], "mean_pairwise_disagreement": 1.5375254785365235, "max_spread_leaf": "outcome", "labels_agree": false, "coverage_complete": true, "quality_disagreements": [ { "item_id": "b1cd579628c11409d0c35f0338d61156d32390e9efdc1ba9b205e4ee560ad6a8", "leaf_id": null, "kind": "quality", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.7, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.9, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.9, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.5, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.3 }, "spread": 0.6000000000000001 }, { "item_id": "e326e963f41734f805ad5aa18c3bcb506f68de99b9376c472012e826c0e9f82e", "leaf_id": null, "kind": "quality", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.8, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.7, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.9, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.9, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.5 }, "spread": 0.4 }, { "item_id": "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491", "leaf_id": null, "kind": "quality", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.7, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.7, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.7, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.7, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.3 }, "spread": 0.39999999999999997 }, { "item_id": "853845cec3f813c798becf8779be9f69bba9e5bc99faa49523554588f4218501", "leaf_id": null, "kind": "quality", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.7, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.7, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.7, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.7, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.3 }, "spread": 0.39999999999999997 }, { "item_id": "3a3970913ce34f37ff7df5a571bbdba0110909a8af3e1455dea74c7d9102398e", "leaf_id": null, "kind": "quality", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.7, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.7, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.9, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.7, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.7 }, "spread": 0.20000000000000007 }, { "item_id": "7bd36b46fbb1617a527a1b1a02993f6c9cf90144be710c2428b1f67aeec4d709", "leaf_id": null, "kind": "quality", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.85, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.7, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.9, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.9, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.7 }, "spread": 0.20000000000000007 }, { "item_id": "7f5b8b789c4ba59787c238aeb399891caade74b3b30234f09f98df3634bb5a23", "leaf_id": null, "kind": "quality", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.7, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.7, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.7, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.9, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.7 }, "spread": 0.20000000000000007 }, { "item_id": "94cd4bdcc287baeea6d25e0d52e76fd0030c73c0d27001c81095911aa9cdfccb", "leaf_id": null, "kind": "quality", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.85, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.9, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.9, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.8, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.7 }, "spread": 0.20000000000000007 }, { "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": null, "kind": "quality", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.7, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.9, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.9, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.9, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.9 }, "spread": 0.20000000000000007 }, { "item_id": "dfea48335ac59fcbd833872b4851b648e88359eb0aff82ba28b703507bd000c4", "leaf_id": null, "kind": "quality", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.8, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.7, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.9, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.9, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.8 }, "spread": 0.20000000000000007 } ], "direction_disagreements": [ { "item_id": "615ebc1c9178f2ad14c67bc28d74c943f50089b0c5bb54166c0bee513afa72bf", "leaf_id": "outcome", "kind": "direction", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.7, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.92, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": -0.9, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.5, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.8 }, "spread": 1.82 }, { "item_id": "78649209d21aac5d44660b537b401e2db604307239a2c7f8b90613c31b012fec", "leaf_id": "outcome", "kind": "direction", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.7, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.85, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.9, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.0, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.0 }, "spread": 0.9 }, { "item_id": "e79747e4fc9350f76ba82cde2f30f2bf01a4bb481dba683f02a2ce5a50a5d5e1", "leaf_id": "outcome", "kind": "direction", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.7, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.8, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.9, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.0, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.0 }, "spread": 0.9 }, { "item_id": "6334192b85f716bb6c98c3ba176e4f5603b37a2d6ef6b843b89e5c9ee9be2491", "leaf_id": "cause", "kind": "direction", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.6, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.7, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.8, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.2, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.0 }, "spread": 0.8 }, { "item_id": "75a434dbe8c96e63769f0ee4c52d1d206b23a9eb00fba08e2d678b6a22985768", "leaf_id": "outcome", "kind": "direction", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.7, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.8, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.0, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.2, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.0 }, "spread": 0.8 }, { "item_id": "a5a944198c97f2941fb464c596f538d9cd7f08d5a8e68a842bd6a1a59314de05", "leaf_id": "cause", "kind": "direction", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.6, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.3, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.8, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.5, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.0 }, "spread": 0.8 }, { "item_id": "db33f1cc3a8863ff1ecd385795ed8ef9f061c2537f42ca78d461084f33e5bfd2", "leaf_id": "cause", "kind": "direction", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.0, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.4, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.8, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.3, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.4 }, "spread": 0.8 }, { "item_id": "e503cd90eed2c9712415cc6a41839836d30b7273eb8914073ba8e892811fed1f", "leaf_id": "outcome", "kind": "direction", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.7, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.7, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.8, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.6, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.0 }, "spread": 0.8 }, { "item_id": "9dcf3afb2a2d4091211b8d3ddbbf1e839831a55f3ab69bc5d14f5538649d15aa", "leaf_id": "outcome", "kind": "direction", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.7, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.78, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.0, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.4, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.4 }, "spread": 0.78 }, { "item_id": "711345b56d6622b735c305214ac8261a574008b40e99eb4f0e22c78fb4815782", "leaf_id": "outcome", "kind": "direction", "values": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": 0.7, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": 0.0, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": 0.0, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": 0.0, "x-ai/grok-4.3": 0.0 }, "spread": 0.7 } ], "consensus_nodes": [ { "node_id": "root", "probability": 0.8516610344325009, "from_children": [ "outcome", "cause" ] } ], "consensus_verdict": { "label": "supported", "probability": 0.8516610344325009, "log_odds": 1.7476886378617709, "evidence_mass": 3.237, "insufficient": false, "refused": false, "refusal_reason": null } }, "baseline": { "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5": { "model_id": "anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5", "prompt_version": "baseline_v1", "probability": 0.72, "leaves": { "outcome": 0.95, "cause": 0.76 }, "rationale": "The outcome is well-documented: job losses did peak in early 2009 and employment began recovering within about a year. The causal claim is more contested among economists, but mainstream analyses (CBO, most academic studies) estimate the Recovery Act added 1-3 million jobs net, supporting a moderate-to-high probability it was a major contributor, though some heterodox economists dispute this.", "cached": false, "cost_usd": 0.00094 }, "openai/gpt-5.4-mini": { "model_id": "openai/gpt-5.4-mini", "prompt_version": "baseline_v1", "probability": 0.42, "leaves": { "outcome": 0.9, "cause": 0.35 }, "rationale": "The Recovery Act is widely associated with the sharp slowdown in job losses and the shift to employment growth within about a year, so the outcome part is likely true. But attributing a major share of the 2009-2012 employment recovery specifically to the Act, net of Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and financial rescues, is much harder to support confidently and is more debated.", "cached": false, "cost_usd": 0.00068325 }, "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite": { "model_id": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-lite", "prompt_version": "baseline_v1", "probability": 0.85, "leaves": { "outcome": 0.99, "cause": 0.85 }, "rationale": "Economic data clearly confirms that US job losses shrank and employment stabilized within a year of the 2009 Recovery Act. Mainstream macroeconomic consensus and studies attribute a significant portion of this employment recovery to the stimulus, independent of monetary policy.", "cached": false, "cost_usd": 0.000279 }, "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash": { "model_id": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "prompt_version": "baseline_v1", "probability": 0.8, "leaves": { "outcome": 0.98, "cause": 0.8 }, "rationale": "The labor market clearly stabilized within about a year, with monthly losses shrinking from ~800k to near zero and payrolls bottoming around early 2010. The causal part is supported by CBO and most economists, but the exact counterfactual contribution beyond Fed policy, automatic stabilizers, and TARP remains uncertain.", "cached": false, "cost_usd": 0.0037743 }, "x-ai/grok-4.3": { "model_id": "x-ai/grok-4.3", "prompt_version": "baseline_v1", "probability": 0.68, "leaves": { "outcome": 0.88, "cause": 0.72 }, "rationale": "Employment stabilized and losses reversed by late 2009-early 2010 as described. Counterfactual estimates from models (CBO, private forecasters) attribute several million jobs to ARRA net of Fed, TARP, and stabilizers, though magnitudes and identification remain debated.", "cached": false, "cost_usd": 0.0018434 } }, "refused": false, "refusal_reason": null, "created_at": "2026-09-17T05:13:22.621196Z", "git_sha": "unknown" }