{"as_of":"2026-08-03T21:13:00Z","caps":{"database_statements":6,"inbound":100,"outbound":100},"context_digest":"sha256:65a89b6c0977e63078acccafaf7110310731283931104b077ff4468953bccd47","coverage":[{"denominator":0,"lane":"reference_resolution","note":"Typed states for the displayed outbound observations.","records_observed":0,"source":"paper_references, paper_reference_links","source_observed_at":null,"state":"measured"},{"denominator":1,"lane":"standing_notices","note":"One-hop event checks from named stored sources.","records_observed":1,"source":"scholarly_work_events, retraction_status_cache","source_observed_at":"2026-08-03T06:30:56.289259+00:00","state":"measured"},{"denominator":1,"lane":"inbound_itemization","note":"Pith citing papers itemized under the disclosed page cap.","records_observed":1,"source":"paper_references, paper_reference_links","source_observed_at":"2026-05-20T07:45:50.470698Z","state":"measured"},{"denominator":1,"lane":"external_citation_measurements","note":"A source-named dated measurement, never combined with another source.","records_observed":0,"source":"arxiv_reference","source_observed_at":"2026-05-20T07:48:07.497771Z","state":"measured"}],"external_citation_measurements":[],"inbound":[{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2305.17339","last_updated":"2023-05-27T02:40:45Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-06T15:34:13.017210Z","submitted_at":"2023-05-27T02:40:45Z","title":"Counterfactual Evaluation of Peer-Review Assignment Policies","version":1},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2305.17339","doi":null,"metadata_source":"arxiv_reference","pith_arxiv_id":"2305.17339","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-06-05T21:23:00.469572Z","title":"Saveski, S","venue":null,"work_id":"fa7e0adb-4255-4825-baad-ea8093b38cca","year":2023},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2605.18752","last_updated":"2026-05-18T17:59:45Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-02T22:38:44.371545Z","submitted_at":"2026-05-18T17:59:45Z","title":"Traditional statistical representations outperform generative AI in identifying expert peer reviewers","version":1},"reference_index":115,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-05-20T07:45:50.470698Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2305.17339","citing_paper":"/paper/2605.18752"},"observation_digest":"sha256:15849a91c12203a7015ba3b3a5c812a177d16e48bf3d06e7789b93a56eed7fdf","observation_id":"3ce02056-a6b3-4cc4-ba82-e5651a07a076","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-05-20T07:48:07.499230Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-03T06:30:56.289259+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-03T06:30:56.289259+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-03T06:30:50.922721+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}}],"links":{"evidence":"/evidence","html":"/paper/2305.17339/citation-record","integrity":"/paper/2305.17339/integrity","json":"/paper/2305.17339/citation-record.json","paper":"/paper/2305.17339"},"outbound":[],"paper":{"arxiv_id":"2305.17339","last_updated":"2023-05-27T02:40:45Z","latest_version":1,"primary_category":"cs.IR","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-06T15:34:13.017210Z","submitted_at":"2023-05-27T02:40:45Z","title":"Counterfactual Evaluation of Peer-Review Assignment Policies"},"reference_resolution":{"displayed":0,"state_counts":{"malformed_identifier":0,"metadata_mismatch":0,"parse_uncertain":0,"unresolved":0,"verified_exact":0,"verified_fuzzy":0},"total_outbound_references":0},"refusal":"A citation records a reference. It does not transfer a finding from one paper to another.","schema":"pith.paper-citation-record.v1","standing_sources":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-03T06:30:56.289259+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-03T06:30:50.922721+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"thesis":"As of 3 August 2026, this Paper Citation Record lists 0 of 0 outbound references and 1 inbound Pith citation observation for arXiv:2305.17339."}