{"as_of":"2026-08-05T03:58:00Z","caps":{"database_statements":6,"inbound":100,"outbound":100},"context_digest":"sha256:556085fec59c47694003aee626c89da8d51cee5c7990f3d373bed2234ed7f649","coverage":[{"denominator":11,"lane":"reference_resolution","note":"Typed states for the displayed outbound observations.","records_observed":11,"source":"paper_references, paper_reference_links","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.967554Z","state":"measured"},{"denominator":11,"lane":"standing_notices","note":"One-hop event checks from named stored sources.","records_observed":11,"source":"scholarly_work_events, retraction_status_cache","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T06:34:03.388597+00:00","state":"measured"},{"denominator":0,"lane":"inbound_itemization","note":"Pith citing papers itemized under the disclosed page cap.","records_observed":0,"source":"paper_references, paper_reference_links","source_observed_at":null,"state":"measured"},{"denominator":1,"lane":"external_citation_measurements","note":"A source-named dated measurement, never combined with another source.","records_observed":0,"source":"cited_works","source_observed_at":null,"state":"measured"}],"external_citation_measurements":[],"inbound":[],"links":{"evidence":"/evidence","html":"/paper/2509.09641/citation-record","integrity":"/paper/2509.09641/integrity","json":"/paper/2509.09641/citation-record.json","paper":"/paper/2509.09641"},"outbound":[{"citation":{"cited_paper":null,"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":null,"snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.434753Z","title":"Amanatidis, H","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2023},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2509.09641","last_updated":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:02:54.745644Z","submitted_at":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","title":"Maximizing social welfare among EF1 allocations at the presence of two types of agents","version":1},"reference_index":1,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.434753Z"},"links":{"citing_paper":"/paper/2509.09641"},"observation_digest":"sha256:77a53c5083411cd58a936b6e7e830b9d66b1cb92499c2e01d08615d711b5b62c","observation_id":"15239f97-bca4-476c-888c-8a5d22414182","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.434753Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":null,"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":null,"snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.515855Z","title":"Amanatidis, G","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2022},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2509.09641","last_updated":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:02:54.745644Z","submitted_at":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","title":"Maximizing social welfare among EF1 allocations at the presence of two types of agents","version":1},"reference_index":2,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.515855Z"},"links":{"citing_paper":"/paper/2509.09641"},"observation_digest":"sha256:36e2b3b6282ff063667f9e7fe44340a1807e620223941ce8c77de8ae6e5bbe33","observation_id":"f1593595-f515-49c1-a6ca-862a024754b5","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.515855Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":null,"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":null,"snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.581118Z","title":null,"venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2023},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2509.09641","last_updated":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:02:54.745644Z","submitted_at":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","title":"Maximizing social welfare among EF1 allocations at the presence of two types of agents","version":1},"reference_index":3,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.581118Z"},"links":{"citing_paper":"/paper/2509.09641"},"observation_digest":"sha256:ef6006960ef4bd4f3f658fcca14a12947de330521c6426b87e658266f0ef5644","observation_id":"5643e0fb-9ecf-41eb-a355-f6138fcaa962","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.581118Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":null,"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":null,"snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.631835Z","title":"Barman, U","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2020},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2509.09641","last_updated":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:02:54.745644Z","submitted_at":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","title":"Maximizing social welfare among EF1 allocations at the presence of two types of agents","version":1},"reference_index":4,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.631835Z"},"links":{"citing_paper":"/paper/2509.09641"},"observation_digest":"sha256:cd8abeca15d8f73f0c4e952d990181eba821ba04a9690d951c336da1d6a5a653","observation_id":"0ccb7832-ff30-493a-851e-5a5420624fa3","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.631835Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":null,"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":null,"snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.711369Z","title":null,"venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2021},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2509.09641","last_updated":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:02:54.745644Z","submitted_at":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","title":"Maximizing social welfare among EF1 allocations at the presence of two types of agents","version":1},"reference_index":5,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.711369Z"},"links":{"citing_paper":"/paper/2509.09641"},"observation_digest":"sha256:da442b2cb9599df4926f69d50bb23809bbba6d0c3a05f366ee49ad4c58929eb5","observation_id":"a63e98f4-ee5c-4d63-be5b-f8fcf0b7ee69","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.711369Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":null,"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":null,"snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.731145Z","title":null,"venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2509.09641","last_updated":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:02:54.745644Z","submitted_at":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","title":"Maximizing social welfare among EF1 allocations at the presence of two types of agents","version":1},"reference_index":6,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.731145Z"},"links":{"citing_paper":"/paper/2509.09641"},"observation_digest":"sha256:709a97d0429df866a0b4ed2e196b83cee8d7cddd69f94b4cba37538eb50504e5","observation_id":"3966591f-aeb0-4e0b-8d2d-7dc035daea9b","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.731145Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":null,"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":null,"snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.778507Z","title":null,"venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2011},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2509.09641","last_updated":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:02:54.745644Z","submitted_at":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","title":"Maximizing social welfare among EF1 allocations at the presence of two types of agents","version":1},"reference_index":7,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.778507Z"},"links":{"citing_paper":"/paper/2509.09641"},"observation_digest":"sha256:1a2fd7d75a64caef30a3d6717863271775f8aca502604d5f30d2a6929cae5d3f","observation_id":"33bf2020-25eb-4f9a-a91e-90feb3d46740","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.778507Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":null,"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":null,"snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.813577Z","title":"Caragiannis, D","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2019},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2509.09641","last_updated":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:02:54.745644Z","submitted_at":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","title":"Maximizing social welfare among EF1 allocations at the presence of two types of agents","version":1},"reference_index":8,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.813577Z"},"links":{"citing_paper":"/paper/2509.09641"},"observation_digest":"sha256:bf25be3615f09f6714d87368b429e11c00c5678ec22e9993c3847697d1992008","observation_id":"c50da790-b026-4bdd-9522-2b4af6bb35c2","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.813577Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":null,"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":null,"snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.878154Z","title":"Lipton, E","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2004},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2509.09641","last_updated":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:02:54.745644Z","submitted_at":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","title":"Maximizing social welfare among EF1 allocations at the presence of two types of agents","version":1},"reference_index":9,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.878154Z"},"links":{"citing_paper":"/paper/2509.09641"},"observation_digest":"sha256:039a8e5d9b05434abacdcd41039acbdd94673450f2269e293ff8cd42b7acd063","observation_id":"63d1ff87-14db-418c-aaec-def65a85c5a0","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.878154Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":null,"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":null,"snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.921816Z","title":"Steinhaus","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":1949},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2509.09641","last_updated":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:02:54.745644Z","submitted_at":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","title":"Maximizing social welfare among EF1 allocations at the presence of two types of agents","version":1},"reference_index":10,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.921816Z"},"links":{"citing_paper":"/paper/2509.09641"},"observation_digest":"sha256:a437c3890fd214d6e37b9b83cf52fd9b871fb97ba2b536b68f7f05aaa3a323e7","observation_id":"a6b5ebee-4662-4665-bce2-0c14a3fac13b","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.921816Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":null,"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":null,"snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.967554Z","title":null,"venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":1974},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2509.09641","last_updated":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:02:54.745644Z","submitted_at":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","title":"Maximizing social welfare among EF1 allocations at the presence of two types of agents","version":1},"reference_index":11,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.967554Z"},"links":{"citing_paper":"/paper/2509.09641"},"observation_digest":"sha256:90e1d2fa6555aa7a0cb115ff95710bb532b2d44b16f6a04fc0aa0f9662915db9","observation_id":"c95d809a-ab38-4659-9781-37421e619a99","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:03:03.967554Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}}],"paper":{"arxiv_id":"2509.09641","last_updated":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","latest_version":1,"primary_category":"cs.GT","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T19:02:54.745644Z","submitted_at":"2025-09-11T17:28:01Z","title":"Maximizing social welfare among EF1 allocations at the presence of two types of agents"},"reference_resolution":{"displayed":11,"state_counts":{"malformed_identifier":0,"metadata_mismatch":0,"parse_uncertain":0,"unresolved":11,"verified_exact":0,"verified_fuzzy":0},"total_outbound_references":11},"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":"2026-08-04T06:34:03.388597+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T06:33:57.428241+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"thesis":"As of 5 August 2026, this Paper Citation Record lists 11 of 11 outbound references and 0 inbound Pith citation observations for arXiv:2509.09641."}