Completed example — Public Release Screening Checklist

Material: Public PISA worked examples used in this resource
Purpose: Demonstrate release decisions for research-process evidence

Evidence status

• Direct quotations are avoided unless verified against an authoritative source.
• Reconstructed conversation wording is paraphrased rather than presented as verbatim quotation.
• Current interpretation is distinguishable from contemporaneous evidence.
• Empirical claims refer to frozen/verified project evidence.

Confidentiality and permissions

• Confidential peer-review material is excluded.
• Private collaborator material is excluded unless suitable for public release.
• Personal identifiers are not required for the examples.
• Third-party imagery is not required for these resource records.
• Journal/publisher confidentiality is not used as public process evidence.

Research claims

• PISA is presented as a worked illustration, not validation of the reason-provenance framework.
• Generated code/text is not described as verified evidence merely because it was generated.
• Methodological claims reflect the PCA/comparator evidence.
• The B4→B9 direct-flow interpretation is not repeated as a valid inference.
• Attribution claims remain bounded to the surviving evidence.
• Retrospective claim-preservation records are not described as if formal contracts necessarily existed at the original decision time.

Release decision

Suitable for public release as a bounded worked example.

Raw private conversations, confidential reviews and unreleased internal evidence dossiers remain outside the public resource.