Biswajit Jana

Open research programme · verified 2026-09-25

Research claims, with their evidence attached.

A reviewer-facing record of the Top-50 repository upgrade programme. Each completed entry connects a research question to generated results, validation, a versioned release, and an explicit boundary of inference.

121repositories audited
115eligible first-party
18 / 50upgrades complete
32ranked upgrades remaining

Completion rule. A repository is complete only after a scoped research question, generated evidence, explicit limitations, automated validation, a public release, and live-link verification.

Queue #1

EPRV Spectrograph Landscape

v0.15.0 · verified

Research questionHow strongly does resolving power improve the local photon-limited Doppler bound as intrinsic stellar line width changes?

Generated result

Increasing resolving power from 100,000 to 150,000 improves the controlled bound by 37.1%, 11.1%, and 2.48% for intrinsic Gaussian widths of 1.0, 2.5, and 5.0 km/s. The broad-line null below 10% is not rejected.

Evidence

  • 15 controlled scenarios
  • 4,000 seeded recoveries
  • 27 tests
  • Python 3.10/3.12/3.13 CI

Evidence maturity

Before63%63
After92%92

+29 rubric points

Queue #4

ExoLight Transit Lab

v1.4.0 · verified

Research questionHow badly can correlated time-series noise invalidate iid transit-depth uncertainties, and can event-clustered intervals restore coverage?

Generated result

With AR(1) correlation ρ=0.8, nominal 95% iid coverage falls to 54.9% and 56.1% for deep and shallow injections; event-clustered intervals reach 93.2% and 92.1%.

Evidence

  • 4 controlled scenarios
  • 4,000 seeded recoveries
  • deterministic reports
  • Scientific core, frontend, and Pages CI

Evidence maturity

Before58%58
After95%95

+37 rubric points

Queue #5

EXOhSPEC Th–Ar Atlas

v0.3.0 · verified

Research questionCan a multi-exposure ladder preserve strong calibration-feature centroids better than a single long exposure without degrading faint features?

Generated result

Across 7,000 strong-feature injections, pixelwise HDR lowers centroid RMSE from 0.012954 to 0.002086 pixel, an 83.9% reduction; faint-feature RMSE remains unchanged.

Evidence

  • 24 measured feature strengths
  • 24,000 seeded recoveries
  • 6 tests
  • Python 3.10/3.12/3.13 CI

Evidence maturity

Before52%52
After93%93

+41 rubric points

Queue #6

Research Portfolio Evidence Registry

v2026.09.24.3 · verified

Research questionCan a large research portfolio expose questions, generated results, validation, releases, and limitations in one reviewer-auditable layer?

Generated result

The first sixteen completed upgrades are represented by one validated schema and a deterministic public registry, while the page states that 34 ranked repositories remain unfinished.

Evidence

  • 121 repositories audited
  • 50-repository ranked queue
  • schema validation
  • deterministic HTML build and CI

Evidence maturity

Before60%60
After95%95

+35 rubric points

Queue #7

LATTICE Radiation Twin

v0.2.0 · verified

Research questionCan eight historical HST epochs distinguish calendar time from four cumulative radiation proxy components well enough to interpret individual coefficients?

Generated result

The component-attribution gate fails: six parameters leave two residual degrees of freedom, the standardized condition number is 175.31, maximum VIF is 4,881.4, and three exposure coefficients change sign under leave-one-epoch-out refits.

Evidence

  • 8 independent epochs
  • 4 identifiability diagnostics
  • 82 tests
  • Scientific and Pages CI

Evidence maturity

Before83%83
After98%98

+15 rubric points

Queue #8

Finding Earth 2.0

v2.1.2 · verified

Research questionWhen the scientific objective is reducing planet-radius uncertainty, can a larger scalar stellar-radius information score justify an indirect observation without measured covariance?

Generated result

Thirteen targets support both actions. Stellar radius has the larger own-parameter score for 10, but the indirect route wins for none at |rho| <= 0.90; Kepler-296 f requires |rho| = 0.995225 to break even.

Evidence

  • 13-target objective-conditioned audit
  • 295 tests and 63% coverage
  • 67 scientific invariants and 26/26 release gates
  • Deterministic 68-file publication bundle (SHA-256 1A69ECA68DD600373B80D2177468D663D4FD2CFBF81E434D88F2A9CCA5DFBAE3)
  • Gaia-preserving scheduled-refresh evidence contract

Evidence maturity

Before93%93
After99%99

+6 rubric points

Queue #9

AstroBis Small-Body Evidence

v1.3.1 · verified

Research questionHow sensitive is a 0.05 AU and 140 m close-approach screen to JPL distance intervals, missing diameters, assumed albedo, and row-limited query coverage?

Generated result

The reviewed 7,500-row chronological prefix contains 586 nominal-close approaches, of which 396 remain close at the three-sigma maximum distance; 190 nominal-close rows cross the distance boundary. Only 235 rows have measured diameters, and 61 nominal-close rows are albedo-sensitive around the 140 m screen.

Evidence

  • 7,500 of 39,427 matching JPL CAD rows with explicit 19.0% coverage
  • 235 measured diameters and 7,263 H-derived sensitivity intervals
  • Six numerical regression tests and deterministic JSON/CSV/SVG products
  • Cross-platform canonical-LF input SHA-256 633cee41d8cbab84f8ed037106b15b36088abce4bcca4c767df6e826d8f679b1
  • Node 24 validation, static build, Pages gate, and zero npm vulnerabilities

Evidence maturity

Before39%39
After96%96

+57 rubric points

Queue #10

GitHub Profile Evidence Index

v1.1.0 · verified

Research questionCan a GitHub profile distinguish reviewer-auditable research evidence from general portfolio discovery while keeping every concise claim traceable to a versioned source?

Generated result

Seven upstream records now route each research question and generated result to an exact source revision, versioned release, live evidence surface, and project-specific boundary; discovery-only links are explicitly excluded from that verified set.

Evidence

  • Seven pinned upstream evidence records
  • Deterministic JSON-to-Markdown/CSV/SVG build
  • Five schema, freshness, traceability, uniqueness, and boundary tests
  • Node 24 CI and zero dependency vulnerabilities
  • All 21 repository/release/live evidence URLs verified HTTP 200
  • Four release assets with GitHub-verified SHA-256 digests

Evidence maturity

Before36%36
After95%95

+59 rubric points

Queue #11

Spectral Noise Budget Studio

v1.1.0 · verified

Research questionAt four declared molecular feature wavelengths, which committed JWST/NIRCam profiles retain at least half of peak response?

Generated result

Across 16 feature/filter comparisons, four are in the half-power core, one is an edge placement, and eleven are outside useful sampled response. CH₄ at 3.30 μm in F277W retains about 0.026% of peak response, a 3,805× source-photon-limited relative-time proxy.

Evidence

  • 3,192 committed SVO throughput samples with source SHA-256 receipts
  • 16-row deterministic JSON and CSV audit
  • Linear interpolation, pivot wavelength, and equivalent-width calculations
  • 13 data-contract, numerical-property, and headline-result tests
  • Node 24 CI, Pages deployment, and zero dependency vulnerabilities
  • Four release assets with GitHub-verified SHA-256 digests

Evidence maturity

Before44%44
After95%95

+51 rubric points

Queue #12

Jana’s RV Doppler Observatory

v4.1.0 · verified

Research questionAre the 250 committed RV target files inference-ready under declared numerical, duplication, provenance, offset-separability, and outlier contracts, and can the browser analysis avoid instrument-zero-point confounding?

Generated result

Only 39 of 250 files pass all six inference-readiness gates. The audit finds 34,153 rows in repeated-epoch groups, 181 files with reference/offset confounding, and 44 files with extreme full-to-robust RV-span ratios; non-ready bundled files are now blocked from automatic scanning and fitting.

Evidence

  • 154,150 committed rows and 250 canonical SHA-256 file receipts
  • Group-centered weighted candidate-period scan with no false-alarm claim
  • Analytic amplitude and per-instrument systemic-offset solution in a bounded fixed-period grid
  • 11 JavaScript tests, 8 Python tests, 18 structural integrity checks, and 11 interface contracts
  • Dark/light WCAG-AA token audit, reduced-motion controls, semantic navigation, and 390 px overflow verification
  • Four v4.1 interface-evidence assets with GitHub-verified SHA-256 digests

Evidence maturity

Before32%32
After96%96

+64 rubric points

Queue #13

Adaptive Optics Wavefront Lab

v3.0.0 · verified

Research questionDoes the 300-frame browser reduction preserve the values, distributions, and temporal content of all 15,000 released CIAO adaptive-optics telemetry frames?

Generated result

Every retained sample matches the released FITS source within the declared six-decimal rounding, and all three distribution gates pass. The temporal-fidelity null is rejected: 20.89%, 9.19%, and 64.46% of full-rate gradient-RMS, command-RMS, and mean-flux power lies above the reduced product's 5 Hz Nyquist frequency.

Evidence

  • 15,000 released CIAO1 frames audited against 300 browser samples
  • Exact retained-point parity within six-decimal rounding
  • Three distribution gates pass and the predeclared temporal-fidelity gate fails
  • Released FITS source DOI, programme metadata, and MD5 receipt
  • Node 24 and Python 3.12 research verification plus Pages deployment
  • Six release assets with GitHub-verified SHA-256 digests

Evidence maturity

Before51%51
After95%95

+44 rubric points

Queue #14

Synthetic Point-Lens Microlensing Recovery Study

v0.5.1 · verified

Research questionUnder a declared Roman-motivated cadence and white-noise proxy, does crossing a blind event-detection threshold imply that the injected t0, u0, and tE are identifiable?

Generated result

The blind search detects 864 of 900 balanced synthetic injections (96.0%, Wilson 95% CI 94.5–97.1%) but recovers the predeclared parameters in 710 (78.9%, 76.1–81.4%). At F146=24 and tE=0.02 d, detection is 41/75 while parameter recovery is 22/75; 0/1,000 simple constant-flux nulls trigger, constraining that scoped null rate below 0.383% at 95% confidence.

Evidence

  • 900 injections with unique parameter-aware master, cadence, epoch, and noise seeds
  • 1,000 identically searched null realizations with raw rows and Wilson intervals
  • Truth-blind matched-filter proposal followed by bounded fitting and full-epoch chi-square evaluation
  • 39 tests, Ruff validation, and Python 3.10/3.12 CI
  • Clean-commit manifests, canonical cross-platform evidence hashes, generated CSV/JSON/SVG artifacts, and release-asset verification
  • Failed custom binary-lens validation preserved as a negative result and runtime-disabled

Evidence maturity

Before39%39
After95%95

+56 rubric points

Queue #15

K2-18 b Spectral Robustness Audit

v1.0.0 · verified

Research questionDo the repository's descriptive 4.3 micrometre contrast and a diagonal-error MIRI flat-spectrum test remain significant under predeclared window and leave-one-bin-out perturbations?

Generated result

The historical window reproduces at 4.07 ± 23.16 ppm (0.176 sigma), while 30 predeclared window choices span -0.861 to +2.258 sigma and none reaches |3 sigma|. The 27-bin MIRI flat fit gives p = 0.000968, but deleting the 5.375 micrometre bin raises p to 0.07832, so the result fails the declared every-one-bin-deletion robustness rule.

Evidence

  • 4,411-point NIRISS+NIRSpec spectrum and separate 28-bin MIRI source product with canonical SHA-256 receipts
  • 30 fully reported band/continuum definitions
  • 27 leave-one-bin-out MIRI refits
  • NASA Exoplanet Archive parameter snapshot with exact TAP query
  • 17 tests, Ruff validation, and Python 3.10/3.12/3.13 CI
  • Deterministic numerical JSON/CSV evidence and semantically validated SVG figures

Evidence maturity

Before45%45
After96%96

+51 rubric points

Queue #16

WASP-80 b Native-Channel Morphology Audit

v1.0.0 · verified

Research questionDoes the descriptive residual contrast between the published full and component-removed CH4 curves keep the same sign across declared adjacent-channel bin widths and origins in both transmission and emission?

Generated result

All 113 native source-data channels were reconstructed. The component-removal residual contrast remains positive across all 30 declared designs per geometry: 63.17 to 85.74 in transmission and 217.65 to 245.99 in emission. The result is posterior morphology sensitivity, not an independent methane detection test.

Evidence

  • 113 native JWST/NIRCam source-data channels with source and derivative SHA-256 receipts
  • 30 declared bin-width/origin designs per geometry and 60 fully reported rows
  • Complete leave-one-bin-out diagnostics
  • One-sector TESS acquisition boundary stated explicitly
  • 15 tests and Python 3.10/3.12/3.13 CI
  • Portable spectral evidence gates and tolerance-based nonlinear optimizer regression

Evidence maturity

Before50%50
After94%94

+44 rubric points

Queue #17

Spectrograph RV Proxy Generalization Audit

v2.0.0 · verified

Research questionAfter calibration at one fiducial spectrum, does a linear resolving-power proxy preserve the discrete photon-information bound across stellar line-width, depth, and line-count regimes?

Generated result

Across 288 predeclared synthetic spectra, the calibrated legacy proxy is at least twofold too optimistic in 39 scenarios and reaches a maximum exact-to-proxy uncertainty ratio of 2.924. From R=100,000 to 250,000 it claims a 60% gain for every line width, while the exact median gain falls to 5.86% for 10 km/s intrinsic lines and rises to 66.89% for 1 km/s lines.

Evidence

  • 288 fully reported scenarios across resolving power, intrinsic width, depth, and line count
  • Discrete Bouchy-style Poisson Fisher bound with fixed coverage and continuum-electron budget
  • Four-versus-eight-pixel convergence with maximum relative difference 1.162e-6 and zero primary-classification changes
  • Nine numerical tests and Node 20/22/24 CI
  • Protocol and scientific-model SHA-256 bindings plus byte-stable generated evidence
  • Seven release assets with GitHub-verified SHA-256 digests

Evidence maturity

Before41%41
After95%95

+54 rubric points

Queue #18

WASP-39 b Supplied-Model Sensitivity Audit

v2.0.0 · verified

Research questionDoes the descriptive preference for the archived full ScCHIMERA curve over its remove-CO2 curve retain its sign under strict common support, model integration, asymmetric-error rules, every rebin origin, covariance stress tests, and contiguous wavelength-block deletion?

Generated result

All 60 declared preprocessing designs retain a positive supplied-model contrast, spanning delta chi-square 559.6 to 780.4, and every single-bin deletion remains above 684.8. Yet deleting a 0.5-micrometre block around the 4.3-micrometre feature reduces the contrast to 3.19 and the outside-4.1-to-4.6-micrometre refit gives 6.04, demonstrating preprocessing stability but strong spectral localization.

Evidence

  • 93 strict common-support bins from the 94-bin Eureka PRISM spectrum
  • 60 fully reported sampling/error/bin-factor/origin designs
  • 20-cell illustrative covariance grid with eigenvalue and condition-number diagnostics
  • All declared single-bin and 0.10/0.25/0.50-micrometre contiguous-block deletions
  • Cross-platform offline SHA-256 verification against exact Zenodo ZIP entries
  • 14 tests and Python 3.11/3.12 CI with SHA-pinned Node 24 actions
  • Seven release assets with GitHub-verified SHA-256 digests

Evidence maturity

Before55%55
After95%95

+40 rubric points

Queue #19

WASP-43 b Phase-Curve Identifiability Audit

v2.0.0 · verified

Research questionDoes a pre-eclipse first-harmonic maximum remain directionally stable across reductions, wavelength windows, aggregation rules, uncertainty conventions, and wavelength deletion, and can four archived phase spectra identify the source paper's two-harmonic model?

Generated result

All 180 predeclared first-harmonic designs place the maximum before eclipse, spanning -9.71 to -7.66 degrees with a median of -8.82 degrees; leave-one-trusted-wavelength results span -9.72 to -8.95 degrees. Four phase observations identify the three-parameter first harmonic with one residual degree of freedom, while the five-parameter two-harmonic design has rank four and is underidentified.

Evidence

  • Two HDF5 spectra verified byte-for-byte against exact Zenodo archive members
  • 11 trusted 5.25-10.25 micrometre bins used for inference and three shadowed-region bins retained only for provenance/display
  • 180 fully reported reduction/window/aggregation/error-rule designs
  • 22 leave-one-wavelength-out refits across both reductions
  • Explicit one- versus two-harmonic design-matrix rank audit
  • 13 tests and Python 3.11/3.12 CI with SHA-pinned Node 24 actions
  • Seven v2.0.0 release assets with GitHub-verified digests

Evidence maturity

Before48%48
After94%94

+46 rubric points

Queue #20

HAT-P-11 b Helium Estimator Sensitivity Audit

v2.0.0 · verified

Research questionDoes the transit-centred helium dip remain positive across declared phase windows, baseline exclusions, baseline sides, weighting rules, and point deletion while preserving exact archive provenance?

Generated result

All 74 valid predeclared estimator designs retain a positive helium dip, spanning 0.511% to 1.160% with a median of 0.841%. The 16 default-design leave-one-point-out estimates span 0.747% to 1.003%; formal signal-to-noise values of 3.64 to 14.06 are conditional on independent reported errors and are not an independent detection significance.

Evidence

  • Two renamed inputs matched to exact Zenodo ZIP members by canonical-LF SHA-256
  • 74 fully reported phase-window, exclusion, weighting, and baseline-side designs
  • 16 leave-one-point-out estimates for the default in- and out-of-transit samples
  • Published 1.08 +/- 0.05% result kept separate from the repository estimator
  • Four tests and Python 3.11 CI with SHA-pinned Node 24 actions
  • Six v2.0.0 release assets with GitHub-verified SHA-256 digests

Evidence maturity

Before44%44
After94%94

+50 rubric points

What this registry does not claim

Maturity scores measure the presence of auditable research practices across ten documented dimensions. They are not peer-review scores, citation metrics, or literal multipliers of scientific quality. Repositories not shown here remain in the ranked queue and are not represented as upgraded.