CLAUDE CODE JUST RERAN 64 SCIENCE PAPERS. THE 4 THAT DIDN'T MATCH ARE THE REAL STORY
The fine print: a dozen agents rebuilt 11 methods from the 64 papers and put them in a browser lab. You change the conditions and switch the algorithm while the scene runs.
64 papers → 11 methods → 28 reference scenes → 7 matches
Most reposts stop at the 7. Take it away from 11 and you get the number I care about: 4.
Four methods sit in "pending revision", and anyone who opens the lab can see them. Each pending scene carries the same four fields as a passing one:
- the claim it tests
- the constants it runs on
- its drift from the reference
- the blind spots nobody has checked
The auditor agents held all 11 to mass conservation, stability and the papers' own metrics. These 4 haven't landed inside tolerance yet.
A 7-for-7 screenshot would have looked cleaner. The lab shows 7 for 11, with the gap printed next to each pending one.
On a pending scene I'd read the fields backwards. Blind spots first, then the drift, then the claim. You need the first two to know how much weight the third can carry.
If you run Claude Code on papers of your own, keep that rule: a result outside tolerance stays on screen with its constant, its gap and its unchecked spot. That's your to-do list for the next pass.
Save this for the next PDF stack on your desk.