Methodology History

JuryPress publishes automatically, and its method has changed while it has been running. Reviews are not rewritten when the method moves on: each one stays as it was generated, because editing old work to match a newer standard would erase the record of the standard changing. What changes instead is whether a review is comparable enough to rank.

Rankings require a complete, loadable statement-level evidence map. Reviews without one remain published and readable, and are marked Historical methodology. That mark is a statement about the record, not about the review's conclusions — a review generated under an earlier method is not thereby wrong. Substantive errors are handled separately: they are corrected, and the correction is shown on the review itself.

Of 41 published reviews: 30 currently ranked, 6 historical methodology, 5 editorially withdrawn, 0 unranked for insufficient evidence.

Season 2, opening runsschema 2.0.0 · prompt 2.0.0

Methodology
A single generation request produced the article and its scores together, with evidence collected beforehand and referenced in the evaluation.
Limitation discovered
Nothing recorded which published sentence rested on which piece of evidence, so coverage could not be checked after the fact.
Change introduced
Statement-level annotation was added to the generation contract so claims could be traced individually.
Ranking treatment
Published and reachable. Not ranked: no current-format evidence map.

Season 2, early runsschema 2.0.0 · prompt 2.1.0

Methodology
Statement annotations were carried inside the generation request itself, alongside the article.
Limitation discovered
Asking one request to both write and audit its own prose meant the audit shared the writer's blind spots, and hedged wording was rewarded.
Change introduced
Judges moved to a recommendation contract, separating the verdict from its justification.
Ranking treatment
Published and reachable. Not ranked: no current-format evidence map.

Season 2, mid runsschema 2.1.0 · prompt 2.1.0

Methodology
Judges recorded a recommended next step rather than a decisive question, with annotations still produced in the writing request.
Limitation discovered
Mapping remained coupled to generation, so a mapping failure could still influence the article.
Change introduced
Evidence mapping was split into a second, separate request that runs after the article is fixed.
Ranking treatment
Published and reachable. Not ranked: no current-format evidence map.

Season 2, pre-editorial runsschema 2.1.0 · prompt 3.0.0

Methodology
The editorial prompt was in place, but the evidence map was not yet written as a separate artefact.
Limitation discovered
There was still no standalone record binding the published article to its sources.
Change introduced
evidence-map.json was introduced as a separate file, bound to a hash of the published article.
Ranking treatment
Published and reachable. Not ranked: no current-format evidence map.