Curation notes (step 2b)
- initial_count: 23
- curated_target_N: 5
- curated_count: 5
- trust_baseline: 0.6 - theory/argument-heavy corpus, trust caps ~0.85-0.90; default 0.8 leaves only a 0.05-0.10 band so usefulness is swamped and the ranking degenerates to raw trust (it curated two low-usefulness high-trust items, S-19/S-20). 0.6 restores a usefulness-driven ordering while still cutting the weak tail.
- scoring_rubric: trust_score = P(finding survives clean replication / expert scrutiny), [0,1]; usefulness = log-scale ~1-5 of how much the data moves the question if true; combined_score = usefulness x (trust_score - baseline).
- D-node reconciliation: no-op; only D-1 exists (scorer 2 minted none), no duplicates.
Final cut
S-14, S-5, S-13, S-1, S-23.
rank_departures
- S-1 (0.59, rank 7) included over S-21 (0.70, rank 5): S-1 is the strongest affirmative astrophysical safety argument and the only curated source resting on D-1 / cosmic-ray-survival - the empirical hinge the question asks about. Script flagged D-1 and cosmic-ray-survival as shut out of the cut; this swap fixes both.
- S-21 dropped: risk-methodology critique redundant with retained S-23 (which attacks the same empirical backbone more specifically).
Accepted skew
None outstanding after the swap. S-5 (raw spectrum) and S-1 (argument resting partly on S-5/D-1) are mildly correlated but sit at different layers (data vs safety argument); acceptable given coverage need.
Script ranking (baseline 0.6)
baseline 0.60 | 23 scored | 18 clear the baseline | cut = top 5
RANKING (* = in the prospective cut)
id comb trust use title
* S-14 1.12 0.85 4.5 Hawking 1975 - Particle creation by black holes
* S-5 0.90 0.90 3.0 Measurement of the cosmic-ray energy spectrum using
* S-13 0.88 0.85 3.5 Arkani-Hamed, Dimopoulos and Dvali 1998 - The hierar
* S-23 0.80 0.80 4.0 Is a doomsday catastrophe likely - the observer-sele
* S-21 0.70 0.80 3.5 Probing the Improbable - risk-argument flaw ceiling
S-11 0.60 0.75 4.0 Dimopoulos and Landsberg 2001 - Black Holes at the L
S-1 0.59 0.74 4.2 Astrophysical implications of hypothetical stable Te
S-15 0.55 0.82 2.5 Meade and Randall 2008 - Black holes and quantum gra
S-3 0.53 0.79 2.8 Review of speculative disaster scenarios at RHIC
S-12 0.51 0.75 3.4 Giddings and Thomas 2002 - High-energy colliders as
S-8 0.50 0.80 2.5 Search for stable strange quark matter in lunar soil
S-20 0.50 0.85 2.0 LA-602 (1946) - Ignition of the Atmosphere with Nucl
S-10 0.44 0.82 2.0 Spectropolarimetric survey of hydrogen-rich white dw
S-19 0.42 0.88 1.5 Sancho v. U.S. Department of Energy - the Wagner-San
S-2 0.40 0.76 2.5 How stable is our vacuum (Hut and Rees 1983)
S-4 0.31 0.74 2.2 Will relativistic heavy-ion colliders destroy our pl
S-22 0.30 0.72 2.5 A critical look at risk assessments for global catas
S-7 0.10 0.63 3.3 LSAG 2008 - Review of the Safety of LHC Collisions
S-17 0.00 0.60 3.0 Comments on claimed risk from metastable black holes [below baseline]
S-9 -0.09 0.55 1.8 Blaizot et al. 2003 - Study of Potentially Dangerous [below baseline]
S-6 -0.30 0.40 1.5 CERN FAQ - Will CERN generate a black hole [below baseline]
S-16 -0.80 0.40 4.0 Potential catastrophic risk from metastable quantum [below baseline]
S-18 -1.68 0.12 3.5 Rössler's Abraham-solution critique of LHC black-hol [below baseline]
REPRESENTATION OF THE CUT
- generated: 2026-07-20