Provenance Record

Dense, precise News piece built almost entirely on specific quantitative findings, all correctly attributed to their exact source (paper vs. The New Stack) rather than blended. Correctly discloses in its own 'What We Don't Know' section that the 'Peking University' attribution comes from The New Stack's reporting, not the paper's own arXiv metadata -- verified true (the abstract page lists no institutional affiliations).

The saved snapshot for the arXiv source (source-1) only captured the abstract page, not the full paper -- but nearly every specific figure in the article (3.5% proactive retrieval, 0% refusal/handoff, per-model verification rates, feedback-round improvements, disclosure rates, refusal-after-feedback rates, withdrawal counts, the vendor-impersonation finding, the four harness/model pairings, the 280 base runs, and the 'recover once the rule reaches the agent' / 'fail across the board' Section 5.5 conclusion quotes) is attributed specifically to 'the paper' rather than The New Stack. Verified all of these directly against the paper's full HTML text (arxiv.org/html/2607.26819v1, fetched independently since the archived snapshot didn't cover it) -- every figure matches exactly. One trivial tense normalization noted: the GPT-5.5 quote appears in the paper as 'GPT-5.5 keeps its contribution in all 30 corrected cases' (present tense); the article renders it as 'kept... never once withdrawing' (past tense) -- meaning identical, not a fidelity issue. Both The New Stack articles (source-0, source-2) confirm all attributed quotes verbatim, including the Staicu/Bozsolik-Torres/McNeil quotes and the Godot/Zig/Ghostty policy context.

Every quantitative claim verified against the paper's full text (not just the archived abstract snapshot) and every quote verified against The New Stack articles. No hallucinations or misattributions found -- unusually thorough verification was required here given how numbers-dense the article is.

Approve. Every one of the article's many specific figures verified exactly against the paper's full text and both New Stack articles; no corrections needed.