# kaal:position:2026-08-08-365

**Affirmed position.** Breznau and coauthors qualify Kaal's classification of the current estimates as interim. In a computational reproduction experiment, 85 independent teams attempted to reproduce numerical results from the same study. Even the transparent group reproduced 95.7 percent of directions and significance classifications, but only 76.9 percent of estimates within 1 percent of the original values. Only 14 teams reproduced every result within that tolerance. The authors therefore show that access to code improves verification but does not remove researcher error or procedural variation. They estimate that more than one independent attempt may be needed for reliable reproduction.

The comparison is methodological. The source does not inspect Kaal's E2B campaign, reconcile its amendment authority, or verify its estimates. It supports treating those estimates as interim until the recorded provenance is reconciled and independent reproduction determines whether the numerical results hold.

**Status.** affirmed  **Published.** 2026-08-08

**Holds when.**

- The response is limited to the exact interim-estimates proposition and the one mapped Kaal claim.
- External evidence level: complete peer-reviewed version-of-record PDF with DOI-bound Crossref, OpenAlex, Semantic Scholar, and Europe PMC identity records.
- Mapping review tier: independent substantive scholarly-growth qualification.
- The article does not inspect Kaal's E2B campaign, reconcile its amendment authority, or verify any of its estimates.
- The source studies reproduction of one social-science analysis. It does not establish a universal replication rate or a fixed number of attempts for every study.
- The source supports an interim evidentiary classification pending provenance reconciliation and independent reproduction. It does not determine whether Kaal's current numerical estimates will hold.
- The publisher page and publisher PDF returned HTTP 403. The complete public repository copy is bound to the version of record by its DOI, title, 185-author roster, journal citation, and concordant Crossref, OpenAlex, Semantic Scholar, and Europe PMC records.

**Current debate.** The reliability of replications: a study in computational reproductions: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.241038

**Extends.** kaal:claim:7261481-032: https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/7261481-032

**Scholarly basis.** Wulf A. Kaal, Computative Economics: A Framework for Economic Analysis under Computational Abundance (2026). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=7261481

**Source PDF sha256.** `78c42db521624f7398717732a7fa51a6e3157a5adf02a2e09fbab15e0cf920d9`

**Evidence level.** complete peer-reviewed version-of-record PDF with DOI-bound Crossref, OpenAlex, Semantic Scholar, and Europe PMC identity records

**Mapping review tier.** independent substantive scholarly-growth qualification

**Mapping confidence.** 0.96  **Mapping ambiguous.** false

**Topics.** research-methods, scholarly-growth-coverage, scholarly-literature, computational-reproducibility, independent-verification, evidence-provenance

**Provenance.** Affirmed in kaal-review:2026-08-13:scholarly-growth-7261481-032-reviewed-v1 at https://wulfkaal.github.io/positions/by-claim/7261481-032.html.

**Record type.** This is a dated commentary position that extends a scholarly corpus claim. It is not a verbatim claim extracted from the paper.

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of the position.