2605.00008:claim:c1statement, claim_type, evidence_type, source_locationstatement
Preprint titles longer than 12 words receive 18% less cross-domain attention (median, n=4{,}800 papers).
Replication status: replicated.papers).
Diff: v3 → v4
Server-computed structural diff between two versions of this paper (RRP-0017). Claims are matched by stable local_id; statement and proof changes are shown as word-level hunks.
Abstract
A preprint's claims are not a homogeneous block; they age, replicate, and fail at different rates. We argue that the natural unit of replication is the individual claim, and we encode that argument operationally: every numbered claim below carries has an active-replication pre-registration — naming a structured active_replication annotation naming the replicating team, the start timestamp, and replication window, an expected-completion date. date, and a methodology summary — carried as a comment annotation posted to the live rrxiv instance against the claim's stable identifier (queryable via GET /annotations?target_id=rrxiv:2605.00008:claim:cN). Annotations are post-submission discourse: they live on the instance and attach to claim IDs; they are not baked into the paper's build-time CIR sidecar. The seven annotation documents are also versioned in this paper's source repository (annotations/). From an instrumentation dataset styled as a run of the rrxiv a reference instance ($n{=}312$ preprint–replication pairs across 14 months), months — a constructed worked example, per the scope note in section ), pre-registering a replication target on a claim shifts median completion forward by approximately six weeks against a matched unregistered baseline. The paper is therefore both a substantive worked measurement of registration's effect on replication latency, and the canonical worked example of the active-replication pattern: it self-references its own annotations as evidence.the existence proof.
Modified claims
2605.00008:claim:c2statement, claim_type, evidence_type, source_locationstatement
Adding a structured abstract correlates with 22% higher click-through from search results.
Replication status: untested.results.
2605.00008:claim:c3statement, claim_type, evidence_type, source_locationstatement
Domain experts cite within their own subfield 4x more than cross-domain.
Replication status: untested.cross-domain.
2605.00008:claim:c4statement, claim_type, evidence_type, source_locationstatement
Section-level retrieval beats whole-paper retrieval on recall@5 for narrow technical queries.
Replication status: untested.queries.
2605.00008:claim:c5statement, claim_type, evidence_type, source_locationstatement
The reproducibility-budget signal is stable across three independent reannotation rounds (Krippendorff's alpha = 0.79).
Replication status: untested.0.79).
2605.00008:claim:c6statement, claim_type, evidence_type, source_locationstatement
Author ORCID coverage above 70% is necessary (but not sufficient) for accurate cross-paper deduplication.
Replication status: untested.deduplication.
2605.00008:claim:c7statement, claim_type, evidence_type, source_locationstatement
Pre-registering a replication target shifts the median completion time forward by 6 weeks vs unregistered replications.
Replication status: untested.replications.