Codex/analysis integrity fixes

CHANGELOG.md

@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ Documentation tooling now counts prose separately from fenced code and diagrams,
 
 The abbreviated license file has been replaced with the official Apache License 2.0 text. Project attribution is recorded separately in NOTICE, and citation metadata identifies the author as an independent Romanian researcher. The existing release tag is preserved. The citation's release version is not silently advanced to an unpublished development version merely because the Python package declares that version.
 
-Analysis-integrity work now includes reproducible time handling for navigation scores, plus the two targeted corrections recorded after the documentation baseline. Pathway enrichment now applies monotonic Benjamini–Hochberg adjustment over the full valid pathway family, including valid pathways with no observed overlap in the correction denominator. Multi-omics grouping now rejects duplicate sample-layer pairs and inconsistent participant mappings instead of silently overwriting earlier values. The frontend now exposes key provenance boundaries and has build-plus-browser smoke coverage, but it still needs broader accessibility, visual regression, and production deployment evidence. Publication origin classification is improved, but provider origin remains a retrieval-boundary label rather than scientific validation. No clinical validation, independent benchmark, or operational scientific review service is asserted by this documentation entry.
+Analysis-integrity work now includes reproducible time handling, record-level score metadata, auditable score components, deterministic citation-export manifests, and SHA-256 export fingerprints for navigation scores through both the evidence engine and the evidence API, plus the two targeted corrections recorded after the documentation baseline. Pathway enrichment now applies monotonic Benjamini–Hochberg adjustment over the full valid pathway family, including valid pathways with no observed overlap in the correction denominator. Multi-omics grouping now rejects duplicate sample-layer pairs and inconsistent participant mappings instead of silently overwriting earlier values. The frontend now exposes key provenance boundaries and has build-plus-browser smoke coverage, but it still needs broader accessibility, visual regression, and production deployment evidence. Publication origin classification is improved, but provider origin remains a retrieval-boundary label rather than scientific validation. No clinical validation, independent benchmark, or operational scientific review service is asserted by this documentation entry.
 
 ## [0.2.0] - 2026-09-14
 

README.md

@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ Synthetic records are software fixtures only and are not scientific conclusions.
 
 ## Scientific specification
 
-The [whitepaper](WHITEPAPER.md) defines the data model, provider contract, scoring equations, validation protocol, trust boundaries, and research roadmap. The [academic manifesto](ACADEMIC_MANIFESTO.md) states the review and ethics commitments behind the implementation.
+The [whitepaper](WHITEPAPER.md) defines the data model, provider contract, scoring equations, validation protocol, trust boundaries, and research roadmap. The [academic manifesto](ACADEMIC_MANIFESTO.md) states the review and ethics commitments behind the implementation. The [OpenLongevityLab impact article](docs/research/openlongevity-impact-article.md) explains the repository purpose, current maturity, intended final stage, collaboration path, and donation link in long-form academic prose.
 
 ## Repository structure
 

docs/API.md

@@ -79,13 +79,13 @@ Evidence, evidence detail, and research-gap routes operate on synthetic fixtures
 
 `GET /api/v1/evidence/export/citation` is the first executable export boundary for the fixture corpus. It returns `mode: citation-eligible`, an `items` list, an `excluded` list, totals for both lists, a schema version, and the research disclaimer. Under the current fixture-only evidence mode, `SYN-*` records are excluded with reason `synthetic_fixture`, so the citation-eligible item list is empty for the bundled cellular-senescence demonstration. Non-synthetic records must also carry `review_status: verified` plus reviewer identity, review timestamp, and review notes before they can enter the citation-eligible item list. This is intentional: the route proves that the platform can reject demonstration data and unverified evidence rather than allowing attractive records to leak into citation workflows.
 
-The citation export route should not be described as a complete publication export system. It does not yet produce bibliographic formats, persistent publication manifests, human-review certificates, or provider-backed evidence bundles. It establishes a narrow behavior that was previously documented only as a policy: synthetic fixtures are not observations and are excluded by default from citation-eligible evidence export. Future work can extend the same contract to persisted publication records once review status, source authenticity, and export manifests are implemented for that path.
+The citation export route should not be described as a complete publication export system. It does not yet produce bibliographic formats, human-review certificates, or provider-backed evidence bundles. It establishes a narrow behavior that was previously documented only as a policy: synthetic fixtures are not observations and are excluded by default from citation-eligible evidence export. The response now includes a deterministic manifest with included and excluded identifiers, exclusion reasons, scoring metadata, and a SHA-256 `export_fingerprint` so repeated exports can be compared. Future work can extend the same contract to persisted publication records once review status and source authenticity are implemented for that path.
 
 `POST /api/v1/evidence/{record_id}/review` records a persistent review event when PostgreSQL is configured and the caller supplies `X-Review-Key` matching `OPENLONGEVITY_REVIEW_KEY`. The request body includes `status`, `reviewer`, `reviewed_at`, and `notes`. The server rejects machine-only statuses as human review actions and requires the same metadata that citation export later expects from verified records. Without a configured review key, the route returns `REVIEW_DISABLED`; without a configured and migrated database, it returns `DATABASE_NOT_CONFIGURED`. This keeps the preview from pretending that review events are persistent when the audit table is not available.
 
 `GET /api/v1/evidence/{record_id}/review-events` lists stored review events for a fixture evidence record when the review repository is configured. The route returns audit events, not a full reviewer user interface. It is the persistence boundary for the human-review workflow: reviewer actions can be stored, inspected, and connected to citation-export eligibility, while user management and role delegation remain future work.
 
-Evidence grades and scores require their methodological labels. The A–G mapping is a project taxonomy, and the numerical navigation score uses heuristic constants. Neither is a calibrated scientific certainty estimate. When a publication date is present, the score depends on the scoring time; evidence summaries now expose `scoring_as_of` so clients can record that temporal basis. The API's ability to serialize a number does not justify describing it as a treatment effect, probability of truth, or measure of human longevity benefit.
+Evidence grades and scores require their methodological labels. The A–G mapping is a project taxonomy, and the numerical navigation score uses heuristic constants. Neither is a calibrated scientific certainty estimate. When a publication date is present, the score depends on the scoring time; `GET /api/v1/evidence` accepts an optional `scoring_as_of` ISO 8601 datetime query parameter and evidence summaries expose the normalized `scoring_as_of` value so clients can record that temporal basis. Evidence items and detail responses include `navigation_score`, `score_method`, record-level `scoring_as_of`, and `score_components` metadata so exports remain traceable to the scoring contract. The API's ability to serialize a number does not justify describing it as a treatment effect, probability of truth, or measure of human longevity benefit.
 
 Publication origin classification is now explicit for persisted publications, including synthetic seed rows and records saved through the PubMed ingestion path. Clients and operators must still avoid treating `synthetic: false` as proof of scientific reliability. It means the record was not classified as synthetic by the storage contract and entered through a provider-boundary path; it does not mean the publication is complete, unretracted, clinically relevant, or human reviewed.
 

docs/README.md

@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
 - `evidence/Evidence-Model.md` — record semantics and grading.
 - `biomarkers/Biomarkers.md` — measurement categories and limitations.
 - `research/Research-Gap-Detector.md` — prioritization heuristics.
+- `research/openlongevity-impact-article.md` — long-form impact article describing purpose, current stage, final target, collaboration, and donation support.
 - `security/THREAT_MODEL.md` — threats and mitigations.
 - `architecture/adr/` — decisions that affect long-term design.
 - `academic/` — thirty-one academic research notes, with expansion status and reading paths in the collection index.
@@ -12,7 +13,7 @@
 
 This directory connects the implementation of OpenLongevity with the explanations needed to inspect it. The project includes a Python research core, provider adapters, publication persistence, an API, experimental analysis utilities, and an early web interface. Those components have different maturity levels. Documentation should help readers identify what is implemented, what has been tested, and what remains a proposed research method. It should not present every topic in the directory as an available product feature.
 
-The root [README](../README.md) introduces current capabilities and installation assumptions. The [whitepaper](../WHITEPAPER.md) provides the main technical and scientific specification, including corrections to earlier examples and maturity claims. The [academic manifesto](../ACADEMIC_MANIFESTO.md) explains the project's standards for evidence and accountability. This index helps readers move from those general documents to focused references without relying on the removed wiki directory.
+The root [README](../README.md) introduces current capabilities and installation assumptions. The [whitepaper](../WHITEPAPER.md) provides the main technical and scientific specification, including corrections to earlier examples and maturity claims. The [academic manifesto](../ACADEMIC_MANIFESTO.md) explains the project's standards for evidence and accountability. The [impact article](research/openlongevity-impact-article.md) gives an external-facing academic overview of the repository, its current research-prototype stage, its intended final form, and how collaborators or donors can support the work. This index helps readers move from those general documents to focused references without relying on the removed wiki directory.
 
 ## Start from the question you need to answer