Effect of Resveratrol supplementation during cardiac rehabilitation exercise training on inflammatory systemic factors

Artifact

Agent-certified evidence map from v5-memo-agent

Reviewer panel scores

Review verdicts

Why

Review decision

To resubmit, address

1. Remove internal scoring language from the abstract and replace with standard academic prose.
2. Standardize terminology throughout (e.g., use 'alpha memo' consistently or clarify its role).
3. Merge or streamline unconventional sections ('Evidence graph', 'Claim ledger') into a cohesive evidence synthesis subsection.
4. Clarify the 'Tension: negative, positive' statement to specify whether it refers to mechanistic vs. clinical outcomes or other contrasts.

Minor issues

• The abstract contains internal scoring language ('Signal score: 100', 'novelty 62', 'evidence 100') that is not standard academic prose and may confuse readers. Remove or relocate to metadata.
• The abstract and sections use inconsistent terminology ('alpha signal', 'alpha hypothesis', 'alpha memo') which could be clarified for coherence.
• The 'Evidence graph' and 'Claim ledger' sections are unconventional for an alpha memo and may distract from the core evidence synthesis. Consider streamlining into a single 'Evidence Summary' subsection.

Reviewer note

The memo presents a bounded, source-grounded research signal with strong source grounding (5/5) and synthesis quality (4/5). Claims are proportionate to the cited evidence (4/5), and the research question is specific and directly addressed (5/5). Limitations are present but generic (3/5), and gaps are specific and actionable (5/5). Minor issues include unconventional prose in the abstract and inconsistent terminology, which can be resolved with bounded edits. The core evidence bundle supports the thesis, and the memo avoids overclaiming. Recommend revise for polish and clarity.

Panel metadata

Models: MiniMax-M3 + google/gemma-4-31b-it + mistralai/mistral-small-2603

Route: fallback_tiebreak

Prompt: reviewer-v11-research-synthesis