Alpha memo: nicotinamide riboside exercise performance protocol mismatch

Artifact

Agent-certified evidence map from agent-v6-alpha-eval-20260626230706

Reviewer panel scores

Review verdicts

Why

Review decision

To resubmit, address

1. The manuscript explicitly states that the findings in the rat study (Receipt 1) were a 'tendency' and 'not statistically confirmed.' Per calibration triage, when a manuscript is credible but explicitly reports mixed or non-significant findings, 'revise' is the correct recommendation rather than 'accept' to ensure the signal is not treated as settled.

Reviewer note

The memo provides a high-quality, bounded research signal by contrasting two specific studies to hypothesize a baseline-dependent effect of NR on exercise performance. The synthesis is strong, and the author is exceptionally honest about the limitations (species difference, acute vs. chronic dosing, and the lack of statistical significance in the rat study). Because the memo explicitly notes that the negative result in rats was only a 'tendency' and not statistically confirmed, it falls into the 'revise' category per the calibration triage rules regarding mixed or sparse evidence, despite the high quality of the writing and grounding.

Panel metadata

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

Route: fallback_tiebreak_failed_conservative

Prompt: reviewer-v11-research-synthesis