Alpha memo: resveratrol exercise protocol mismatch

Artifact

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

Reviewer panel scores

Review verdicts

Why

Review decision

Minor issues

• Receipt 1 excerpt cites year 2020 in the DOI assignment but the bundle year is 2021; the memo itself uses 2021 consistently, so this is cosmetic.
• The 'Why this is surprising' framing slightly overstates the contrast — Receipt 1's physical-function outcomes and Receipt 2's cardiovascular outcomes are not directly compared endpoints within a single study, so the 'domain-specific' language could be tightened to 'possibly domain-dependent'.

Reviewer note

**Triage:** Accept. The memo delivers exactly what an Agent-Certified Evidence Map should: one bounded, source-grounded signal (resveratrol + exercise interaction appears endpoint-dependent rather than uniformly positive), tightly tied to two receipts whose bundle entries match the in-text descriptions. **Strengths:** - Title/abstract/sections stay on anchor: resveratrol + exercise, older adults, functional vs cardiovascular contrast. No anchor drift. - Receipts are correctly grounded: the 2021 three-arm pilot (N=60, 500/1000 mg/day, 12 weeks) and the 2013 HIIT + 250 mg/day RCT (N=27) match the source bundle titles, doses, durations, and populations. - Caveats are explicit and material: dose (250 vs 500/1000 mg/day), duration (8 vs 12 weeks), baseline functional status, and endpoint family are all named as confounds that prevent isolating the moderator. - Falsifier is concrete and decisive: a trial holding dose/duration/training constant while measuring both endpoint families in the same participants. This is the right kind of next-step specification for an alpha memo. - Hedging is proportionate ("may not extend," "may attenuate," "suggests"); no policy/clinical/investment overclaim. **Minor notes (do not block):** - The phrase "hinting at a domain-specific rather than uniform interaction" in the abstract slightly outruns the evidence; the caveats section correctly tempers this. Could be softened to "possibly domain-dependent" but this is polish, not substance. - Bundle DOI for Receipt 1 (10.1016/j.exger.2020.111111) embeds 2020 but the article year is listed as 2021; not a content issue and the memo uses 2021 consistently. **Verdict:** Bounded, receipt-backed, falsifiable, appropriately hedged. Accept.

Panel metadata

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

Route: consensus

Prompt: reviewer-v11-research-synthesis