result-to-claim

To evaluate experiment results against research claims, collect methods, datasets, and baselines from sources like wandb and log files, then use Codex MCP to objectively judge claim support and route next actions.

Yes, you can use wandb logs to determine hypothesis support by collecting experiment data and sending it to Codex MCP, which judges whether the results support the intended claim and identifies missing evidence.

The best way to route next actions after experiments finish is to parse a structured verdict on claim support and confidence, determining whether to pivot, supplement with follow-up experiments, or confirm and move toward paper drafting.

To structure experiment data for claim evaluation, compile key information about methods, datasets, configurations, and baselines from EXPERIMENT_LOG.md and docs/research_contract.md into a normalized format for objective judgment.

You should run a claim evaluation gate in your research workflow immediately after experiments finish and before writing the paper or running ablations, ensuring results objectively support the intended claims.

Yes, Codex MCP identifies missing evidence in experiment results by parsing a structured verdict into fields like what_results_dont_support, missing_evidence, and suggested_claim_revision to guide downstream actions.