Step 10: tool results

add_argument

{
  "name": "The argument from the within-study baseline reruns",
  "stance": "for",
  "claim_id": "738d9786-0b87-4b75-9c33-cabe43c903d5",
  "description": "Kantamneni et al. reran each SAE-favourable case study with a dense baseline (logistic regression, attention-pooled probe) and got comparable results."
}

{"success":true,"message":"Created argument \"The argument from the within-study baseline reruns\" (for) on claim 738d9786-0b87-4b75-9c33-cabe43c903d5. Attach its subclaim edges, then give it a written form with write_argument, and evaluate it with evaluate_argument when you record the claim's assessment.","argument_id":"d09fa10c-dec1-4d68-88d0-0fcfe0ed38d4"}

add_argument

{
  "name": "The argument from residual SAE advantages and hindsight baselines",
  "stance": "against",
  "claim_id": "738d9786-0b87-4b75-9c33-cabe43c903d5",
  "description": "In the same study the SAE latent still beat the baseline on mislabeled CoLA examples, SAE probes still won some pooled comparisons, and the baseline routes to the spurious-feature finding were run after SAEs had pointed to it."
}

{"success":true,"message":"Created argument \"The argument from residual SAE advantages and hindsight baselines\" (against) on claim 738d9786-0b87-4b75-9c33-cabe43c903d5. Attach its subclaim edges, then give it a written form with write_argument, and evaluate it with evaluate_argument when you record the claim's assessment.","argument_id":"8395f9d1-9885-42bf-9754-d2c1bb76e1f2"}