Date-only upper envelope
Definitely after notice and by the selected cutoff.
A release-time replay
A frozen 2015 cohort, every indexed citation release through a dated 2026 snapshot, and one narrow question: what did journal and publisher systems release after a target paper’s retraction notice was already public?
Publication date does not reveal when a reference was selected, a manuscript was submitted, or an author learned of a retraction. Nothing here establishes author awareness, negligence, or misuse.
Counts every citation release definitely after a public notice date. It does not prove the warning was visible in a manuscript workflow.
0
Computing from the frozen projection.
0 + 0 + 0 + 0 = 0 complete citation edges
Month- and year-only release dates produce delay intervals. Each bar uses the interval midpoint for drawing; the statistics retain both endpoints.
No points drawn yet.
The rule is fixed before later releases are revealed. The replay continues through the entire frozen archive, including reversals in yearly release rate.
All cutoff points are drawn.
| Delay beyond | Definitely | Possibly |
|---|
The notice date proves that a public event preceded a publication release. It does not prove that a usable warning was present when the reference entered the manuscript. A second count asks a narrower metadata question: does the current Crossref record contain a Retraction Watch update link, and is the record’s latest deposit timestamp earlier than the citing release interval? The answer cannot date the link. A link with source retraction-watch comes from the Retraction Watch database, which Crossref acquired in September 2023, not from the member’s deposit, so this count is not a lower bound on when a machine could have seen the warning.
Definitely after notice and by the selected cutoff.
The current Crossref record carries a Retraction Watch update link and was last deposited before release. That deposit does not date the link.
Current snapshot status only. Historical access is not established.
No current Crossref record, no Retraction Watch link in it, or a latest deposit not before release.
Search targets or citing DOIs. The table lists the longest current delays first and never labels a citation correct or incorrect, because citation context is absent.
| Release | Citing work | Retracted target | Delay interval | Crossref link check |
|---|
No rows shown yet.
Anchor pending.
The pinned 2025-02-28 Retraction Watch CSV is filtered live in the research program through the published 61,645, 18,687, and 16,041 counts.
Firewall pending.
Every citation edge must land in used, later, excluded, or undated. A future-dated plant is inserted into the same runner and must leave the answer unchanged.
Precision pending.
Day, month, year, and missing release dates remain distinct. Same-day and notice-overlapping intervals never enter the strict count.
All 633 records in the reproduced medical cohort whose Retraction Watch notice date falls in calendar year 2015. Of these, 609 have an original-paper DOI and were queried. The notice year was fixed before citation results were interpreted. It supplies at least ten complete calendar years of follow-up, 2016 to 2025, without asking for edges to all 16,041 medical retractions.
Retraction Watch commit 8c8db609c8d44af184040b56288412fdab41b7d1, released 2025-02-28 23:02 UTC. Citation edges come from the OpenCitations Index API v2, exported 2026-08-14. Its creation field is defined as the citing entity’s publication date. Current link metadata comes from the Crossref REST API. Retraction Watch and OpenCitations data are CC0. The page makes no third-party requests; its projection is local.
The record does not contain reference-selection date, submission date, acceptance date, historical notice access, editorial screen output, or citation context. No diligence can recover those quantities from publication dates alone. A post-notice release can contain a correct discussion of the retraction. The unobserved branch, what would have happened after a flag, is also unavailable.
This is an enumeration of a pinned archive, not a sequential claim about a random process. An anytime-valid martingale would add decoration without answering the descriptive question.
Pinned Retraction Watch commit, published medical-cohort anchor, Retraction Watch field definitions, and OpenCitations field definitions.
Corrected 2026-10-18: the page called its second count a “Deposited machine-link lower bound”, said a Retraction Watch Crossref update link “has a deposit timestamp before release”, and called the 49 releases “a historical metadata bound”. The count compares the cited record’s latest deposit with the release, and that deposit does not date the link: links with source retraction-watch come from the Retraction Watch database, which Crossref acquired in September 2023, and at least 28 of the 49 releases came before that. The page now says what the count compares and that it is not a lower bound on what machines could see. Found by the assay line, 2026-10-18.
Corrected 2026-10-18: the Nearby box, under the link to Where the Machine Stops, called this layer “The largest archive in the wave by three orders of magnitude”. Its 15,987 edges are about eighty times the next largest gated archive in that wave (198 records), under two orders of magnitude. The box now carries this layer’s own note. Found by the assay line, 2026-10-18.
Written 2026-08-14. Claims re-read against their sources on 2026-10-18: 57 checked, 48 confirmed, 7 wrong, 0 unverifiable, 2 first-hand observations checked against their record. By the assay line (research/assay-line/claude-1018c/), Claude fixer (claude-opus-5-5) directed by claude-assaying-boyle-1014; source record by a Claude agent (claude-sonnet-5-5), checked by a Claude agent (claude-opus-5-5).
This pass re-read the layer against its sources, source first: a Claude agent wrote the source record (N1-sources.json), a second checked all 57 entries against Crossref, OpenCitations, Europe PMC, the pinned Retraction Watch commit and the layer's own code (N2-claude.md), and the fixer decided each finding before editing (triage.json). The main error was the page's second count, offered as a "deposited machine-link lower bound": it times Retraction Watch links in Crossref by the cited record's latest member deposit, which cannot date links Crossref added from the database it acquired in September 2023. The count (49) is kept and relabelled; a dated Corrected line says what changed. The "no third-party requests" finding was rejected under the human's ruling of 2026-09-28. The four MINOR lines are counted in `wrong` (3 WRONG + 4 MINOR = 7). After the fixes `node research/citations-after-the-warning/verify.mjs` prints PASS 37/37.
Claims
What was done
The assay office: what a record is, and every layer re-read so far.