{
  "edition": "0.3.2",
  "date": "2026-10-22",
  "source_values_modified": false,
  "entries": [
    {
      "id": "GW-001",
      "type": "bibliographic",
      "change": "Distinguish FRBSF Working Paper 2005-26 (September 2005) from NBER Working Paper 11929 (January 2006). The previous CFF attached 2005 to the NBER URL.",
      "source": "https://www.nber.org/papers/w11929"
    },
    {
      "id": "GW-002",
      "type": "interpretation",
      "change": "Make the calibration explanation conditional; one selected 3% event is not an empirical calibration result.",
      "source": "https://www.frbsf.org/wp-content/uploads/wp05-26bk.pdf"
    },
    {
      "id": "GW-003",
      "type": "clarification",
      "change": "Separate probability masses from densities, original announcements from revisions, and day-level dates from intraday evidence."
    },
    {
      "id": "GW-004",
      "type": "reader flow",
      "change": "Remove the opening result spoiler so the reveal exercise works as intended."
    },
    {
      "id": "GW-005",
      "edition": "0.3.0-research-review",
      "type": "interpretation",
      "change": "Worked examples now state their selection rules. The January 2004 payroll example is identified as chosen for its surprise; an ordinary example (first payroll release after January 2004 whose result lies in the range containing the 50% point) and a boundary example (earliest claims result on a strike) are added. Examples are not presented as evidence of accuracy.",
      "records": [
        "gw2005-nfpay-2004-01-09-2004-01-09",
        "gw2005-nfpay-2005-01-07-2005-01-07",
        "gw2005-iclm-2004-02-26-2004-02-26",
        "gw2005-nfpay-2002-10-03-2002-10-04"
      ],
      "values_changed": false
    },
    {
      "id": "GW-006",
      "edition": "0.3.0-research-review",
      "type": "bibliographic",
      "change": "Page references now cite the FRBSF version explicitly. The 2005 data package (readme dated 8 November 2005), FRBSF WP 2005-26 (September 2005), NBER WP 11929 (January 2006) and the 2007 ISOM volume are listed as distinct objects.",
      "source": "https://www.frbsf.org/wp-content/uploads/wp05-26bk.pdf",
      "values_changed": false
    },
    {
      "id": "GW-007",
      "edition": "0.3.0-research-review",
      "type": "clarification",
      "change": "Credit wording separates permission to republish from review or endorsement, at the opening of the article and on every export.",
      "values_changed": false
    },
    {
      "id": "GW-008",
      "edition": "0.3.0-research-review",
      "type": "clarification",
      "change": "Announced values are contrasted with current BLS vintages (CES0000000001, retrieved 22 October 2026) as context only; the edition continues to record announced values.",
      "source": "https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001",
      "values_changed": false
    },
    {
      "id": "GW-009",
      "edition": "0.3.2",
      "type": "method",
      "change": "Evaluation protocol 1.1: the interval midpoint is no longer described as the paper's within-range uniform assumption; outcome-space linear interpolation, the assumption-free interval and randomized positions are distinct treatments; probability tests use an explicit derived normalization; endpoint handling before inverse-normal transforms is stated.",
      "source": "Independent internal review, 22 October 2026",
      "values_changed": false
    },
    {
      "id": "GW-010",
      "edition": "0.3.2",
      "type": "wording",
      "change": "The opening and reveal paragraphs now refer to nonfarm payroll employment rather than 'the entire US economy'.",
      "source": "Independent internal review, 22 October 2026",
      "values_changed": false
    },
    {
      "id": "GW-011",
      "edition": "0.3.2",
      "type": "clarification",
      "change": "Exact-boundary results are described as the cumulative mass of the preceding ranges, with the tie settlement convention unknown (article, exercise and script, descriptor, protocol). The tie example is identified as the earliest of the 14 claims cases; the earliest boundary case overall is the 12 December 2002 retail-sales release.",
      "source": "Independent internal review, 22 October 2026",
      "values_changed": false
    },
    {
      "id": "GW-012",
      "edition": "0.3.2",
      "type": "documentation",
      "change": "Proposed corrections contact set to Sophia Kurg <sophia@vultax.com>; claims that nothing was computed before the protocol are narrowed to calibration and scoring statistics; private copies of cited sources kept with retrieval dates and hashes.",
      "source": "Independent internal review, 22 October 2026",
      "values_changed": false
    }
  ]
}