Open
Quantum contextuality
The experiment supports the exclusion of noncontextual explanations. For the strongest reading, however, full control of possible measurement disturbance was not yet completely certified.
Understand why →Examples
How the test works in real cases
Each case answers the same six questions. Technical notation is kept on the deeper layer; the first task is to make the result understandable.
3open
3pass
0applicability boundary
This is not a success rate. It is the public-level balance of six concrete, time-indexed protocol runs; a seventh frozen run, GW-P (OPEN), is documented on the GW150914 case page as expert-level depth.
Featured test case · GW150914 · LIGO
One famous event is assessed through two separate public claims. The physical-signal detection is PASS; the stronger categorical source attribution is OPEN at the same 11 February 2016 evidence state. The pair was selected before the verdicts were known.
2014 open · 2015 pass
BICEP2
A particularly clear pair: in 2014 the signal attribution remained OPEN because polarized dust was a live, not-yet-resolved alternative. In 2015 new dust-sensitive evidence supported a distinct later claim. The later record does not overwrite the earlier one.
Compare the two dates →Pass
Muon g−2 2021
The published 4.2σ experiment–theory tension was explicitly relative to the WP20/data-driven-HVP benchmark. Within that fixed comparator-relative claim, no applicability-relevant deficit remained open.
Understand the benchmark →Documentary case
Galactic Centre Excess
This is not one of the six public-level P3 runs. It documents how a limited research result can be presented more strongly in an abstract and then transmitted more strongly in later citations than the underlying result warrants.
Read the case →Why does an earlier result remain on record?
Because each run is tied to a specified evidence state. New evidence creates a new run. It does not retrospectively change what was warranted at the earlier time.