iIntuitionist-Fin Field Intelligence Notes

Claude Code reviews · October 2–4, 2026

What the reviews found

The calculations reproduce. That does not mean the forecasts are accurate enough to sell or that the research is ready for a journal.

The October 2 review found sparse polling, no tested adjustment for sponsored polls, and incomplete checks against later results. We removed the earlier forecast percentages.

The October 3 review reran the calculations and found that the learned weights added little. A simpler method was at least as defensible. It also found a broken daily-update check and a gap in the website’s access controls.

Our response

October 4 chamber audit: Claude Code reproduced all 18 chamber scenarios and 42 historical checks, but found missed prior-experience credit, candidate-name mismatches, inconsistent Ohio treatment and an underreported directional bias. The new v3 repair addresses the input issues; it does not claim to eliminate bias. Read the chamber audit.

Review scope: The chamber v2 calculations have now been independently checked by Claude Code. Tide, poll-weighting additions and the v3 chamber repairs have not received that same follow-up review.

The later changes are builder-tested and still need another review. Claude Code is an AI reviewer within this project, not an outside human peer reviewer. Its checks are valuable, but they are not a guarantee.

Read the October 2 report · Read the October 3 report · Read the revised working paper

Codex builds and writes; Claude Code audits. People at Lampbotics direct the project and remain responsible for what is released.