{
  "about": "CauSciBench native output: 'record' has the shape their evaluation/extract.py reads (a run's records in one list rescore with their evaluation/run_evaluation.py); the method is the tool-family label of the answer call (tool-family accuracy from tool calls, not a method the model named); 'scores' are the per-item terms of evaluation/metrics.py.",
  "answer_ref": "call_005ddf3f:coef.contacted_2weeks",
  "attempt": 1,
  "epoch": 1,
  "gold": {
    "effect": -0.017,
    "effect_as_stored": "-0.017",
    "is_significant": 0,
    "source_id": "causcibench_real.gold.q077",
    "std_error": 0.017,
    "std_error_as_stored": "0.017"
  },
  "label": {
    "family": "iv",
    "method": "iv",
    "rule": "two-stage least squares",
    "tool_id": "infer.iv_2sls"
  },
  "native_id": 77,
  "precision_limited": false,
  "record": {
    "dataset_path": "data/csv_files/realdata/panagopoulos_timing.csv",
    "effect": -0.017,
    "method": "iv",
    "name": "Timing is everything? Primacy and recency effects in voter mobilization campaigns",
    "query": "Among high-propensity voters, defined as those with a voting propensity greater than 0.68, what is the effect of receiving a get-out-the-vote phone call two weeks prior to the election on turnout?",
    "result": {
      "final_result": {
        "causal_effect": -0.006193464656590043,
        "covariates": [
          "democrat",
          "republican",
          "unenrolled",
          "other_party",
          "age",
          "age_squared",
          "vtr_gen01",
          "vtr_gen03"
        ],
        "method": "iv",
        "outcome_variable": "vtr_gen05",
        "standard_deviation": 0.013344682267538401,
        "treatment_variable": "contacted_2weeks"
      },
      "retries": null
    }
  },
  "scores": {
    "control_overlap": 1.0,
    "effect_correct": 0,
    "method_correct": 1,
    "outcome_match": 1,
    "relative_error_pct": 63.56785496123505,
    "treatment_match": 1
  },
  "status": "failed",
  "task_id": "causcibench_real.q077"
}