Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Technical Archive of MIC-50-90 1.0.0 (PDF, 54 pages). It accompanies the article describing the software and its Supplementary Appendices A–C, and contains the detailed material needed to examine the method and its reported evaluations. A1 defines the data, target quantities and notation. A2–A5 contain the mathematical arguments and their implementation scope, including the bounds for the observed collection, the simultaneous population bounds with Proposition P6 and its machine-checked algebraic core, and additional counts and sufficient reporting. A6 specifies the evaluation materials, A7 presents the numerical results and A8 links validation and reproduction. References are numbered locally. The software is archived separately at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23305733 (GitHub release v1.0.0). The text and figures are licensed under CC BY 4.0. Third-party data summarized in the document retain their own source terms.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Maciej Kochanowski (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: