{
  "schema_version": "1.0",
  "scores.csv": {
    "recording_index": "Zero-based chronological recording index.",
    "timestamp": "Source recording timestamp formatted as YYYY.MM.DD.HH.MM.SS.",
    "mcift_score": "Distance from the frozen healthy-reference MCIFT exchange matrix.",
    "conventional_score": "Maximum robust standardized conventional vibration-feature deviation.",
    "mcift_positive": "True when mcift_score exceeds its calibration-only frozen threshold.",
    "conventional_positive": "True when conventional_score exceeds its calibration-only frozen threshold."
  },
  "summary.json": {
    "thresholds": "99.5th-percentile thresholds fitted on the calibration partition.",
    "mcift_first_stable_warning": "Start timestamp of the first run containing three consecutive MCIFT positives.",
    "mcift_lead_recordings_before_final_recording": "Number of ten-minute recording intervals from stable-warning start to the final experiment recording.",
    "false_alarms_before_calibration_end": "Isolated threshold crossings before the end of reference plus calibration data; not event-level false-alert metrics."
  },
  "partitions": {
    "total_recordings": 984,
    "reference_recordings": 98,
    "calibration_recordings": 98,
    "evaluation_begins_at_index": 196
  },
  "limitations": [
    "The final recording is an experiment endpoint, not a labelled degradation onset.",
    "Three consecutive recordings represent approximately 20 minutes between first and third timestamps, while their covered observation span depends on the recording duration.",
    "Positive-run fragmentation should be reported alongside first-warning lead.",
    "These results do not establish that MCIFT is superior to conventional methods."
  ]
}