Breaking down: "How can a single citation reward be split fairly across multiple authors?"

Identified 3 sub-claim(s) to support

Discovered 20 verified source(s)

Recalled 7 past runs on this subject — how these sources performed when they were available.

ERC-8004 reputation loaded — composite scores on this subject.

Agent spend wallet ready: 0x29028Fe1122E17Fe7863A22701e863FE4DaE1aFB (balance sufficient)

Reused cached Onchain Micropayments Digest (free) — S1

Sub-claim "The fairness of a split depends on the contributions of each…": 80% covered by S1 — S1 states 'A fair model pays each cited source in proportion to its contribution,' directly linking fairness to contributions.

Sub-claim "A citation reward can be split proportionally to each author…": 90% covered by S1 — S1 explicitly describes per-citation payments weighted by contribution and mentions automatic splitting for multi-author works.

Sub-claim "Alternative methods include equal split or weighting by auth…": 0% covered — S1 only covers proportional splitting; no gathered source discusses equal split or author order weighting.

Only the third sub-claim is poorly covered (0.0), but no skipped source appears relevant to alternative splitting methods. All other claims are well covered by the single gathered source. No purchase is necessary as additional sources would not address the gap affordably.

Final check — "The fairness of a split depends on the contributions of each…": 90% assessed by S1

Final check — "A citation reward can be split proportionally to each author…": 100% assessed by S1

Final check — "Alternative methods include equal split or weighting by auth…": 0% assessed

Final coverage assessment — The gathered text only covers proportional splitting based on contribution, but does not address alternative methods like equal split or author order weighting. More sources are needed for sub-claim 3.

Synthesizing a grounded answer from 1 source(s)…

Verified — S1 supports claim 1 at 100%: “A fair model pays each cited source in proportion to its contribution to the final answer.”

Verified — S1 supports claim 2 at 100%: “A fair model pays each cited source in proportion to its contribution to the final answer.”

Drafted answer citing 1 source(s)

Confidence: Low — 1 sub-claim remain below the evidence threshold.

Onchain Micropayments Digest contributed 100% → reward $0.02

Settled $0.012 citation reward → Mara Okoye (312b6324-1…)

Settled $0.008 citation reward → Devin Park (17beb88e-e…)

Done. Spent $0.02 across 2 payment(s) to creators.