Q46, run 2026-11-05-1233-haiku

Does Halden Leasing have an issuer rating?

Tests: Local type: a credit opinion (CO) is not a rating.

Expected: issuer_rating = no

❌ R1 csv run 1 graded by code

Depends. E11 has only a CO-type rating (BBB, A46). The data does not define CO, and the LTIDR type is the issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "depends"}

Why: issuer_rating: expected no, got depends

❌ R1 csv run 2 graded by code

Depends. Halden Leasing has only a CO rating (A46, BBB). The data doesn't define CO, so it's unclear whether that counts as an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "depends"}

Why: issuer_rating: expected no, got depends

✅ R1 csv run 3 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing has only a CO rating (BBB, A46), and the data does not define CO. Issuer ratings in the data are LTIDR or STIDR.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R1 csv run 4 graded by code

No. E11's only rating is a CO-type record (A46, BBB), and CO is not defined. Only LTIDR and STIDR are issuer ratings here.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R1 csv run 5 graded by code

No. E11's only rating is a CO record (A46), not an LTIDR.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R2 rdf run 1 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing (E11) has only a CO-type rating (A46), and CO is not defined in the data. Its only issuer-type rating records are absent.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R2 rdf run 2 graded by code

No. E11's only rating is A46, of type CO, which the data does not define as an issuer type; the issuer types are LTIDR and STIDR.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R2 rdf run 3 graded by code

No
Halden Leasing's only rating is A46, type CO, which is not an issuer-rating type (LTIDR or STIDR). This assumes CO is not an issuer rating, which the data does not define.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R2 rdf run 4 graded by code

No. E11's only rating (A46) is type CO, which the data does not define; it is not a long-term issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

❌ R2 rdf run 5 graded by code

Depends. E11's only rating is A46 (BBB), of type CO, which the data doesn't define as an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "depends"}

Why: issuer_rating: expected no, got depends

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 1 graded by code

No. E11 has only a credit opinion (A46, CO), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 2 graded by code

No
E11 has only a credit opinion (A46), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 3 graded by code

No. E11's only action is a credit opinion (A46), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 4 graded by code

**No.** E11 has only a credit opinion (A46), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 5 graded by code

No
E11's only rating action is a credit opinion (A46, CO), which is explicitly not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 1 graded by code

No. E11 has only a Credit Opinion (A46), which is not a rating, and as a finance subsidiary it has no issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 2 graded by code

No. E11 has only a Credit Opinion (CO, A46), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 3 graded by code

No. E11 has only a credit opinion (A46), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 4 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing (E11) has only a credit opinion (A46, CO), which is never an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 5 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing (E11) has only a credit opinion (A46, type CO), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 1 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing (E11) has only a credit opinion (A46), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 2 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing (E11) has only a credit opinion (A46), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 3 graded by code

No. The only action on E11 is a credit opinion (A46), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 4 graded by code

No. E11's only record is a credit opinion (A46, CO), which is not a rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 5 graded by code

No. Its only rating record is a credit opinion (A46), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R3 csv+padding run 1 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing has only a CO rating (A46), which is undefined, not an LTIDR.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

❌ R3 csv+padding run 2 graded by code

Depends. E11 has no LTIDR, but it has a CO rating of BBB (A46), and the data does not define the CO rating type.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "depends"}

Why: issuer_rating: expected no, got depends

✅ R3 csv+padding run 3 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing (E11) has no LTIDR or STIDR. Its only rating is a CO-type rating (A46), which the data does not define.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R3 csv+padding run 4 graded by code

No. E11 has only a CO rating (A46, BBB), which is not an LTIDR or STIDR, and the CO code is not defined.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R3 csv+padding run 5 graded by code

No. E11 has only a CO rating (A46), and LTIDR is the only issuer-rating type in the data. CO is not defined, so this is an inference.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R10 executed run 1 graded by code

No. E11 (Halden Leasing) has no LTIDR rating in the data; only its parent E10 is rated.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R10 executed run 2 graded by code

No. E11 has no LTIDR records.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R10 executed run 3 graded by code

No. The data has no LTIDR rating for E11, Halden Leasing.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R10 executed run 4 graded by code

No. E11 has no LTIDR records in ratings.csv.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R10 executed run 5 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing (E11) has no LTIDR or STIDR record.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R7 csv+neutral run 1 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing (E11) has only a credit opinion (A46), which is not a rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R7 csv+neutral run 2 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing (E11) has only a Credit Opinion (A46), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R7 csv+neutral run 3 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing's only rating-type record is a Credit Opinion (A46), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R7 csv+neutral run 4 graded by code

No
Halden Leasing (E11) has only a credit opinion (CO, A46), which the ontology says is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R7 csv+neutral run 5 graded by code

No. E11's only action is a credit opinion (A46), which the ontology says is never an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R8 csv+axioms run 1 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing (E11) has only a credit opinion (A46), not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R8 csv+axioms run 2 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing has only a credit opinion (A46), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R8 csv+axioms run 3 graded by code

No. E11 has only a credit opinion (A46), which is not an issuer rating (LTIDR or STIDR).

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R8 csv+axioms run 4 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing's only rating is a credit opinion (A46), which is disjoint from issuer ratings.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R8 csv+axioms run 5 graded by code

No
E11 has only a credit opinion (A46, CO), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R9 csv+axioms+markdown run 1 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing (E11) has only a credit opinion (A46), which the ontology says is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R9 csv+axioms+markdown run 2 graded by code

No. Halden Leasing's only rating is a credit opinion (A46), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R9 csv+axioms+markdown run 3 graded by code

No. E11 has only a credit opinion (A46), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R9 csv+axioms+markdown run 4 graded by code

No. E11 has only a credit opinion (A46, CO), which is not an issuer rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}

✅ R9 csv+axioms+markdown run 5 graded by code

No. E11 has only a credit opinion (A46, CO), which is never counted as a rating.

JSON: {"issuer_rating": "no"}