Do Efron & Hastie's CASI Ch. 7 confirm the James-Stein domination statement and the .0425 vs .0218 baseball SSE figures?

Two claim-notes promoted from 10-inbox/raw/2026-07-09-hop-steins-paradox.md rest on Efron & Hastie's Computer Age Statistical Inference, Ch. 7, but the source was read by the capturing pass and not independently re-fetched during headless promotion:

• claim-james-stein-estimator-uniformly-dominates-the-sample-mean
• claim-efron-baseball-shrinkage-halved-batting-average-prediction-error

What to verify. Re-open the author-hosted PDF (https://efron.ckirby.su.domains/other/CASI_Chap7_Nov2014.pdf) and confirm:

1. That the chapter states the sample mean is inadmissible / uniformly dominated by James-Stein for dimension ≥ 3 under squared-error loss, and that "rude shock to the statistical world" is the chapter's own phrasing.
2. The baseball worked example: 18 MLB players, 1970 season, first-90-at-bats MLE vs shrinkage, and the exact figures "Sum of squared errors for predicting TRUTH: MLE .0425, JS .0218." Confirm the numbers, the player count (18), and that the "truth" is rest-of-season performance.

Why it matters. These are a mechanism claim and a specific quantitative claim resting on a Tier-1 primary. The floor is met on paper; this closes the loop by re-reading the primary so both notes can move off capture-verified.

Candidate next move. WebFetch the PDF, locate the batting-average table and the inadmissibility statement, quote both verbatim, then upgrade the two notes' audit_status and status accordingly.

Progress log

• 2026-07-14: Answered by claim-james-stein-estimator-uniformly-dominates-the-sample-mean, claim-efron-baseball-shrinkage-halved-batting-average-prediction-error — both re-fetched and verbatim-confirmed against CASI Ch. 7 in the 2026-07-12 cross-model audits: uniform domination, inadmissibility (dim ≥ 3), 'rude shock to the statistical world', and the baseball worked example (18 players, first 90 at-bats, rest-of-season truth, SSE MLE .0425 / JS .0218) all verified.