Epic: Retire citation_quotes — consolidate into claims architecture

[OAGr]

Objective

Eliminate the citation_quotes PostgreSQL table by migrating all its data and functionality into the claims + claim_sources + claim_page_references architecture. This removes the dual-system complexity where citation verification data and claim verification data are stored separately, requiring backward propagation and manual linking.

Current State

• 4,935 citation_quotes records, only 16% linked to claims
• 3,018 claims exist, but most lack page references
• SQLite layer already retired (PRs refactor: retire SQLite DAOs (Phase 1 of knowledge.db retirement) #1299, refactor: retire SQLite knowledge.db — Phase 2 (complete elimination) #1302)
• crux claims integrate command exists (feat: add crux claims integrate command #1288)
• Coverage audit command exists (feat: add claims coverage-audit command (step 1 of #1194) #1290)

Task List

• Backfill all citation_quotes → claims + claim_sources (data migration) #1309 — Backfill all citation_quotes → claims + claim_sources (data migration)
• Reroute all write pipelines from citation_quotes → claims system #1310 — Reroute all write pipelines from citation_quotes → claims system
• Switch frontend reads from citation_quotes → claims and drop the table #1311 — Switch frontend reads from citation_quotes → claims and drop the table

Decision Log

Date	Decision	Rationale
2026-02-27	Retire SQLite first, then tackle PG consolidation	SQLite was causing #1283 (storage split). Removing it unblocked the PG consolidation cleanly.
2026-02-27	3-phase approach (backfill → reroute writes → switch reads + drop)	Each phase is independently shippable and verifiable.
2026-02-27	Drop extractionModel and claimContext fields	Low value, rarely populated. Not worth adding to claims schema.
2026-02-27	Map verification fields to existing sourceVerdict* columns	Natural fit — avoids adding more columns.

Open Questions

• How to handle the ~4,135 orphaned citation_quotes (no linked claim)? Backfill creates claims, but some are plain citations (not factual claims). Need a classification step.
• Should page_citations (for rc- footnotes) remain as a separate table, or merge into claim_page_references?

Related Issues

• Consolidate citation_quotes into claims + claim_sources architecture #1194 — Original consolidation issue
• Retire SQLite knowledge.db — migrate all Crux CLI data access to PostgreSQL #1293 — SQLite retirement (DONE: PRs refactor: retire SQLite DAOs (Phase 1 of knowledge.db retirement) #1299, refactor: retire SQLite knowledge.db — Phase 2 (complete elimination) #1302)
• Claims system is disconnected from page authoring pipeline — cr- footnotes never generated #1283 — Claims disconnected from authoring pipeline (DONE: PR feat: add crux claims integrate command #1288)
• Epic: Facts → Claims Migration #1200 — Facts → Claims migration (independent parallel track)
• Citation system migration + DB/server/code cleanup #975 — Citation system migration (partially superseded)