Consistency: Strong. Deep research, review, and PN all agree OTUD3 is an OTU-family Cys-protease DUB (Cys76) with K6/K11 preference; the RQC role (deubiquitinating 40S eS10/uS10, antagonizing ZNF598; PMID:32011234) is captured in description + IDA annotations. No contradictions. Nuance: review/description frame the RQC role as negative regulation (a brake on RQC); PN files OTUD3 as an RQC "Deubiquitination" member, which is correct directionally but the PN-group→GO:0006515 "protein quality control" projection slightly overstates OTUD3's role (it antagonizes, not drives, QC).
PN story / NEW pressure:GO:0101005 deubiquitinase activity (verified real) is entailed by the existing GO:0004843 cysteine-type DUB activity already annotated (IDA/IBA/TAS) — already captured, no NEW pressure on MF. GO:0006515 (verified real) is new_to_goa and absent from review; given OTUD3 antagonizes RQC, a positive "involved_in protein QC" assertion over-reaches. Conclude: MF already captured; process term over-reaches as a propagation.
Mapping strategy: Does not change the node. RQC-type→GO:0101005 redundant with the review's GO:0004843. The group→GO:0006515 propagation is the only divergence and should NOT be projected to OTUD3 (antagonist).
Evidence alignment: PN cites only PMID:23827681 (OTU linkage-specificity); review has it (HIGH/VERIFIED) plus the full substrate literature (26280536 PTEN, 32011234 RQC, 35675826 PPARD, 38288086 KPTN). Review strictly superset; no divergence.
Verdict: Consistent; PN MF already captured, PN RQC-process projection (GO:0006515) over-reaches because OTUD3 is a negative regulator of RQC. No YAML change needed.
Recommended edits: [MAP] Do not propagate GO:0006515 (protein QC) to OTUD3 from the RQC-group node — OTUD3 antagonizes ZNF598-driven 40S ubiquitination (negative RQC regulator), so an involved_in protein quality control assertion mis-states direction; flag as do-not-project.