I recently noticed this review. It was invalidated and I could not understand the reason for invalidation.
After a bit of searching in Meta Stack Exchange, I found this answer in which it was mentioned:
If the review task is removed due to other circumstances outside the queue (e.g. a moderator ...
@rene In case you have time - I am sure you would be able to create the SQL query for the conditions on posts (no edits and comments) in some more efficient way than I did.
I simply used NOT IN with a query looking for Ids for posts that have no edits, no comments.
I do not see whether the results are actually invalidated - probably because I am low rep on Aks Ubuntu.
I ended up with this: https://data.stackexchange.com/askubuntu/query/1456090/invalidated-reviews-on-posts-with-no-comments-and-no-edits-with-some-additional-c?num=100
Even without the restriction on 2021, the same query returns only 6 results on Math and no results on MathOverflow.
BTW I have used the format site://review/first-posts/id as a link to the review. I assume that this will be broken for very recent reviews - since the link was now changed to first-questions and first-answers.
I hope that I did not make some stupid mistake and that the query returns what you actually wanted.
Since rene is here, I suppose he'll post a much better SEDE query to do the same thing. (I saw that my query run rather long time on Ask Ubuntu.)
@MartinSleziak this might be slightly more efficient due to joining. This works in this case because you want records where no equivalent records exist in the joined tables: data.stackexchange.com/askubuntu/query/1456091/…
I included several parameters into the query, so that one can easily change review type or date. For example, if I just change some parameters, I get reviews since 2020.
@rene I suspected that some kind of outer join might be used for this purpose, but I wasn't sure what exactly I should use. (And I wasn't sure whether there might be some problems if I need to do more than one outer join.)
@RandomPerson You should probably use the query that rene posted. (It will be faster.)