The robust peer reviewed evidence is only required to exclude competitors.... so the International Federations have to fund that research for a specific group of athletes for that event (bizarrely specific on that). The excluded competitor can refute this evidence and if excluded, can simply transfer to another event and if the Federation wanted to exclude them from the next chosen event, they have to produce peer reviewed evidence for that new event with the specific cohort of competitive athletes.
With boxing... the substitute federation had no opportunity to comply with those rules.
For Athletics, Cycling, Swimming et al... I am not aware of any athlete that has appealed their exclusion, nor that there is seperate robust peer reviewed scientific evidence available for each individual event.
The rules create the possibility for an athlete to medal in several events, transferring from one to another until they age out of competion, each time, requiring the federation to fund specific research, defend the challenge etc.
But... the Court of Arbitration has already ruled that biology unlines the reason for the existance of the female category...
Unfortunately.... no one is appealing on behalf of XX women who are unfairly disadvantaged by the inclusion of XY's in their competition and the IOC regulations do not specifically give them that right, in the way they give excluded competitors the right to challenge an exclusion decision.