I have major criticisms of Basic Income / UBI experiments. They are limited to a small number of individuals during a limited amount of time. The study is not distributing enough money to change market prices and participants aren't getting taxed at the higher rates needed to support the payments. So essentially you're measuring the impact of giving people the money without the other effects of a Basic Income system. Furthermore, I doubt the participants' landlords were made aware of the extra money their tenants now have. I could go on, but there are so many externalities that are not being captured to accounted for.
Will these limitations be taken into context? I doubt they will, as most UBI experiments tout how much better the participants feel, how great it was for their mental health, how much more secure they feel, etc.. This is nice, but I feel like they were measuring the effect of a stipend, not a Basic Income.