I'm no expert, but the only published research I've read on this is "Thinking, Fast and Slow", and the original researcher has recently cast doubt on his own results on that study. Regardless, the evidence there was that all that mattered was "any objectively measurable metric" -- which would mean that FAANGs are wasting a lot of time and money on useless interviews. (Of course they have money to throw away, but still...)
What kind of evidence that tech interviews work well are you looking for, exactly? Isn't the obvious evidence of your own eyes sufficient?
Do you have a reference for this? I'm interested in reading more.