experiment: diagnose uncertainty identity vs relatedness

2026-08-11 17:41:23 +01:00
parent 19c00f3bf3
commit f0cf85d2b6
2 changed files with 136 additions and 0 deletions
@@ -191,6 +191,12 @@ Two-turn run (fixed scenario: "We are considering relocating the engineering tea

 ---

+### Experiment 57J.54 — Uncertainty Identity vs Relatedness Diagnosis
+
+**Diagnosed why** explicit savings-realism uncertainty in 57J.53 Update 1 was absorbed into a broader cost node (`noymlfr`) rather than represented as a dedicated unknown. **Classification: B — PROMPT SEMANTIC-IDENTITY GAP.** The root cause is not a validator defect (the exact-string duplicate detector works correctly for what it checks) or a graph-model defect (the schema can represent the distinction). The gap is in the prompt's Additional Guidance line 137: it instructs the model to distinguish "same uncertainty" from "merely related uncertainty" but provides no criterion for when a broad cost node covers a specific savings-valuation concern versus asks a different question about it. Concept A ("total costs at new location") and Concept B ("are projected office savings realistic?") are OVERLAPPING BUT DISTINCT — one is magnitude estimation across all categories; the other is assumption validity for one specific category. Resolving Concept A does not resolve Concept B. **Recommended boundary: prompt-only clarification** of rule #7's "unresolved term" criterion to explicitly treat uncertainty about a specific sub-component within an existing uncertain topic as a new unresolved term requiring its own node. No production code changed, no Ollama calls. Full record in `docs/experiment-57j54.md`.
+
+---
+
 ### Experiment 57E — Irrelevant Decomposition Question Boundary

 **Objective:** Identify the exact graph node that triggered the decomposition producing "How the two observations were measured", and determine whether the parent was genuinely about comparison/measurement/timing before decomposition.