Verify the evidence
Conflicting evidence and unresolved claims
Compare source scope and authority before choosing which statement applies.
Lesson 3 of 6 in the recommended order · About 25 min (estimate)
On this page
Practical AI glossary — terms and common confusions
- Model
- A learned component used to produce a result.
A drafting model is one part of a letter app; it is not the whole app.
- Application
- The software experience around components and services.
A letter app adds accounts, storage, and a Send button.
- Prompt
- Instructions and input supplied for a task.
“Summarize this notice in two bullets” specifies a task and shape, not a truth guarantee.
- Token
- A unit a model processes; it need not be a whole word.
A tokenizer can split a name into pieces; count using the actual system.
- Context
- Information available for the current request.
An earlier attachment may be absent even when its filename is visible.
- Training
- Adjusting a model using examples.
A training log differs from a conversation correction.
- Inference
- Using a trained model to produce a result.
Drafting another sentence does not by itself prove retraining.
- Retrieval
- Selecting material to supply to a task.
A retrieved notice still needs a relevance and date check.
- Embedding
- A numerical representation used to compare or organize items.
A similar search match is a candidate, not proof of the same meaning.
- Tool
- A function an application can call.
A calendar lookup can be read-only; finding an event is different from creating one.
- Agent
- Software that can choose and carry out steps toward a goal.
An agent still needs bounded permissions and checked action receipts.
- Hallucination
- Plausible generated content that is unsupported or false.
An invented opening time needs evidence or removal, even when phrased confidently.
- Evaluation
- Checking results against stated criteria.
Twenty checked examples establish a bounded result, not universal reliability.
- Multimodal
- Working with more than one kind of input or output.
A photo plus text does not prove every small label in the photo was read correctly.
Outcome
Resolve an explicit update and preserve an unresolved conflict when the packet supplies no tie-breaker.
Why it matters
Compare source scope and authority before choosing which statement applies.
Concept
Different statements are not automatically a contradiction: they may concern different dates, groups, or definitions. First align the subject and conditions. When they do conflict, look for an explicit correction, responsible authority, or direct observation relevant to the question. A newer date by itself does not settle every disagreement.
Do not average incompatible policies or hide a disagreement by selecting the more convenient claim. A useful answer can state what each source says, explain the unresolved point, and identify who could resolve it. Unknowns belong in the output when they affect the decision.
Worked example
Cedar’s draft schedule lists Hall A; a signed final schedule explicitly replaces that draft and lists Hall C. Use Hall C. If two current unsigned copies list different halls with no stated priority, report the conflict and obtain organizer confirmation. “The answer is probably Hall B” is not a resolution.
Cedar continuity note: these lessons use separate snapshots—room selection, booking pending, booking confirmed, and later attendance review. Survey responses are preferences, not attendance. Each supplied packet identifies the facts for its own task; do not import a later snapshot into an earlier decision.
Replacement is evidence of priority; disagreement alone is not
Case 1: an explicit replacement
- Draft schedule
Lists Hall A.
Explicitly replaced by
Signed final scheduleLists Hall C and explicitly replaces the draft.
Decision- Use Hall C for this schedule.
The stated replacement establishes priority. No calendar dates are supplied in this example.
Case 2: a separate hypothetical conflict
- Current unsigned copy 1
Lists one hall.
No stated priority between these sources
Current unsigned copy 2Lists a different hall.
Decision- Report the conflict and obtain organizer confirmation.
If this is all the packet supplies, neither copy wins. Being current does not resolve their disagreement.
Before you check
For each source, list subject, period, authority, and whether it supersedes another source. Write one sentence that preserves any remaining disagreement.
Practice and fresh transfer
The packets below are fictional and contain the facts needed for these cases. External references are optional background. Judge each response independently: it may be supported, contradicted, or unresolved. Select the passages needed to justify your judgment and write why the distinction matters before revealing feedback.
Assess the response
Use Accept when all material claims are supported. Use Revise when a supplied fact or requirement is contradicted. Use Evidence is insufficient when a key fact cannot be established either way. If a response contains both an unknown and a direct contradiction, choose Revise and explain both problems. Conflicting claims with no established authority remain insufficient; a claim does not become a governing fact merely because a source asserts it.
Some responses are fully supported. Others need correction or more evidence. Judge each on its sources; do not edit a correct answer just to change it.
Your written notes stay in this page and disappear when you leave. Only a self-reviewed completion can be saved to your learning account. These practice checks do not establish independent proficiency.
Practice
Case 1
Consider the proposed response for this fictional Cedar work task. Use the supplied packet and stated requirements.
Source packet
- Source 1
- Final schedule: Hall C for the workshop. Signed by the coordinator; explicitly replaces the earlier Hall A draft.
- Source 2
- Archived draft: Hall A. Marked superseded.
Response to assess
The workshop is in Hall C under the coordinator’s final schedule.
Practice
Case 2
Consider the proposed response for this fictional Cedar work task. Use the supplied packet and stated requirements.
Source packet
- Source 1
- Current note from team One: Delivery is 6 June. No priority rule is recorded.
- Source 2
- Current note from team Two: Delivery is 8 June. No correction or authoritative confirmation is supplied.
Response to assess
Delivery is definitely 6 June.
Fresh transfer
Case 3
Consider a fictional comparison of prices for different groups.
Source packet
- Source 1
- Notice: Members pay $5.
- Source 2
- Visitor page: Nonmembers pay $9. Both refer to the same event.
Response to assess
These prices conflict, so neither can be used.
Fresh transfer
Case 4
Consider a fictional status statement following a documented correction.
Source packet
- Source 1
- Correction log: The device total was entered as 38; the verified correction is 28. This corrects the same inventory date.
- Source 2
- Original sheet: 38 devices before the correction.
Response to assess
Use 28 for that inventory date and retain the correction note in the source ledger.
Save your self-review
Completion records that you reviewed the cases. Your explanation and transfer performance need a facilitator to establish independent learning.
Sign in with your learning-center account to save completion.
Review the explanation for every case before saving.
Summary and next step
Apply the checklist to a new task. Preserve supported content, explain any change with evidence, and name what remains unresolved. Saving records self-review, not independently demonstrated proficiency. A facilitator must assess the explanation and fresh transfer for human learning evidence.