Evaluate conclusions
Assumptions, causal claims, and uncertainty
Distinguish an observed pattern from an explanation of why it happened.
Lesson 4 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
Separate measured change, possible explanations, and causal evidence in a supplied report.
Why it matters
Concept
A change in a count establishes a difference when the measurements are comparable. It does not automatically establish the cause. A new reminder, weather, participant availability, and measurement changes may coincide. Name which explanations were investigated and which remain possibilities.
An assumption is an input accepted for a calculation or plan without being established by the current evidence. Label it and check how the conclusion depends on it. Do not turn a scenario calculation into a prediction or a speculative cause into a fact. Conversely, retain a report that accurately describes only the measured change.
Worked example
Cedar attendance rose from 12 to 16 after a reminder was introduced. The record does not control for a changed day or different invitees. “Attendance rose by four” is supported. “The reminder caused all four additional attendees” is not established. A next study could compare comparable groups or gather additional evidence, without claiming that the cause has already been isolated.
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.
The increase does not identify its cause
Observed change
Earlier attendance: 12
Later attendance: 16
Difference- 16 − 12 = 4 more attendees.
Attendance rose after a reminder was introduced. The arrow shows the order of the counts, not a causal link.
Explanations still to investigate
Reminder- Introduced before the increase; its causal contribution is not established.
Changed day- The record does not control for this possibility.
Different invitees- The record does not control for this possibility.
These are candidates to investigate, not established causes. No arrow connects an untested explanation to the increase.
Before you check
Mark each statement as observation, assumption, or proposed explanation. For an assumption, describe what would change if it were false.
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
- Register: Session 1 had 12 attendees; session 2 had 16.
- Source 2
- Study note: Invitees and weekdays differed; no controlled comparison was performed.
Response to assess
Recorded attendance increased by four; the record does not isolate the reason.
Practice
Case 2
Consider the proposed response for this fictional Cedar work task. Use the supplied packet and stated requirements.
Source packet
- Source 1
- Log: A poster redesign and a change of venue occurred before signups rose.
- Source 2
- Evaluation: No comparison separates the effects of the redesign and venue.
Response to assess
The poster redesign alone caused the signup increase.
Fresh transfer
Case 3
Consider a fictional planning calculation with an explicit assumption.
Source packet
- Source 1
- Planning rule: Estimate chairs using 75% of 40 invitations, and label this an assumption, not confirmed attendance.
- Source 2
- Attendance register: Registration has not opened.
Response to assess
Assuming 75% attendance gives a planning estimate of 30 chairs; attendance is not yet confirmed.
Fresh transfer
Case 4
Consider a fictional comparison whose measurement definition changed.
Source packet
- Source 1
- Old report: 50 entries counted every visit, including repeat visitors.
- Source 2
- New report: 40 people counted unique visitors only.
Response to assess
The number of visits fell by 10.
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.