David F GliddenandClaude Opus 5
1cf79b0f86
Q1 is applied, not extended: Constraint 4 has two clauses and my contrary reading engaged only the second. Limits, not failures — and "I could not look" is a limit. I had overstated my own uncertainty on the question I withdrew a recommendation over. The condition that cost most: my quote-verification pass reported verified on a reconstruction of REVIEWED-104 — contractions, re-punctuation, two blocks spliced, and the closing sentence dropped. A two-valued verifier inside a package arguing verifiers must be three-valued. Rebuilt at ~/dotfiles/scripts/verify-quotes.py. The first rebuild had three tiers and cried wolf on every correctly-copied quote, since a record stored with hard wraps is byte-different from the same text quoted as one line; splitting re-wrapped from normalized is the same two-strengths lesson the fleet learned. Both directions proven: corrected package exit 0, original reconstruction not-found exit 1. The dropped sentence answered my own Q2. It was in the record the package quoted. Both citation errors in that package had one cause, which the script cannot diagnose: I quoted the ADVISORY message and attributed it to the PLACED record. Different documents; placement adds and cuts, so quoting the advisory loses exactly what placement contributed. My "five instances, same shape" was wrong — two are the shape, three belong to the attested-absence family whose parent is already ratified (REVIEWED-47, 2026-07-05). I searched for a doctrinal parent among R0 and Constraint 4 and missed the ratified sibling closest in content. The ladder entry now joins that lineage. Filed as a watch-item, with an operative memory note: third package running where the grounding pass was incomplete and every substantive omission cut against my own argument. It optimises for finding my errors, not my support. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01A35wiD55yRHj5U1ECZAX4t
15 lines
2.1 KiB
Markdown
15 lines
2.1 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: feedback-grounding-pass-finds-errors-not-support
|
|
description: My grounding passes are asymmetric — they reliably catch my own mistakes and reliably miss the passages that would SUPPORT my argument. Three dated jurist packages, every substantive omission cutting against me.
|
|
metadata:
|
|
type: feedback
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
**The grounding pass is optimising for finding its own errors and not for finding its own support.** Jurist observation, 2026-08-08, on the third package in a row.
|
|
|
|
**Why:** in three consecutive packages the grounding pass was incomplete, and **every substantive omission cut against my own argument** — the opposite of advocacy, so it is not motivated reasoning; it is a search shaped by *"what have I got wrong?"* and never by *"what already backs this?"*. The clearest case: I quoted REVIEWED-104 and **dropped its closing sentence**, which was the sentence that would have closed my own gate question Q2 without asking. I also searched for a doctrinal parent among R0 and Constraint 4 and **missed the ratified sibling closest in content** (the 2026-07-05 attested-absence ruling) — which, when found, relocated and strengthened the proposal.
|
|
|
|
**How to apply:** when grounding an argument, run the search **twice, with both intents stated**. Pass 1 (already habitual): *what have I quoted wrongly, over-claimed, or failed to check?* Pass 2 (the one that does not happen): *what in the ratified record ALREADY says this, or already settles a question I am about to ask?* Search the register for the **conclusion**, not only for the citations — if a gate question is answerable from the record, asking it wastes the ruling. ⚠ Precise cause, from the same day: **quoting the ADVISORY message and attributing it to the PLACED record.** They are different documents; placement can add, cut, or re-word, so quoting the advisory systematically loses whatever the act of placing contributed. Quote from the file, never from the message.
|
|
|
|
Related: [[feedback-resurface-banked-notes-before-rederiving]] · [[reference-verification-ladder]] · [[feedback-checkable-claim-surfaces-bugs]]
|