Q002 — ACH Matrix¶


Research	R0041 — Enterprise Sycophancy
Run	2026-04-01
Query	Q002

Matrix¶

	H1: Formal requirements exist	H2: Emerging recognition, few requirements	H3: Not recognized as distinct risk
SRC01-E01: Kwik peer-reviewed military AI sycophancy paper	+	++	--
SRC02-E01: Defense One cognitive degradation findings	-	++	--
SRC03-E01: Georgetown 11 categories of harm	-	++	--
SRC04-E01: Science study quantifying sycophancy	N/A	++	--
SRC05-E01: Sycophantic clinical summaries, no FDA guidance	-	+	-
SRC06-E01: Multi-agent industrial sycophancy scenario	N/A	+	-

Legend:

++ Strongly supports
+ Supports
-- Strongly contradicts
- Contradicts
N/A Not applicable to this hypothesis

Diagnosticity Analysis¶

Most Diagnostic Evidence¶

Evidence	Why Diagnostic
SRC01-E01	Only peer-reviewed paper specifically addressing sycophancy in a deployment domain; its existence as a recommendation (not a requirement) is highly diagnostic for H2 vs H1
SRC05-E01	Researchers naming sycophancy while FDA has no guidance is diagnostic for H2 (emerging) vs both H1 and H3

Least Diagnostic Evidence¶

Evidence	Why Non-Diagnostic
SRC06-E01	Vendor-authored scenario with COI concerns; unclear if it represents documented incidents or hypothetical risks

Outcome¶

Hypothesis supported: H2 — Sycophancy is being recognized in academic and policy circles, particularly in defense and healthcare, but formal deployment requirements are rare to nonexistent

Hypotheses eliminated: H1 — No formal deployment requirements with sycophancy reduction as a stated goal were found; H3 — Peer-reviewed literature and Science publication demonstrate sycophancy is recognized as a distinct phenomenon

Hypotheses inconclusive: None