R0042/2026-03-28/Q002/H3¶
Statement¶
General customization is a documented enterprise motivation for private AI, but sycophancy-specific control, response style adjustment, and interaction norms are not. Enterprises cite "customization" broadly (domain adaptation, terminology, workflows) without extending it to behavioral or interaction characteristics.
Status¶
Current: Supported
This is the hypothesis best supported by the evidence. Multiple enterprise sources mention "customization" as a private AI motivation, but every instance defines it as domain knowledge adaptation, business process alignment, or model configuration — not as behavioral trait control. One source (TrueFoundry) uses "enforce strict output behavior" which bridges toward behavioral control but does not name sycophancy or interaction style.
Supporting Evidence¶
| Evidence | Summary |
|---|---|
| SRC01-E01 | Sycophancy is a documented AI problem but not connected to enterprise infrastructure decisions |
| SRC02-E01 | Anti-sycophancy framed as software architecture, not as infrastructure decision |
| SRC03-E01 | Technical capability for behavioral control exists at research level, not at enterprise demand level |
| SRC04-E01 | "Enforce strict output behavior" is the closest language to behavioral control — and it still does not name sycophancy |
Contradicting Evidence¶
No evidence directly contradicts this hypothesis.
Reasoning¶
The evidence reveals a clear gap between two parallel conversations:
- Enterprise infrastructure conversation: Focuses on data sovereignty, security, compliance, cost, IP protection. "Customization" means domain adaptation. Sycophancy is not mentioned.
- AI research conversation: Actively addresses sycophancy through training methods, architectural patterns, and monitoring tools. Enterprise deployment is not discussed.
These conversations do not overlap. H3 accurately describes this gap.
Relationship to Other Hypotheses¶
H3 occupies the precise middle ground. H1 is eliminated (behavioral customization is not documented). H2 is partially correct but overstates the constraint. H3 explains why: the word "customization" appears in enterprise sources but means something different from behavioral customization.