R0042/2026-04-01/Q002 — ACH Matrix¶
Matrix¶
| H1: Sycophancy control is prominent motivation | H2: Customization documented but not sycophancy-focused | H3: Conversation limited to security only | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SRC01-E01: Behavioral governance as sovereign AI motivation | + | ++ | -- |
| SRC02-E01: Enterprise sycophancy concerns, technical solutions | - | ++ | - |
| SRC03-E01: Domain accuracy as on-prem customization | - | ++ | -- |
| SRC04-E01: Organizational sycophancy reduction (technical) | - | + | - |
Legend:
- ++ Strongly supports
- + Supports
- -- Strongly contradicts
- - Contradicts
- N/A Not applicable to this hypothesis
Diagnosticity Analysis¶
Most Diagnostic Evidence¶
| Evidence | Why Diagnostic |
|---|---|
| SRC02-E01 | CIO.com discusses sycophancy as enterprise concern but proposes only technical solutions, not deployment-architectural ones — this is highly diagnostic because it shows sycophancy is known as a problem but not connected to deployment decisions |
| SRC01-E01 | Deepset's behavioral governance is the closest enterprise literature gets to behavioral customization as deployment motivation, and it still does not include sycophancy — diagnostic for the gap between H1 and H2 |
Least Diagnostic Evidence¶
| Evidence | Why Non-Diagnostic |
|---|---|
| SRC04-E01 | Documents sycophancy reduction techniques but in a technical implementation context that does not discriminate between deployment motivations |
Outcome¶
Hypothesis supported: H2 — Behavioral customization is documented as a secondary motivation, focused on domain accuracy and governance, not sycophancy.
Hypotheses eliminated: H1 — Sycophancy control is not a documented enterprise deployment motivation. H3 — The conversation does extend beyond security.
Hypotheses inconclusive: None