R0043/2026-04-01/Q001/H2¶
Statement¶
Some domains have not developed specific terminology for this phenomenon and either use generic terms (e.g., "bias," "accuracy") or have no vocabulary at all for the concept.
Status¶
Current: Partially Supported
Supporting Evidence¶
| Evidence | Summary |
|---|---|
| SRC07-E01 | Enterprise software evaluation and UX/product design lack domain-specific terms, using general concepts like "hallucination rate" and "satisfaction-accuracy tradeoff" |
| SRC09-E01 | Article explicitly identifies that regulated industries describe manifestations without standardized nomenclature |
Contradicting Evidence¶
| Evidence | Summary |
|---|---|
| SRC03-E01 | Defense and aviation have well-established terminology dating to early 2000s |
| SRC05-E01 | Human-AI interaction research has a rich vocabulary with formal definitions |
Reasoning¶
This hypothesis is partially supported. While most domains have some terminology, the depth and specificity varies enormously. Aviation and defense have decades-old, well-defined terminology. AI safety has specific recent terminology. But enterprise software evaluation, academic integrity, and UX/product design largely borrow terms from other fields rather than developing domain-native vocabulary for this specific phenomenon.
Relationship to Other Hypotheses¶
H2 is a refinement of H1 — it holds for 2-3 of the 8 domains (academic integrity, enterprise software, UX) while H1 holds for the remainder. H2 and H1 are compatible rather than contradictory.