Q002 — ACH Matrix¶


Research	R0050 — Journalism and Other Truth-Seeking Disciplines
Run	2026-03-31
Query	Q002

Matrix¶

	H1: Multiple novel	H2: None novel	H3: Few novel
SRC01-E01: Legal standards of proof — policy-driven thresholds	+	-	+
SRC02-E01: Legal evidence — admissibility, privilege, adversarial testing	++	--	++
SRC03-E01: Auditing — sufficiency/appropriateness framework	N/A	+	+
SRC04-E01: Bradford Hill — largely subsumed by GRADE/IPCC	-	+	+
SRC05-E01: FMEA — three-axis severity-occurrence-detection scoring	++	--	++
SRC06-E01: OCEBM — precursor to GRADE	-	+	+
SRC07-E01: Source criticism — authentication-before-evaluation	+	-	+
SRC08-E01: SIFT/CRAAP — pedagogical simplifications	-	+	+

Legend: ++ Strongly supports · + Supports · -- Strongly contradicts · - Contradicts · N/A Not applicable

Diagnosticity Analysis¶

Most Diagnostic Evidence¶

Evidence	Why Diagnostic
SRC02-E01	Legal evidence law's admissibility gating and privilege doctrines are clearly novel, strongly discriminating between H2 (eliminated) and H1/H3
SRC05-E01	FMEA's detection dimension is clearly not present in any of the nine frameworks, supporting H1/H3 over H2

Least Diagnostic Evidence¶

Evidence	Why Non-Diagnostic
SRC03-E01	Auditing standards are borderline — their concepts parallel GRADE but with distinct formalization. Does not clearly discriminate between hypotheses

Outcome¶

Hypothesis supported: H3 — A few disciplines contribute specific novel concepts (legal evidence law, FMEA, historical source criticism) while most are already captured (Bradford Hill, OCEBM, CASP, SIFT, CRAAP, auditing).

Hypotheses eliminated: H2 — Legal evidence law and FMEA clearly contribute novel concepts.

Hypotheses inconclusive: H1 — Partially supported. Three disciplines contribute, which could be interpreted as "multiple," but the count is concentrated rather than widespread.