Skip to content

C004 — Twelve Rules in Four Groups

Research: R0053 Run: 2026-03-31 Mode: claim

BLUF

The claim is almost certainly correct. Direct inspection of the methodology prompt (research.md) confirms that Layer 1: Behavioral Constraints contains exactly twelve numbered rules organized in four named groups of three: Truth Hierarchy (Rules 1-3), Anti-Sycophancy Rules (Rules 4-6), Evidence Handling Rules (Rules 7-9), and Process Compliance Rules (Rules 10-12).

Probability / Answer

Rating: Almost certain(ly) / Nearly certain (95-99%) Confidence: High Rationale: The methodology prompt is the primary source artifact. Direct inspection confirms the exact structure claimed. The only reason this is not 100% is the general epistemic principle that no assessment is absolute.

Reasoning Chain

  1. The methodology prompt (research.md) contains a section titled "Layer 1: Behavioral Constraints" spanning lines 87-175. [Source: SRC01, High reliability, High relevance]

  2. This section contains four subsections: "Truth Hierarchy" (lines 94-113), "Anti-Sycophancy Rules" (lines 115-133), "Evidence Handling Rules" (lines 135-155), and "Process Compliance Rules" (lines 157-175). [Source: SRC01, High reliability, High relevance]

  3. Rules are numbered 1-12 consecutively. Truth Hierarchy contains rules 1, 2, 3. Anti-Sycophancy contains rules 4, 5, 6. Evidence Handling contains rules 7, 8, 9. Process Compliance contains rules 10, 11, 12. [Source: SRC01, High reliability, High relevance]

  4. JUDGMENT: The claim is a precise structural description of the prompt, verified by direct inspection. Every detail matches.

Hypotheses

H1: The claim is substantially correct — twelve rules, four groups, three each.

Status: Supported Evidence for: Direct inspection of the primary source artifact confirms every detail. Evidence against: None.

H2: The claim is substantially incorrect — the structure differs.

Status: Eliminated Evidence for: None. Evidence against: Direct inspection contradicts this hypothesis.

H3: The claim is partially correct — the numbers or groupings are slightly off.

Status: Eliminated Evidence for: None. Evidence against: Every number and grouping name matches exactly.

Evidence Summary

Source Description Reliability Relevance Key Finding
SRC01 research.md (methodology prompt) High High 12 rules, 4 groups, 3 each -- exact match

Collection Synthesis

Dimension Assessment
Evidence quality Robust -- primary source artifact directly inspected
Source agreement High -- single authoritative source
Source independence N/A -- single primary source
Outliers None

This is a structural claim about a specific artifact. The artifact is available for direct inspection. The claim matches the artifact exactly.

Gaps

Missing Evidence Impact on Assessment
None identified N/A -- the primary source is the definitive authority

Researcher Bias Check

Declared biases: No researcher profile was provided. Influence assessment: For a structural claim verified against a primary source artifact, researcher bias is not a significant factor.

Revisit Triggers

Trigger Type Check
The methodology prompt is revised to change the rule count or groupings event Check if research.md Layer 1 structure has changed
Rules are added, removed, or reorganized event Compare current research.md against this snapshot