Evidence item · v0.74
Maintainer Disagreement — why some weights remain contested
E-METH-MAINTAINER-DISAGREEMENT
Visual overview: Evidence Viewer
Classification
- Evidence ID
- E-METH-MAINTAINER-DISAGREEMENT
- Corpus/version
- v0.74
- Stage
- Not explicitly stage-mapped in current stage_flow.
- Category
- Evidence Governance
- Major category
- Methodology / Signal Core
- Sub-category
- Transparency / Maintainer Notes
- BF status
- unweighted_explanatory
- Scoring label
- Contextual / unweighted / no active Bayes factor.
Navigation
Primary Datum
Maintainer Disagreement explains that the project owner does not personally agree with every current weight, calibration, or row framing in The Signal. The row clarifies that The Signal is AI-assisted, not AI-authoritative: AI helped compare hypotheses, stress-test weights, detect inconsistency, and resist some preferred conclusions, while the maintainer remains responsible for publication, correction, and interpretation. Disputed rows should be marked, reviewed, sourced, and corrected only when the evidence justifies it. This unweighted support-layer article protects the map from preference-fitting and keeps AuditGuardrailSynthesisV1 beta, reviewable, and transparent.
Scoring / Hypothesis Pressure
Contextual / unweighted / no active Bayes factor.
Dependency / Cap Metadata
- dependency_cluster_id
- methodological_controls
- dependency_cluster_role
- methodology
- dependency_cluster
- methodological_controls
- dependency_role
- methodology
- cap_profile
- manual_review
- evidence_function
- methodological_pressure
- directness
- methodological
Caveats / Notes
- Source note
- Unweighted transparency note explaining maintainer disagreement and AI-assisted pressure review. It should not alter scoring math.
- Scoring note
- No active BF. Support-layer explanation only.
Citations
- The Signal public methodology surfaces: evidence rows, caveats, dependency notes, counter-pressure, and beta synthesis outputs.
- E. T. Jaynes, probability as disciplined reasoning and public inference.
- Richard Swinburne, cumulative-case reasoning and explanatory power.
Recommended Citation
The Signal Evidence Dataset, "Maintainer Disagreement — why some weights remain contested," Evidence ID: E-METH-MAINTAINER-DISAGREEMENT, Version 0.74. Accessed [access date]. https://logos-signal.org/evidence/E-METH-MAINTAINER-DISAGREEMENT/
Machine-Readable Source
This page is generated from the public evidence mirror without recalculating or changing scores.