Lesson 14: Handle missing and conflicting evidence
One policy says two books, another three. Before asking the model to choose the newest, inspect the time and conditions each describes.
B and E concern different years
E is a superseded 2025 archive. Current limits use B’s three; historical comparison also needs E’s two. Deleting every archive prevents historical answers.
The explicit replacement relation justifies selection. A newer timestamp alone might identify a draft, another branch’s rule, or an unrelated edit, not a replacement.
A gives normal hours; D gives an exception
Sunday opening in A and closure on the 18th in D can coexist. A gives ordinary hours; D a date-specific exception. Use D for that date, and both for a comparison.
Do not extend D to every Sunday or closure on the 19th. Keep conclusions within stated scope.
Report a conflict that cannot be resolved
Create temporary X/Y cards claiming active fourteen-day and twenty-one-day loans without dates, authority, or replacement evidence. They are a separate conflict exercise outside A–H. You cannot establish which applies.
Report the discrepancy and need for authoritative version evidence. Do not average or choose the familiar number. Rank, length, and confident tone do not establish authority.
Deposits are a gap rather than a conflict. State that the sources cannot establish requirements; suggest checking fees without pretending that check happened. Answer supported components separately.
Write answers for B/E, A/D, X/Y, and deposits. Confidence should differ: the first two have explainable differences, the third lacks validity evidence, and the last lacks facts.
Check the scope of your claims
Current three and historical two are supported, as are date-specific closure and ordinary opening. Do not choose between X/Y without evidence or equate unknown deposits with no deposit. Explain what establishes each conclusion.
Further reading: Anthropic: Reduce hallucinations
← Previous · Learning plan · Fictional library practice sources · Next →