Skip to content

What cannot be trusted yet?

A fluent answer or a successful process is not a scientific verdict. Build checks around observed failures.

Working notes

  • Self-reported confidence did not reliably predict which claims survived later checking.
  • Critical instructions repeatedly decayed when stored only as memory; mechanically enforced rules held better.
  • Review findings can persist through revisions without being resolved.
  • An audit found code defects while missing a more serious data problem.
  • Autonomous tuning was mixed: validation gains could accompany worse held-out performance.
  • Successful exit codes and self-comparisons can hide empty outputs or ineffective checks.

Source: course evidence synthesis, §2. These are selected observations, not general performance guarantees.

Test the checker

Include a known-bad case. A test that cannot fail cannot establish the claim you care about.

Before the course

  • [TODO: select a compact worked example and its verification artifact.]
  • [TODO: rehearse the live walkthrough and prepare a fallback.]

Back to the deck ↩