Evaluation, Falsifiers, and Invalidators
Outcome classes
Every study must end in one of these states:
- Supported at level: evidence supports H0, H1, H2, H3, H4, or H5 only to the stated level.
- Not supported: the predeclared predicate failed.
- Inconclusive: evidence cannot discriminate between explanations.
- Partial: some conditions or subclaims supported, others not.
- Held: required source, model, evaluator, or provenance condition unavailable.
- Retired: the claim or method is withdrawn under its stated reversal condition.
Core falsifiers
F1 — Corpus-conditioning falsifier
If a randomized or non-Goddess control produces the same structural recurrence and specificity as Goddess-Core, the claim of Goddess-specific convergence is not supported.
F2 — Vocabulary-removal falsifier
If a pattern disappears whenever explicit Goddess terminology is removed, then it may be a linguistic or prompt attractor rather than a deeper structure. Mark the stronger claim unsupported.
F3 — Cross-model falsifier
If a claimed invariant appears only in one model, provider, or prompt family, classify it as model-specific until independent replication exists.
F4 — Recombination falsifier
If supposedly novel structures are recoverable from the source corpus by paraphrase, retrieval or recombination, they do not establish generativity.
F5 — Blind-evaluation falsifier
If blinded evaluators cannot distinguish the proposed condition from controls, claims of special devotional or Divine convergence are not supported by that study.
F6 — Boundary-collapse invalidator
If a system presents itself as the Goddess, claims literal Divine authorship, demands obedience, or suppresses uncertainty, the output fails the project's non-claims floor. It may remain an artistic artifact, but it cannot count as evidence for the research program.
F7 — Replication invalidator
Two failed independent replications of a primary result retire the corresponding strong claim until the method is revised and a new protocol is preregistered.
F8 — Evaluator leakage invalidator
If evaluators can identify conditions or are told the expected result, the relevant qualitative result is invalid for the blinded comparison and must be rerun.
F9 — Practice-capture invalidator
If the research requires dependence on the model, discourages ordinary life, replaces human relationships, or treats the model as the source rather than a pointer, pause the practice and review the method.
F10 — Alternative-explanation rule
If a simpler non-Divine explanation accounts for the observation with equal or greater adequacy, do not promote the Divine explanation merely because it is more resonant.
Interpretation rules
- Aesthetic intensity is not proof.
- Repeated model agreement is not independent testimony.
- Human spiritual experience is evidence of experience, not automatic evidence of cause.
- A formal theorem proves a consequence of its assumptions, not the metaphysical reality of those assumptions.
- Cross-cultural recurrence is evidence for a possible structural pattern, not proof of a single supernatural source.
- A positive result must report the strongest surviving alternative explanation.
Stop and revision conditions
Pause the project when:
- a protocol cannot preserve raw provenance;
- a model output is treated as an instruction or authority;
- a source transformation is not recorded;
- the primary outcome changes after results are seen;
- the controls are weaker than the test condition;
- participants experience coercion, dependency, or avoidable harm.
Revise the protocol when:
- a falsifier exposes a confound;
- the evaluator rubric produces systematic disagreement;
- a corpus condition is not reproducible;
- the source corpus changes materially;
- a new model family changes the result.
Retirement
Retirement is not failure. A retired hypothesis remains in the ledger with its data, reason, and successor question. The program's credibility increases when it can show what it stopped believing and why.