{
  "conditions": {
    "C1": {
      "condition": "C1",
      "description": "No Collective review",
      "status": "OK",
      "m1_collective": {
        "scores": {
          "cognitive_scientist": 82,
          "narrative_biographer": 78,
          "epistemologist": 85,
          "pragmatic_engineer": 88
        },
        "combined": 83,
        "issues": [
          {
            "category": "cognitive_patterns",
            "description": "Some behavioral patterns border on clich\u00e9 (e.g., 'time is money' frugality) without sufficient nuance about when these patterns break down",
            "severity": "medium"
          },
          {
            "category": "biographical_completeness",
            "description": "Limited coverage of emotional responses, family dynamics, and personal relationships beyond functional aspects",
            "severity": "medium"
          },
          {
            "category": "historical_context",
            "description": "Insufficient grounding in specific historical events or timeframes that shaped these behaviors",
            "severity": "low"
          },
          {
            "category": "pattern_specificity",
            "description": "Some patterns described too abstractly without concrete behavioral triggers or thresholds",
            "severity": "medium"
          }
        ],
        "strengths": [
          "Excellent identification of core tensions and contradictions that create realistic behavioral complexity",
          "Strong epistemological grounding with explicit acknowledgment of data limitations",
          "Pragmatic structure that clearly indicates how different modes trigger different response patterns",
          "Sophisticated treatment of paradoxes (seeking recognition while avoiding self-promotion)",
          "Clear operational guidance for AI implementation with specific behavioral triggers"
        ]
      },
      "m3_patterns": {
        "total": 36,
        "behavioral": 8,
        "axioms": 6,
        "predictions": 0,
        "limitations": 1,
        "tensions": 21,
        "density_per_1000_chars": 4.73
      },
      "m4_diagnostics": {
        "char_count": 7614,
        "token_est": 1903,
        "sections": 12,
        "pronoun_consistency": "he/him (97.3%)",
        "has_thin_data": true,
        "has_contested": false,
        "has_availability": true,
        "has_failure_modes": false
      },
      "m2_pairwise": {
        "winner": "A",
        "confidence": 4,
        "reasoning": "Brief A provides more behavioral specificity with concrete examples of how Franklin's patterns manifest (e.g., 'shifts into questioning mode rather than direct argumentation' with specific contexts), while Brief B often stays at a more abstract level. Brief A also better captures the nuanced tensions in Franklin's character through specific behavioral predictions, making it more actionable for AI injection.",
        "decoded_winner": "baseline",
        "presentation_order": "baseline_first"
      }
    },
    "C2": {
      "condition": "C2",
      "description": "No contradictions/consolidation",
      "status": "OK",
      "m1_collective": {
        "scores": {
          "cognitive_scientist": 82,
          "narrative_biographer": 78,
          "epistemologist": 88,
          "pragmatic_engineer": 85
        },
        "combined": 83,
        "issues": [
          {
            "category": "narrative_biographer",
            "description": "Historical figure identity never explicitly stated, making it difficult to verify completeness and accuracy of portrait",
            "severity": "medium"
          },
          {
            "category": "cognitive_scientist",
            "description": "Some behavioral patterns described through self-reported virtue tracking rather than observed behaviors",
            "severity": "medium"
          },
          {
            "category": "narrative_biographer",
            "description": "Chronological context and life stages unclear - behaviors presented as static rather than evolving",
            "severity": "medium"
          },
          {
            "category": "pragmatic_engineer",
            "description": "Dense prose style may require multiple readings for AI to extract actionable patterns",
            "severity": "low"
          }
        ],
        "strengths": [
          "Excellent acknowledgment of data limitations and uncertainty through [THIN DATA] section",
          "Rich behavioral tensions and contradictions that avoid simplistic characterization",
          "Systematic connection between principles and specific behavioral manifestations",
          "Strong grounding of claims in specific examples and contexts",
          "Nuanced treatment of complex motivations like strategic invisibility and collaborative loyalty"
        ]
      },
      "m3_patterns": {
        "total": 33,
        "behavioral": 8,
        "axioms": 7,
        "predictions": 0,
        "limitations": 2,
        "tensions": 16,
        "density_per_1000_chars": 3.66
      },
      "m4_diagnostics": {
        "char_count": 9006,
        "token_est": 2251,
        "sections": 15,
        "pronoun_consistency": "he/him (100.0%)",
        "has_thin_data": true,
        "has_contested": false,
        "has_availability": true,
        "has_failure_modes": true
      },
      "m2_pairwise": {
        "winner": "B",
        "confidence": 4,
        "reasoning": "Brief B provides more concrete behavioral patterns with specific triggers and responses (e.g., 'shifts into questioning mode rather than direct argumentation' when encountering disagreement), while Brief A tends toward abstract principles. B's structure of 'foundational certainties' leading to 'predictable patterns' offers clearer actionability for AI behavior generation.",
        "decoded_winner": "baseline",
        "presentation_order": "test_first"
      }
    },
    "C3": {
      "condition": "C3",
      "description": "No scoring",
      "status": "OK",
      "m1_collective": {
        "scores": {
          "cognitive_scientist": 82,
          "narrative_biographer": 78,
          "epistemologist": 85,
          "pragmatic_engineer": 79
        },
        "combined": 81,
        "issues": [
          {
            "category": "cognitive_patterns",
            "description": "Some behavioral descriptions border on idealized rationality rather than capturing genuine human inconsistency",
            "severity": "medium"
          },
          {
            "category": "narrative_completeness",
            "description": "Limited coverage of emotional responses, personal relationships, and private life contexts",
            "severity": "medium"
          },
          {
            "category": "behavioral_specificity",
            "description": "Several patterns described abstractly without concrete behavioral examples or situational triggers",
            "severity": "medium"
          },
          {
            "category": "predictive_utility",
            "description": "Tension resolution rules could be more specific about which principle dominates in particular contexts",
            "severity": "low"
          }
        ],
        "strengths": [
          "Excellent identification and articulation of core tensions and contradictions in the subject's behavior",
          "Strong epistemological grounding with explicit acknowledgment of data limitations",
          "Effective capture of systematic thinking patterns and empirical orientation",
          "Useful behavioral predictions for intellectual and civic contexts",
          "Clear documentation of when specific patterns surface in conversation"
        ]
      },
      "m3_patterns": {
        "total": 29,
        "behavioral": 7,
        "axioms": 4,
        "predictions": 0,
        "limitations": 1,
        "tensions": 17,
        "density_per_1000_chars": 3.99
      },
      "m4_diagnostics": {
        "char_count": 7261,
        "token_est": 1815,
        "sections": 11,
        "pronoun_consistency": "he/him (97.1%)",
        "has_thin_data": true,
        "has_contested": false,
        "has_availability": true,
        "has_failure_modes": true
      },
      "m2_pairwise": {
        "winner": "A",
        "confidence": 4,
        "reasoning": "Brief A provides more behavioral specificity with concrete triggers and response patterns (e.g., 'automatically filters through public benefit,' 'shifts into questioning mode'), while Brief B often describes general principles without clear behavioral manifestations. A's structured approach to tensions and contradictions offers more actionable guidance for AI responses than B's philosophical summaries.",
        "decoded_winner": "baseline",
        "presentation_order": "baseline_first"
      }
    },
    "C5": {
      "condition": "C5",
      "description": "No tiering (all facts = identity)",
      "status": "OK",
      "m1_collective": {
        "scores": {
          "cognitive_scientist": 82,
          "narrative_biographer": 71,
          "epistemologist": 88,
          "pragmatic_engineer": 85
        },
        "combined": 82,
        "issues": [
          {
            "category": "narrative_completeness",
            "description": "Historical figure unnamed, making it difficult to verify accuracy or completeness of portrait",
            "severity": "medium"
          },
          {
            "category": "behavioral_specificity",
            "description": "Some patterns described in abstract terms without concrete behavioral examples",
            "severity": "medium"
          },
          {
            "category": "personal_domain_gaps",
            "description": "Acknowledged lack of data on personal relationships could limit AI responses in important contexts",
            "severity": "low"
          },
          {
            "category": "pattern_verification",
            "description": "Limited evidence for how consistently these patterns apply across different life stages",
            "severity": "low"
          }
        ],
        "strengths": [
          "Excellent epistemological grounding with clear acknowledgment of data limitations and domain boundaries",
          "Rich behavioral patterns that avoid clich\u00e9s and capture genuine complexity",
          "Strong integration of multiple behavioral systems showing how patterns interconnect",
          "Practical guidance for AI implementation with specific interaction strategies",
          "Nuanced treatment of contradictions and failure modes",
          "Clear operational instructions for engaging with the subject's thinking patterns"
        ]
      },
      "m3_patterns": {
        "total": 26,
        "behavioral": 5,
        "axioms": 2,
        "predictions": 0,
        "limitations": 1,
        "tensions": 18,
        "density_per_1000_chars": 3.84
      },
      "m4_diagnostics": {
        "char_count": 6765,
        "token_est": 1691,
        "sections": 11,
        "pronoun_consistency": "he/him (100.0%)",
        "has_thin_data": true,
        "has_contested": false,
        "has_availability": true,
        "has_failure_modes": true
      },
      "m2_pairwise": {
        "winner": "A",
        "confidence": 4,
        "reasoning": "Brief A provides more concrete behavioral patterns with specific triggers and manifestations (e.g., 'When evaluating any policy... he automatically filters it through public benefit'), while Brief B often describes attitudes without clear behavioral anchors. A's systematic documentation of tensions, communication patterns, and specific response triggers makes it significantly more actionable for AI injection.",
        "decoded_winner": "baseline",
        "presentation_order": "baseline_first"
      }
    }
  },
  "timestamp": "2026-03-08T15:39:20.212325"
}