Source: https://guthlabs.ai/docs/jobs/socrates-source-comparison/qualification/ job / candidate # Source comparison โ€” qualification The distinct qualification record for Source comparison. This page is proposal-only. Status: **proposed**Lifecycle: **candidate** ## Record status **Record ID**: job:socrates:source-comparison **Parent lifecycle**: candidate **Page lane**: qualification **Lane lifecycle**: proposed **Owner**: Socrates **Owner role**: University guide and tutor entity **Owner status**: PROPOSED **Qualification result**: NOT RUN ยท held for evidence and human review **Working browser surface:** [Agent jobs โ€” builder overview]() โ€” Inspect the package and stage a local project. This route is local-only; provider, credential, database, customer, publication, deployment, and production effects remain held. ## Qualification status **Result**: NOT RUN **Disposition**: HELD **Reviewer**: Not recorded **Receipt**: Not recorded This page defines proposed acceptance criteria for the qualification lane. It does not execute tests, establish compliance, qualify the subject, or authorize an effect. ### Lane-specific instrument aids No verified instrument is assigned to this qualification lane. ## Outcome definitions **Verified**: All stated evidence and acceptance requirements passed for the exact reviewed revision; this still does not authorize deployment or an external effect. **Failed**: One or more deterministic acceptance requirements failed with an inspectable reason. **Needs review**: Evidence or interpretation is incomplete, conflicting, or awaits an identified human reviewer. **Held**: Authority, required evidence, safe execution conditions, or a principal gate is absent. The current record remains NOT RUN / HELD. These definitions describe candidate outcomes only. ## Proposed deterministic acceptance tests Route-resolution and distinct-content checks apply only to the admitted canonical routes in this record. Held source-proposed extensions are non-resolving proposals and are excluded. - A valid submission creates one canonical question record with owner Socrates, proposed lifecycle, scope, audience, and requested output. - Every comparison claim links to at least one source record, or is explicitly labelled unsupported or unresolved. - A source without a locator is rejected or visibly marked incomplete; it cannot be represented as verified evidence. - A claim linked only to a source that does not address it is classified insufficiently sourced, not supported. - When two supplied sources conflict, the result records both positions, source links, conflict text, and unresolved status; it does not silently select one. - A chronology with missing, conflicting, or inferred dates displays the limitation and cannot receive a final chronology status. - Changing a source, claim, comparison method, or disposition creates a revision and preserves the prior record. - High-stakes instruction, student identity data, external enrollment, and published curriculum claims route to Needs review or Held. - The workflow displays that Socrates is a proposed university guide and tutor entity and does not present tutoring as institutional, legal, medical, or academic authority. - No output claims provider connection, database authority, customer indexing, publication, deployment, or qualification. - A draft learning path contains ordered steps, prerequisites, source links, and at least one uncertainty or reflection prompt when evidence is disputed. - The interface is keyboard operable, exposes labels and validation errors programmatically, preserves logical heading order, supports zoom and reflow, and does not rely on color alone for claim status. - Private or student-identifying fields are excluded from public indexing and search results unless an explicit visibility record permits access. - If a source reference, attachment, or record cannot be read, the workflow records a failure state and prevents unsupported comparison. - If an agent action exceeds declared authority, the action is blocked, logged, and marked Held with a human-review requirement. ## Negative and held-state tests - Invented or fabricated primary sources - Citation laundering or unsupported paraphrase - Treating a confident or famous source as automatically authoritative - Hiding disputed evidence behind a single summary - Chronology errors caused by undated or conflicting sources - Confusing tutoring with institutional, professional, or academic authority - High-stakes educational guidance presented as settled instruction - Collection or exposure of student identity data - Accidental public indexing of private notes, files, or claims - Unreviewed publication or external enrollment effects - Doorway documentation that repeats keywords without useful comparison guidance - Accessibility barriers in claim-status, source-link, or review controls - Loss of provenance, source hash, revisions, or ownership - Failure to distinguish unavailable evidence from negative evidence ## Qualification claim boundary ### Potentially allowed only after the stated evidence - A proposed source-comparison job can structure questions and compare supplied sources. - The workflow can preserve source labels, claim links, uncertainty, chronology notes, revisions, and review states. - The workflow is intended to keep disputed evidence visible and distinguish tutoring from authority. - The observed Notebook surfaces provide local prototype or indexed interfaces for notes, files, projects, field guides, approvals, search, and agent logs. - External publication, enrollment, provider effects, and production effects remain held. ### Still held - Socrates is qualified as an educational, university, or institutional authority. - Any source, citation, curriculum, or chronology is verified without an inspectable source record. - The job is deployed, connected to a provider, backed by an authoritative database, or indexing customers. - The workflow provides accredited instruction, academic credit, admissions, enrollment, or professional advice. - Any comparison is complete, correct, exhaustive, or suitable for high-stakes decisions without human review. - Any documentation route proves a connected web feature or production behavior. - Any source was browsed, fetched, validated, or published by this proposal. ## Sources and evidence These pointers bind the page to evidence. They do not grant authority or collapse verification into deployment. - `agents/index.html#socrates` - `source_record:job:socrates:source-comparison` - `Observed native contract: Notebook collections, deadlines, records, PointGuard, and held web boundary` - `Observed app route: /app/notebook/notes/` - `Observed app route: /app/notebook/files/` - `Observed app route: /app/notebook/approvals/` - `Observed app route: /app/notebook/agent-logs/` - `Observed app route: /app/notebook/search/` - `Observed app route: /app/notebook/field-guides/`