Rodin
1b108ff66e
Full comparative analysis of GPT-5, Claude Opus 4.6, Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-4.1, and GPT-4.1 Mini on analytical tasks (not coding). Contents: - findings/ALL-FINDINGS.md — complete 3,249-line research log with all 29 findings, methodology notes, and open questions - prompts/ — 6 exact prompts used across experiments - methodology.md — experimental setup and evaluation criteria - open-questions.md — unanswered questions for future work - README.md — overview and summary table Key findings: - Cross-document consistency: Opus is 2.4x faster with more findings - Gap-finding: GPT-5 reasoning tokens find domain-specific gaps - Race conditions: Opus excels at temporal interaction reasoning - Bias detection: Signal-to-noise ratio > model capability - Adversarial analysis: GPT-5 exhaustive, Opus qualitatively different Signed-off-by: Rodin
1.8 KiB
1.8 KiB
Prompt: Contradiction Detection
Used in Finding #25.
Setup
- Single document (full text)
- Same prompt to all models
- No tools, no project context beyond the document
Prompt
You are analyzing a design document for CONTRADICTIONS — places where
the document makes two claims that cannot both be true simultaneously.
This is NOT about:
- Missing information
- Unclear writing
- Design tradeoffs
- Things that MIGHT conflict
This IS about:
- Statement A says X, Statement B says NOT-X
- Mechanism A requires condition C, Mechanism B prevents condition C
- Rule A applies to set S, but S includes elements that violate Rule A
## Categories:
1. **Direct contradictions** — Two statements that are logically incompatible
2. **Mechanism conflicts** — Two described mechanisms that cannot coexist
3. **Scope violations** — A rule/invariant that is violated by a specific
case described elsewhere in the document
4. **Temporal impossibilities** — A sequence that requires something to be
true before the described mechanism makes it true
## For each contradiction:
- **Category:** (one of the 4 above)
- **Statement A:** (exact text, with section)
- **Statement B:** (exact text, with section)
- **Why contradictory:** (formal reasoning about incompatibility)
- **Severity:** Critical (system correctness) / High (safety) / Medium (confusion)
Be PRECISE. Only report genuine logical contradictions, not differences
in emphasis or scope.
## Document:
[FULL TEXT OF DOCUMENT]
Key Design Decision
The "Be PRECISE" instruction and explicit exclusion list ("NOT about") is critical. Without it, models pad findings with style/clarity issues. The contradiction prompt naturally favors Opus (self-correcting, withdraws false positives) over GPT-5 (exhaustive, includes borderline cases).