claw
d8a030d9e9
Tests the open question from Finding #39: does Opus's internal reasoning depth suffice for self-contradiction verification? Key result: wrong question. Opus finds a different CLASS of contradiction than GPT-5. GPT-5 finds specification conflicts (statement comparison). Opus finds logical impossibilities (deductive rule interaction). Neither dominates — they don't overlap. Sonnet remains unreliable (~33% precision). Document tested: escalation-policy.md (228 lines) Models: GPT-5, Claude Opus 4.6, Claude Sonnet 4.6
Model Findings — Analytical & Research Work
Tracking what actually works (and doesn't) when using AI models for research, analysis, bias detection, and document review — not coding.
Started: 2026-04-26
Context
We use multiple models in different roles: Claude Code (Opus/Sonnet) for generation, Sonnet + GPT-5 for independent dual review, smaller models for focused analytical tasks. Most public discussion is about coding. We found almost no published methodology for using models in analytical research tasks (searched 2026-04-26). That gap is why we're tracking this.
Each experiment lives in its own file. See individual finding files below.