Adversarial Review Protocol

Purpose

Provide a repeatable process for trying to weaken or falsify each major Framework Engineering claim.

Review Steps

1. Select a claim under test.
2. State the strongest current evidence for the claim.
3. State the strongest competing explanation.
4. Identify the weakest evidence link.
5. Identify the existing discipline that may already explain the same result.
6. Define what conflicting evidence would force revision.
7. Define the next experiment most likely to change the current decision.
8. Record a claim decision: keep, revise, suspend, or remove

Reviewer Rules

• Do not defend the claim by default.
• Do not treat internal same-model runs as independent confirmation.
• Prefer simpler explanations when they explain the evidence equally well.
• Record uncertainty explicitly.
• Attack the weakest link first.

Minimum Review Questions Per Claim

• What would make this false?
• What simpler explanation exists?
• What discipline already explains this?
• What evidence is currently weakest?
• What experiment would change our mind?