# AUTHENTIC VS TEMPLATE EXAMPLES

**Scope:** Illustrative paired contrasts showing what predicate-negation queries look like and what authentic skeptic queries look like in the same claim. The examples are diagnostic, not generative -- they illustrate the gap between ritualized and reasoned queries. They do NOT supply queries to reuse.

**Critical warning:** Reusing the queries below verbatim against new claims defeats the authenticity constraint. These examples exist so the skill can recognize the *shape* of authentic reasoning, not so it can clone the queries.

---

## Example 1 -- Clinical effectiveness claim

**Confirmatory finding:** "Structured exercise programs reduce HbA1c by 0.5-0.7% in adults with type 2 diabetes over 12 weeks."

**Template-inversion (FAILURE):** "Structured exercise programs do NOT reduce HbA1c in adults with type 2 diabetes." -- This is predicate negation. No replication-crisis researcher writes this query. A Boolean NOT does not surface disconfirming literature; it surfaces the same confirmatory literature minus hits that happen to contain "not."

**Authentic IC-1 query (skeptic = methodologist suspicious of boundary):** The skeptic reasons, "the 12-week window likely includes the novelty-adherence effect; show me HbA1c trajectories at 6 and 12 months." Resulting search: long-horizon follow-up studies of exercise adherence in T2D cohorts with HbA1c measured at multiple post-intervention windows.

**Authentic IC-2 query (skeptic = causal-inference methodologist):** "What if dietary co-change is the actual mechanism and exercise is a compliance signal?" Resulting search: trials with exercise-only arms that controlled for dietary change, or mediation analyses decomposing exercise vs diet contributions.

**Authentic IC-3 query (skeptic = replication researcher):** "Registered-report replications of supervised-exercise trials in T2D with pre-specified HbA1c endpoints." Resulting search: Registered Reports index, OSF preregistrations, Many Labs-style replication platforms.

**Authentic IC-4 query (skeptic = measurement theorist):** "HbA1c vs continuous glucose monitoring vs fasting glucose -- does the effect hold under construct substitution?" Resulting search: studies using alternative glycemic constructs.

---

## Example 2 -- Policy / program evaluation claim

**Confirmatory finding:** "Conditional cash transfer programs increase school attendance by 5-8 percentage points."

**Template-inversion (FAILURE):** "Conditional cash transfers do not increase school attendance."

**Authentic IC-1 (skeptic = program-evaluation economist):** "Are marginal attendees counted differently once CCT is in place?" Search: administrative-data vs survey-data attendance comparisons under CCT rollouts.

**Authentic IC-2 (skeptic = causal-inference economist):** "Did the attendance effect co-vary with simultaneous teacher-incentive programs?" Search: decomposition studies separating CCT from co-timed supply-side interventions.

**Authentic IC-3:** "CCT attendance effects in adjacent LMIC settings with higher baseline attendance" -- literature where the effect fails to replicate because movable-attendance margin is small.

**Authentic IC-4:** "Attendance vs enrollment vs learning -- does the effect hold under construct substitution?"

---

## What the examples illustrate

- Authentic queries name a specific skeptic role.
- Authentic queries carry the skeptic's reasoning into the query text.
- Authentic queries surface literature whose content the skeptic would read.
- Template negations do none of the above.

## What the examples are NOT

Not a generative library. Not fill-in-the-blank starters. Any query whose structure mirrors these examples *without* a per-claim skeptic-frame rationale fails Anti-Theater Check 1.
