Compare the rule with concrete cases
Fictional rule: every labelled sample has a reference note. Unlabelled samples may also have notes. “Labelled implies note” does not mean “note implies labelled”. A proposed bidirectional interpretation would wrongly require every noted sample to have a label.
| Sample | Label | Note | Original rule |
|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | Present | Present | Valid |
| S2 | Absent | Present | Valid |
| S3 | Present | Absent | Invalid |
Work through the distinction
Only a labelled sample without a note violates the one-way rule. A note is not evidence that a label exists. If both directions are intended, state both rather than deriving the second silently.
An unlabelled sample has no note. Does it violate the rule?
Show the worked answer
No. The rule imposes a note requirement only on labelled samples; it states nothing additional for this unlabelled case.
Acceptance wording to adapt
Reject a sample when label_present=true and reference_note_present=false. Accept the other three combinations for this particular rule. A note must not automatically create or infer a label.