Keep original reasoning and the evidence delta
Synthetic review R-381 found no documented conflicting instruction because reply A was missing. The customer then supplies the original A, and the team verifies it against the case record: A says Monthly data while accepted reference and reply B say October data. This changes the instruction finding, but does not establish when the output was corrected. The fixture reopens only the unsupported finding and related remedy work, retaining the original review history.
| Finding | Original evidence | New verified evidence | Review action |
|---|---|---|---|
| Instruction conflict | A missing; no conflict established | A differs from B and accepted title | Revisit conflict finding |
| Correction completion time | Unknown | A contains instructions only | Still unknown |
| Original review R-381 | Prior reasoning retained | New evidence linked | Add revised decision; do not erase |
Revise only the affected finding
- Identify the new evidence
- Verify its case association
- Compare against prior reasoning
- Record revised finding and next remedy
An unverified screenshot is a new report, not automatically accepted evidence; check its association before revising the decision.
Does the verified A establish the output correction time?
Show the worked answer
No. It establishes contradictory instructions, not a completed correction. Completion timing remains unknown while that finding is revised.
Retain the earlier review and link each changed finding to the new verified evidence. Unchanged findings keep their original scope.