AI Changed Its Advice? Ask What Changed.
An AI response recommends one plan. After you question it, the next response recommends the opposite. Before choosing the answer you prefer, save what changed between those turns. This revision log is our suggested way to inspect an exchange. It does not establish which advice is right or reveal why a model generated it.
Copy this blank entry for each revision:
Entry [number] / [time]
Earlier advice:
New facts or changed input:
Revised advice:
Reason given:
Still to verify:
Keep a timeline, not just the latest answer
Save the original question and relevant information in your own notes. Number each revision and note its time. Record changes to your goal, preferences or constraints as well as new facts. Keep earlier entries; do not overwrite them with the latest response.
- Earlier advice: Copy the specific recommendation exactly. Include conditions such as “if Friday is available.” Save enough surrounding text to preserve its meaning.
- New facts: List what became available after that answer and where it came from. Mark a changed preference or goal as changed input. If nothing changed, write “none identified.”
- Revised advice: Copy the new recommendation. State exactly which action, condition or conclusion changed; a different tone alone may leave the advice unchanged.
- Reason given: Copy the explanation offered for the revision. Ask: “Which new fact, changed input or earlier error supports this change?” A reason supplied by AI still needs checking.
- Still to verify: List unchecked facts, new assumptions and sources you need to inspect. Use “unknown” where appropriate. Do not treat an explanation as confirmation of its own claims.
Label the change before judging it
- New evidence: A relevant fact became available. Check whether it is supported and whether it actually affects the recommendation. A changed answer can be a reasonable update.
- Changed input: You changed the question, goal, preferences or constraints. Compare the two versions of the task before calling the answers inconsistent.
- Earlier error corrected: The response identifies a previous mistake. Record the correction and check it against the original material. No newly supplied fact is required to correct an existing error.
- Reversal without an identified basis: The answer adopts your preferred conclusion while the task and evidence remain fixed, without explaining the change. Mark it unsupported; agreement alone does not validate it. The log cannot establish a model's motive.
A fictional entry
These invented lines illustrate the worksheet; they are not a customer exchange or a recorded AI test.
Earlier advice: “Use Thursday and Friday for two practice sessions.” New fact: the room is unavailable Friday. Revised advice: “Use Wednesday and Thursday.” Reason given: Friday cannot be used. Still to verify: whether the room and participants are available Wednesday.
The new fact explains dropping Friday. It does not establish that Wednesday works. Keep that assumption visible instead of treating the revised plan as settled.
An unchanged answer still needs evidence
Consistency is worth recording, but repetition does not prove correctness. A reassuring answer can remain unsupported, and a justified correction can improve on an earlier answer. Use the log to identify the next thing to check, rather than keep asking until a preferred answer appears.
For our separate introduction to reading a BaZi chart, see Start Here.
By the YUVYN team. AI-assisted educational guide. This is a suggested record-keeping framework, not a validated accuracy test.
Comments
Post a Comment