Skip to content
TITAN//CAPABILITY
Revision 7T · Full Tutorial Edition · Updated 1 September 2026

PWR-122 · SELF GUIDED full tutorial

Find defined errors in synthetic documents and count both misses and false alarms

Error detection requires a declared error class, ground truth and correction path. This lesson uses synthetic one-page reports containing arithmetic mismatches, internal contradictions, unsupported citations and source mismatches. The learner reads one page normally, then applies a fixed verification sequence to a matched page, reveals the answer key and calculates hits, misses and false alarms. It is not medical-image review, deception detection or safety monitoring.

What you will produceThe learner applies a four-pass checklist to three synthetic reports and reduces high-cost misses without increasing false alarms beyond the declared limit.
Method8 numbered Power-specific steps
Practice authoritySelf-guided low-risk method

One source of teaching truth

Full step-by-step individual tutorial · TLU-PWR-122

The learner applies a four-pass checklist to three synthetic reports and reduces high-cost misses without increasing false alarms beyond the declared limit.

Canonical Power page
PWR-122 · Error detection
Full tutorial
Open full tutorial
Practical authority
The tutorial teaches a low-risk method that may be practised inside its stated limits.
Current treatment
Full low-stakes tutorial
Research depth
detailed · 4 bound sources
Risk framing
moderate to high
Capability self-practice
Permitted inside the tutorial's stated low-risk limits
Pathway membership
G-CUR-012

Open My Power Path Inspect the canonical record

1 · Permission and limits

Know exactly what you may do

You may

  • Inspect fully synthetic, consequence-free documents with an answer key.
  • Use checklists, calculators and source cards.

Qualified help is required for

  • Clinical, legal, financial, engineering, security or other professional review.
  • Compulsive-checking concerns or consequential quality assurance.

Never do this from the page alone

  • Use the exercise to diagnose, accuse, detect deception or clear safety-critical material.
  • Assume slow reading or suspicion alone is error detection.

2 · Get ready

Gather what you need and check the starting conditions

What you need

  • Exact synthetic packet. Report A: A1 ‘18 red + 27 blue = 46’; A2 body says inspection Tuesday but summary says Wednesday; A3 cites S1 for higher demand; A4 cites nonexistent S9 for lower repair cost. Report B: B1 ‘14 + 19 = 34’; B2 body says sample 40 but summary says 44; B3 cites S2 for return rate; B4 cites nonexistent S8 for a delay claim. Report C controls read ‘22 + 11 = 33’ and ‘checked June 4’ consistently; C3 cites S3 for lower defect rate.
  • Source cards and hidden key. S1 discusses packaging only, S2 storage temperature only and S3 courier time only. Key: A1/B1 arithmetic (45/33); A2/B2 contradiction; A3/B3/C3 source mismatch; A4/B4 unsupported citation; the two Report C control statements are clean.
  • Confusion-matrix sheet for true errors found, misses, false alarms and correct rejections.

Before you start

  • Define the four error classes and examples before inspection.
  • Mark all people, sources and decisions fictional.
  • Set a 10-minute limit and a stop rule for compulsive rechecking or distress.
  • Have a helper separate Reports A–C from the source cards and hidden key. If you prepared the packet and remember the answers, use it only as demonstration and score a fresh helper-prepared permutation.

3 · The method

Follow these steps in order

  1. Declare error classes

    Write arithmetic mismatch, contradiction, unsupported citation and source mismatch, with the evidence needed to confirm each.

    Why: A suspicion becomes a detected error only when it matches a rule and ground truth.

    Check: Each class has a definition and confirmation method.

  2. Set prevalence and error costs

    Read the packet’s class list and rank the fictional consequence of missing each class versus raising a false alarm. State which error class the next checklist prompt will target; do not invent a universal acceptable false-alarm count.

    Why: Search behaviour and an effective repair depend on how rare and costly the target is.

    Check: The sheet names the available error classes, highest-cost miss and the class-specific prompt before inspection.

  3. Make an ordinary baseline pass

    Read report A once and mark suspected errors without a checklist. Commit before seeing the key.

    Why: The baseline shows what ordinary reading catches and misses.

    Check: Every mark has a class and line reference.

  4. Apply the verification sequence

    On matched report B, check quantities, then internal claims, then citation existence, then whether each cited source supports the sentence.

    Why: Separate passes reduce switching and target specific error mechanisms.

    Check: All four passes are completed in order.

  5. Require confirmation

    For each mark, write the calculation, conflicting sentence or source-card evidence. Remove marks that lack confirmation.

    Why: Evidence controls false alarms and separates anomaly from error.

    Check: Every retained mark has a visible proof.

  6. Reveal and classify outcomes

    Compare with the answer key and count hits, misses, false alarms and correct rejections by class.

    Why: Accuracy alone can hide rare but costly misses.

    Check: The confusion matrix totals all eligible items.

  7. Write and verify the correction

    For every confirmed error, produce the corrected number, sentence or citation link and have the answer key or a second independent calculation verify it.

    Why: Detection is incomplete when the proposed repair introduces another error.

    Check: Each confirmed mark has one corrected replacement and a documented independent check.

  8. Redesign around the costliest miss

    Identify the missed class with highest declared cost, add one targeted prompt and test it on report C without extending total time.

    Why: A repair should target the harmful failure, not merely make all checking slower.

    Check: Report C shows whether the targeted miss falls and false alarms stay bounded.

4 · Worked example

See the whole method used once

Scenario

The supplied Reports A and B each contain one arithmetic mismatch, contradiction, source mismatch and unsupported citation; Report C adds clean controls and one source mismatch.

Walkthrough

  1. Maya defines arithmetic and source mismatch before reading.
  2. On the ordinary Report A pass she catches A1 but misses A2, A3 and A4, giving one hit, three misses and no false alarms.
  3. On Report B she recomputes 14+19=33 and compares the body’s sample 40 with the summary’s 44.
  4. She opens S2, sees no return-rate evidence, and separately checks the citation list to show that S8 does not exist.
  5. Against the key she records four Report B hits, no misses and no false alarms, then adds ‘state the exact supported claim’ before applying the same pass to C3.

Result

Maya has evidence-backed detections and a class-specific repair. She has not shown professional audit or safety-monitoring competence.

5 · Right and wrong

Compare correct or safer execution with the common wrong version

Right and wrong comparison
MomentRight / saferWrong / riskierWhy it matters
MarkingName the error class and confirming evidence.Highlight anything that feels odd.Vague suspicion inflates false alarms.
ChecklistUse separate arithmetic, consistency and source passes.Reread the whole page repeatedly without a target.Unstructured repetition adds burden without a known mechanism.
ScoringCount misses and false alarms by class.Celebrate total accuracy on mostly clean statements.High base-rate accuracy can hide rare-target failure.
RepairTarget the highest-cost missed class.Simply double inspection time.More time may not repair the actual search failure.

6 · Common mistakes

Spot the error and apply the correction

Common mistakes and corrections
MistakeFix
A citation exists, so it is marked valid.Open the source card and compare the exact supported claim.
Clean statements are absent from the denominator.Include correct rejections and false alarms for all eligible checks.
The answer key is opened during inspection.Commit all marks first and timestamp reveal.
All error classes are averaged.Report arithmetic, contradiction, citation and source mismatch separately.

7 · Practice

Turn the steps into a usable skill

First session

  1. Learn four error definitions.
  2. Complete one ordinary baseline report.
  3. Apply the four-pass checklist to a matched report.
  4. Build the confusion matrix.
  5. Repair the costliest miss on a third report.

Repeat plan

Use one three-report set weekly for four weeks, with new synthetic content and predeclared error prevalence. Keep time fixed. After week two, include a set with very rare targets to test vigilance without increasing stakes.

Progress when

  • High-cost misses decline on fresh reports.
  • False alarms remain below the predeclared limit.
  • Every detection includes reproducible evidence.

Do not progress when

  • Checking becomes repetitive, distressing or hard to stop.
  • The material becomes real or consequential.
  • Ground truth or error definitions are disputed.

8 · Check the result

Measure what changed

Class-specific hits, misses and false alarms on keyed synthetic reports.

How: For each class, count hits, misses, false alarms and correct rejections. Calculate sensitivity as hits/(hits+misses) when at least one keyed error exists; report false-alarm count and eligible clean checks, time and burden, then compare matched baseline and checklist sets without merging classes.

Good result: On fresh keyed sets, the targeted high-cost miss is corrected with visible evidence while misses, false alarms and time all remain reported. No fixed ‘one false alarm per report’ rule is presented as a validated professional threshold.

This does not prove: It does not establish professional review, lie detection, diagnosis, safety clearance or transfer to rare real-world targets.

Self-check

9 · Stop, adapt or get help

Keep the safety boundary practical

Stop and get help

Accessibility and adaptations

10 · Evidence and limits

Why these instructions are here

  1. primary research

    Ultra-rare targets produced high miss rates even across very large numbers of search trials, so prevalence and misses must be reported.

    The Ultra-Rare-Item Effect
  2. official guidance

    NIST AI RMF supports configured risk measurement and correction paths when errors involve AI-assisted systems.

    Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)

Limits

Open the complete canonical research register
  1. Primary empirical supportLimiting / contrary
    Rare Targets Are Rarely Missed in Correctable Search

    Mathias S. Fleck; Stephen R. Mitroff · 2007 · Primary research

  2. Primary empirical supportLimiting / contrary
    To Trust or to Think: Cognitive Forcing Functions Can Reduce Overreliance on AI in AI-assisted Decision-making

    Zana Buçinca; Maja Barbara Malaya; Krzysztof Z. Gajos · 2021 · Primary research

  3. Primary empirical supportLimiting / contrary
    The Ultra-Rare-Item Effect

    Stephen R. Mitroff; Adam T. Biggs · 2013 · Primary research

  4. Limiting / contraryOfficial boundary context
    Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)

    National Institute of Standards and Technology · 2023 · Official framework

Read the complete evidence interpretation on the Power dossier.

Tutorial delivery controls

Learn, adapt, troubleshoot and resume

Estimated timeEstimated 27 min reading and worksheet pass
DifficultyIntermediate
EquipmentCommon household or practice equipment
SpaceRoom-scale practice space
Method qualityComprehensive10 of 10 structural checks present. Automated method-readiness band; human editorial sign-off is separate.
Evidence contextG1; Detailed research depthScientific support is evaluated separately from teaching-method structure.
Editorial reviewPending manual sign-offNo human approval is claimed until reviewer, date and content hash are recorded.
Your tutorial progress0 of 8 steps complete
0 of 8 steps complete
Download learner worksheet

Progress is saved only in this browser on this device.

Step-by-step learner mode

Each activity includes its success check, a nearby accessible alternative and an “I’m stuck” correction path. Alternatives preserve the target where possible; when they change the task, Titan labels them as related rather than equivalent.

01

Declare error classes

Write arithmetic mismatch, contradiction, unsupported citation and source mismatch, with the evidence needed to confirm each.

Why this step exists

A suspicion becomes a detected error only when it matches a rule and ground truth.

Success check

Each class has a definition and confirmation method.

I’m stuck on this step

Reset: Re-read this authored instruction — “Write arithmetic mismatch, contradiction, unsupported citation and source mismatch, with the evidence needed to confirm each.” — and its success check, then attempt only this step.

  1. Possible snag: A citation exists, so it is marked valid.

    Correction: Open the source card and compare the exact supported claim.

  2. Possible snag: All error classes are averaged.

    Correction: Report arithmetic, contradiction, citation and source mismatch separately.

Stop / get help: Stop if checking becomes compulsive, distressing or continues past the time limit.

02

Set prevalence and error costs

Read the packet’s class list and rank the fictional consequence of missing each class versus raising a false alarm. State which error class the next checklist prompt will target; do not invent a universal acceptable false-alarm count.

Why this step exists

Search behaviour and an effective repair depend on how rare and costly the target is.

Success check

The sheet names the available error classes, highest-cost miss and the class-specific prompt before inspection.

I’m stuck on this step

Reset: Re-read this authored instruction — “Read the packet’s class list and rank the fictional consequence of missing each class versus raising a false alarm. State which error class the next checklist prompt will target; do not invent a universal acceptable false-alarm count.” — and its success check, then attempt only this step.

  1. Possible snag: The result from “Read the packet’s class list and rank the fictional consequence of missing each class versus raising a false alarm. State which error class the next checklist prompt will target; do not invent a universal acceptable false-alarm count.” does not yet meet this declared check: The sheet names the available error classes, highest-cost miss and the class-specific prompt before inspection.

    Correction: Return to the start of “Set prevalence and error costs”, reduce complexity or pace, and repeat only the part needed to satisfy: “The sheet names the available error classes, highest-cost miss and the class-specific prompt before inspection.”

Stop / get help: Stop if checking becomes compulsive, distressing or continues past the time limit.

03

Make an ordinary baseline pass

Read report A once and mark suspected errors without a checklist. Commit before seeing the key.

Why this step exists

The baseline shows what ordinary reading catches and misses.

Success check

Every mark has a class and line reference.

I’m stuck on this step

Reset: Re-read this authored instruction — “Read report A once and mark suspected errors without a checklist. Commit before seeing the key.” — and its success check, then attempt only this step.

  1. Possible snag: The result from “Read report A once and mark suspected errors without a checklist. Commit before seeing the key.” does not yet meet this declared check: Every mark has a class and line reference.

    Correction: Return to the start of “Make an ordinary baseline pass”, reduce complexity or pace, and repeat only the part needed to satisfy: “Every mark has a class and line reference.”

Stop / get help: Stop if checking becomes compulsive, distressing or continues past the time limit.

04

Apply the verification sequence

On matched report B, check quantities, then internal claims, then citation existence, then whether each cited source supports the sentence.

Why this step exists

Separate passes reduce switching and target specific error mechanisms.

Success check

All four passes are completed in order.

I’m stuck on this step

Reset: Re-read this authored instruction — “On matched report B, check quantities, then internal claims, then citation existence, then whether each cited source supports the sentence.” — and its success check, then attempt only this step.

  1. Possible snag: The result from “On matched report B, check quantities, then internal claims, then citation existence, then whether each cited source supports the sentence.” does not yet meet this declared check: All four passes are completed in order.

    Correction: Return to the start of “Apply the verification sequence”, reduce complexity or pace, and repeat only the part needed to satisfy: “All four passes are completed in order.”

Stop / get help: Stop if checking becomes compulsive, distressing or continues past the time limit.

05

Require confirmation

For each mark, write the calculation, conflicting sentence or source-card evidence. Remove marks that lack confirmation.

Why this step exists

Evidence controls false alarms and separates anomaly from error.

Success check

Every retained mark has a visible proof.

I’m stuck on this step

Reset: Re-read this authored instruction — “For each mark, write the calculation, conflicting sentence or source-card evidence. Remove marks that lack confirmation.” — and its success check, then attempt only this step.

  1. Possible snag: The result from “For each mark, write the calculation, conflicting sentence or source-card evidence. Remove marks that lack confirmation.” does not yet meet this declared check: Every retained mark has a visible proof.

    Correction: Return to the start of “Require confirmation”, reduce complexity or pace, and repeat only the part needed to satisfy: “Every retained mark has a visible proof.”

Stop / get help: Stop if checking becomes compulsive, distressing or continues past the time limit.

06

Reveal and classify outcomes

Compare with the answer key and count hits, misses, false alarms and correct rejections by class.

Why this step exists

Accuracy alone can hide rare but costly misses.

Success check

The confusion matrix totals all eligible items.

I’m stuck on this step

Reset: Re-read this authored instruction — “Compare with the answer key and count hits, misses, false alarms and correct rejections by class.” — and its success check, then attempt only this step.

  1. Possible snag: Clean statements are absent from the denominator.

    Correction: Include correct rejections and false alarms for all eligible checks.

  2. Possible snag: The answer key is opened during inspection.

    Correction: Commit all marks first and timestamp reveal.

Stop / get help: Stop if checking becomes compulsive, distressing or continues past the time limit.

07

Write and verify the correction

For every confirmed error, produce the corrected number, sentence or citation link and have the answer key or a second independent calculation verify it.

Why this step exists

Detection is incomplete when the proposed repair introduces another error.

Success check

Each confirmed mark has one corrected replacement and a documented independent check.

I’m stuck on this step

Reset: Re-read this authored instruction — “For every confirmed error, produce the corrected number, sentence or citation link and have the answer key or a second independent calculation verify it.” — and its success check, then attempt only this step.

  1. Possible snag: The result from “For every confirmed error, produce the corrected number, sentence or citation link and have the answer key or a second independent calculation verify it.” does not yet meet this declared check: Each confirmed mark has one corrected replacement and a documented independent check.

    Correction: Return to the start of “Write and verify the correction”, reduce complexity or pace, and repeat only the part needed to satisfy: “Each confirmed mark has one corrected replacement and a documented independent check.”

Stop / get help: Stop if checking becomes compulsive, distressing or continues past the time limit.

08

Redesign around the costliest miss

Identify the missed class with highest declared cost, add one targeted prompt and test it on report C without extending total time.

Why this step exists

A repair should target the harmful failure, not merely make all checking slower.

Success check

Report C shows whether the targeted miss falls and false alarms stay bounded.

I’m stuck on this step

Reset: Re-read this authored instruction — “Identify the missed class with highest declared cost, add one targeted prompt and test it on report C without extending total time.” — and its success check, then attempt only this step.

  1. Possible snag: The result from “Identify the missed class with highest declared cost, add one targeted prompt and test it on report C without extending total time.” does not yet meet this declared check: Report C shows whether the targeted miss falls and false alarms stay bounded.

    Correction: Return to the start of “Redesign around the costliest miss”, reduce complexity or pace, and repeat only the part needed to satisfy: “Report C shows whether the targeted miss falls and false alarms stay bounded.”

Stop / get help: Stop if checking becomes compulsive, distressing or continues past the time limit.

Correct versus incorrect execution

These accessible process diagrams are built from the tutorial’s own right/wrong teaching. They are not anatomical illustrations and do not add technique beyond the canonical tutorial.

Marking — Vague suspicion inflates false alarms.
PWR-122 correct and incorrect comparison: MarkingMarking. Correct or safer: Name the error class and confirming evidence.. Wrong or riskier: Highlight anything that feels odd.. Why: Vague suspicion inflates false alarms.SITUATIONMarkingCORRECT / SAFERName the error class and confirming evidence.WRONG / RISKIERHighlight anything that feels odd.YESNO
Correct / safer

Name the error class and confirming evidence.

Wrong / riskier

Highlight anything that feels odd.

Checklist — Unstructured repetition adds burden without a known mechanism.
PWR-122 correct and incorrect comparison: ChecklistChecklist. Correct or safer: Use separate arithmetic, consistency and source passes.. Wrong or riskier: Reread the whole page repeatedly without a target.. Why: Unstructured repetition adds burden without a known mechanism.SITUATIONChecklistCORRECT / SAFERUse separate arithmetic, consistency and sourcepasses.WRONG / RISKIERReread the whole page repeatedly without atarget.YESNO
Correct / safer

Use separate arithmetic, consistency and source passes.

Wrong / riskier

Reread the whole page repeatedly without a target.

Scoring — High base-rate accuracy can hide rare-target failure.
PWR-122 correct and incorrect comparison: ScoringScoring. Correct or safer: Count misses and false alarms by class.. Wrong or riskier: Celebrate total accuracy on mostly clean statements.. Why: High base-rate accuracy can hide rare-target failure.SITUATIONScoringCORRECT / SAFERCount misses and false alarms by class.WRONG / RISKIERCelebrate total accuracy on mostly cleanstatements.YESNO
Correct / safer

Count misses and false alarms by class.

Wrong / riskier

Celebrate total accuracy on mostly clean statements.

Repair — More time may not repair the actual search failure.
PWR-122 correct and incorrect comparison: RepairRepair. Correct or safer: Target the highest-cost missed class.. Wrong or riskier: Simply double inspection time.. Why: More time may not repair the actual search failure.SITUATIONRepairCORRECT / SAFERTarget the highest-cost missed class.WRONG / RISKIERSimply double inspection time.YESNO
Correct / safer

Target the highest-cost missed class.

Wrong / riskier

Simply double inspection time.

Method-structure checklist

10 of 10 structural checks present

  • Ordered, Power-specific instructions — present
  • Every activity has a success check — present
  • Materials or supplied records are declared — present
  • Measurement or assessment rule is present — present
  • Tutorial-specific troubleshooting is present — present
  • Stopping or escalation boundary is present — present
  • Every activity has an adjacent alternative — present
  • Correct-versus-incorrect comparison is present — present
  • Evidence context is bound to the Power record — present
  • Planning metadata is present — present

The method-readiness band and presence checklist assess tutorial presentation and are separate from evidence quality for the underlying Power. They are automated editorial aids, not human approval.

Manual editorial sign-off: Pending. This tutorial must not display a human-approved state until an identified editor signs the exact content hash.