Detecting AI Deception Intent: not assessed
Practice
Menu
Case 04 of 06Visibly syntheticReviewed 2026-08-23

The claim attached to the wrong product identity

A capability statement for one product version or service surface is presented as if it applies to another.

Claim / record

Make your call before the finding appears.

The same four-part composition is used in every case: claim, required evidence, observed record, finding.

Claim
“A capability documented for Product A version 4.2 also applies to Product B version 3.0.”
Case-specific evidence object
ClaimProduct B · 3.0
SourceProduct A · 4.2
Required evidence
  1. Is the identity named in the claim exact?
  2. Does the publisher source apply to that same product and version?
Observed record
  1. Supports Is the identity named in the claim exact?

    The public claim names Product B version 3.0.

  2. Contradictory Does the publisher source apply to that same product and version?

    The source applies only to Product A version 4.2.

What does the record let you say?

Make the narrowest call the evidence supports. You can revise your view after the finding is revealed.

Finding

Contradicted

The declared claim is in conflict with the required evidence.

Intent: not assessed.

What remains unknown

Product B might have the capability for another reason; this source cannot establish it.

Read plainly

Five questions that keep the story honest.

Each answer stays inside this case’s declared boundary. Unknowns remain visible instead of being converted into certainty.

  1. 01

    What happened?

    A real publisher statement crossed an identity boundary and was attached to a different product surface.

  2. 02

    Why does it matter?

    Capability, safety and setup claims can change across products, versions and service surfaces.

  3. 03

    How do we know?

    The claim identity and the source identity are both explicit and do not match.

  4. 04

    What remains unknown?

    Product B might have the capability for another reason; this source cannot establish it.

  5. 05

    What can someone do next?

    Record product, version, channel and surface before transferring a claim, then find a source that matches all four.

Proof

Open the technical record.

Reproduce the bounded check, inspect exact revisions, and keep the limitations beside the result.

Reproduce

Evidence pattern: Product or version mismatch provenance-or-identity-mismatch

Write the claim identity and source identity side by side and compare product, version, channel and surface.

node tools/check-cases.mjs --case wrong-product-identity

Exact sources

Limitations and non-claims

  • Publisher attribution is not independent behavior-test credit.
  • The method is not a ranking, certification or suitability judgment.

Intent remains not assessed. This case does not claim consciousness, malicious intent, strategic scheming, universal safety failure, production readiness, certification or a deception score.

Challenge this record