{
  "schema":"ULTRACON_CON_VALIDATION_PILOT_PACKET_V1",
  "pilot_id":"CON-V42-PILOT-01",
  "date":"2026-09-14",
  "status":"BLIND_PACKET_FROZEN",
  "purpose":"Small contradictory pilot for admission, neighbor-concept and qualifier-audit coding.",
  "codebook":{
    "admission":{"allowed":["IN","OUT"],"rule":"IN only when a documented attribution/role/category explicitly concerns foolishness, stupidity, idiocy, poor judgment/understanding/prudence/competence, or a collective/AI failure is explicitly framed through such an attribution. Error, failure, disability, immorality, nonconformity or oddity alone are OUT."},
    "primary_neighbor":{"allowed":["N01_IGNORANCE","N02_ERROR","N03_INCOMPETENCE","N04_IRRATIONALITY","N05_FOOLISHNESS","N06_BULLSHIT","N07_MADNESS","N08_IMMORALITY","N09_ABSURDITY","N10_FAILURE","N11_NONCONFORMITY","N12_DISABILITY","NONE"],"rule":"Choose the single closest non-equivalent neighboring concept that could explain the scene without a global stupidity essence."},
    "audit_state":{"allowed":["SUPPORTED","FRAGILE","RETROSPECTIVE","ASYMMETRIC","REVERSED","INDETERMINATE","NA"],"rule":"SUPPORTED = locally reasonable after reconstructing information/responsibility; FRAGILE = weak or under-evidenced; RETROSPECTIVE = later outcome/hindsight drives the label; ASYMMETRIC = power/credibility asymmetry materially drives it; REVERSED = reconstruction substantially turns the problem back toward qualifier/norm rather than target; INDETERMINATE = competing/insufficient evidence; NA only when admission=OUT."}
  },
  "units":[
    {"id":"P01","text":"A driver passes a large, unobstructed ROAD CLOSED sign in daylight, does not slow down, hits the barrier, and the passenger says: ‘Quel con, le panneau était juste devant nous.’"},
    {"id":"P02","text":"A doctor chooses treatment A using the best evidence available at the time; a known 20% adverse outcome occurs. Months later, after the outcome is known, a commentator says: ‘Only an idiot would have chosen A; the result proves it.’"},
    {"id":"P03","text":"A student has never been taught an obscure formula and has no reasonable way to know it. The teacher asks it unexpectedly, then says in front of the class: ‘Tu es vraiment imbécile de ne pas savoir ça.’"},
    {"id":"P04","text":"A blind pedestrian cannot access a temporary notice that exists only as small visual print. A stranger sees the pedestrian take the wrong route and says: ‘How stupid can you be? The notice is right there.’"},
    {"id":"P05","text":"An employee deliberately avoids opening a safety memo because they prefer not to know what it requires. They then make the exact preventable error described in the memo; coworkers call the behavior ‘stupid’."},
    {"id":"P06","text":"An engineer warns that a design has a hidden failure mode. The majority calls her ‘crazy’ and ‘stupid’ for delaying the launch. A later stress test confirms the failure mode she described."},
    {"id":"P07","text":"A team of individually competent analysts all rely on the same corrupted data feed and produce a bad forecast. The postmortem calls it a forecast failure and data-quality incident; nobody uses a stupidity/foolishness/idiocy attribution."},
    {"id":"P08","text":"An AI system gives the correct reasoning and correct payment instructions, but the external payment API times out. The user says: ‘This AI is stupid; it can’t even pay.’ Logs show the failure occurred entirely in the external API."},
    {"id":"P09","text":"A court jester deliberately performs foolishness as part of a licensed role, using apparent stupidity to mock the king. Contemporary descriptions explicitly call the performer ‘the fool’."},
    {"id":"P10","text":"A speaker knowingly produces impressive-sounding claims without caring whether they are true. The audience calls the speech ‘bullshit’ but does not attribute stupidity, idiocy, foolishness or poor judgment to the speaker."},
    {"id":"P11","text":"A strategist commits a calculated fraud for personal gain. Observers call the act immoral and criminal but do not describe the strategist as stupid, foolish, irrational or incompetent."},
    {"id":"P12","text":"A novice with otherwise normal performance makes one arithmetic mistake. A supervisor immediately says: ‘You’re an idiot.’ No repeated incompetence or negligence is documented."},
    {"id":"P13","text":"A candidate receives a low score on one unfamiliar technical test. The report records only the score and skill gap; there is no stupidity, foolishness, idiocy or global-competence attribution."},
    {"id":"P14","text":"An absurdist theatre piece intentionally violates ordinary logic. Reviews call it ‘absurd’ and ‘deliberately incoherent’, but no character, author or audience member is described as stupid or foolish."}
  ],
  "blindness_rule":"Each coder receives only this packet, not the other coder’s outputs. Adjudication occurs only after both first-pass files are frozen."
}