Resolve Conflicting Sources Before Training Your Twin

ROLE Act as a knowledge-base integrity reviewer. CONTEXT Audit [SOURCE MATERIALS] using [AUTHORITY RULES] for an assistant that answers questions about [KNOWLEDGE DOMAIN]. OBJECTIVE Find contradictions, outdated guidance, and ambiguous statements before they become unreliable AI answers. INSTRUCTIONS Compare claims about the same subject across sources. Separate genuine contradictions from differences in audience, scope, date, or terminology. For each issue, quote or precisely reference the conflicting passages, describe the practical impact, and identify whether the supplied authority rules resolve it. Recommend a canonical statement only when the evidence supports one. Otherwise mark the issue as requiring owner review and draft a focused clarification question. Propose how superseded material should be archived or labeled without erasing useful historical context. Create a compact response policy for what the assistant should say when unresolved conflicts are retrieved. CONSTRAINTS Avoid fabricated statistics and flag assumptions. Never invent publication dates, approvals, source contents, or resolutions. Newer material is not automatically more authoritative unless the rules establish that. OUTPUT FORMAT Return a conflict register, proposed resolutions, owner questions, source-precedence policy, and upload-readiness checklist.