---
title: "Can the 'one-third of cases ambiguous or inconsistent' figure Kelly et al. (2025) attribute to Samet (1975) be located in Samet's original text?"
type: "question"
status: "answered"
date_raised: "2026-08-15T00:00:00.000Z"
tags: ["source-evaluation","admiralty-code","verification","intelligence-tradecraft","epistemics"]
verifier_log: "2026-08-20 — answered by seek_verify: source_quote(s) of [[claim-samet-1975-three-fourths-of-officers-correlated-reliability-with-accuracy]] matched verbatim against a direct fetch of the primary. Mechanical check only; judgment untouched."
---


[[claim-source-reliability-and-credibility-are-not-judged-independently]] carries, from Kelly et al. (2025), the claim that Samet (1975) found intra-individual coding "ambiguous or inconsistent for one-third of the cases." A direct read of Samet's original at capture on 2026-08-11 (DTIC ADA003260 via archive.org OCR) **could not locate this specific figure**. The closest matching section — "Intrasubject Comparison," Form 5 vs Form 6 — is a regression analysis, not the x>y / x=y / x<y consistency scoring Kelly's phrasing describes.

**Why it's load-bearing.** The existing claim-note rests partly on this figure, and the vault's whole two-axis-leak cluster leans on Samet as its primary. If Kelly's attribution does not map cleanly onto Samet's text, that is a correction the cluster needs; if it's an OCR gap, the figure stands. Either outcome matters. (Note: the separate three-fourths-correlated finding *was* located and quoted — see [[claim-samet-1975-three-fourths-of-officers-correlated-reliability-with-accuracy]] — so this question is narrowly about the one-third figure, not about whether the non-independence finding is real.)

**What would answer it.**
- A direct read of the **bound original** of ARI Technical Paper 260 (not the archive.org OCR, which may have dropped a table or section) to find or rule out a one-third ambiguous/inconsistent statistic.
- Failing that, a check of exactly which Samet passage Kelly et al. (2025) cite for the figure, to see whether Kelly is paraphrasing the regression result or pointing at a distinct consistency-scoring result.

**Do not force.** If neither source can be reached without a fetch capability this environment lacks, the figure stays flagged in the existing note's correction history, not asserted and not deleted.