1. Definition
The Evidence Map governs the evidential discipline of the entire syllabus, explicitly categorizing the empirical status of claims using labels like supported claim, theoretical synthesis, design hypothesis, speculative extension, and needs empirical validation.
2. Use Case
Activated whenever a node makes definitive claims about human learning, cognitive science, AI behavior, developmental psychology, or pedagogical efficacy.
3. Human Role
The human must actively distinguish between well-supported empirical claims, their own theoretical syntheses, design hypotheses intended for testing, and speculative extensions. They are responsible for maintaining the academic integrity of the map.
4. AI Role
The AI must act as a strict auditor. It is required to flag unsupported claims, ask for the placement of claims within the evidence hierarchy, and strictly avoid inventing citations, studies, or authors (hallucinations).
5. Friction
The protocol prevents persuasive theory from pretending to be established empirical fact. Any new claim introduced into the system must be halted and tagged with its correct evidence status before it can be fully integrated into the public syllabus.
6. Risk
Without rigorous evidence mapping, Pyragogy risks becoming rhetorically strong but academically fragile. If design hypotheses are mistaken for supported claims, the entire framework loses its empirical grounding and credibility.
7. Observable Markers
Every major claim in the syllabus is explicitly labeled by its evidence status. Speculative extensions are clearly marked as such, and no fake citation authority or inflated maturity is introduced into the framework.