{"datasetId":"superfunction-pay-crosswalk@1","harnessVersion":"0.1.0","policy":{"refutedThreshold":1,"unsupportedThreshold":2,"lenses":["source-fidelity","internal-consistency","domain-plausibility"]},"refuterModel":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6","cellCount":16,"verifiedCount":16,"quarantined":[],"cells":[{"cellId":"sfx:research_and_development","verdicts":[{"lens":"source-fidelity","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.92,"reason":"The sources directly support the claim. SOURCE 1 defines the canon super-function 'research_and_development' as scientific and technical discovery-to-development work including laboratory, clinical, and applied research — with member functions like Analytical Development, Biotechnology, Clinical Research, Process Development, and R&D Management. SOURCE 2 confirms 'R&D' exists as a pay key. SOURCE 3 defines the R&D pay key as 'creating the product or the knowledge behind it: scientific research, engineering of the product itself, product design and development' with the defining test being that 'the output is the thing the company sells (or the science behind it).' This aligns exactly with the canon super-function definition. The only potential alternative is 'Industry Specific,' given clinical trial operations is cited as an example; however, the canon super-function is broader than any single vertical and the R&D pay key explicitly covers the science behind the product. No other pay key is an equally or more natural home: G&A, IT, Marketing, Sales, Physical Operations, Professional Services, and Customer Support are all definitionally distinct. The mapping is well-supported and unambiguous under source-fidelity review.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"internal-consistency","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.91,"reason":"Internal consistency check passes. SOURCE 1 defines the canon superfunction 'research_and_development' as scientific and technical discovery-to-development work covering lab, clinical, and applied research programs, with member functions like Analytical Development, Biotechnology, Clinical Research, Process Development, and R&D Management. SOURCE 3 defines the pay key 'R&D' as 'creating the product or the knowledge behind it: scientific research, engineering of the product itself, product design and development' with the defining test that 'the output is the thing the company sells (or the science behind it).' These definitions align tightly and without contradiction. The only plausible alternative competitor is 'Industry Specific,' whose glossary definition covers work 'distinctive to the employer's industry vertical that has no cross-industry equivalent' — but the canon superfunction 'research_and_development' is explicitly cross-industry (it includes biotechnology, mathematical sciences, analytical development, etc., applicable across pharma, tech, materials, and other sectors). No other pay key in SOURCE 2 is an equally or more natural home: G&A, Sales, Marketing, IT/Infrastructure, Customer Support, Physical Operations, and Professional Services are all clearly mismatched by their SOURCE 3 definitions. The sources are internally consistent with the 'exact' mapping claim.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"domain-plausibility","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.95,"reason":"The canon superfunction 'research_and_development' is defined as scientific and technical discovery-to-development work including laboratory, clinical, and applied research programs. The pay-key glossary defines 'R&D' as 'creating the product or the knowledge behind it: scientific research, engineering of the product itself, product design and development.' These definitions align exactly. The only plausible competing key is 'Industry Specific,' which the glossary defines as work distinctive to a vertical with no cross-industry equivalent. However, R&D exists across industries (pharma, tech, materials, etc.), and the pay-key glossary explicitly distinguishes R&D as its own category. No other key in the available list (Customer Support & Service, G&A, IT/Infrastructure, Marketing, Physical Operations, Professional Services, Sales) is a more natural or equally natural home for research_and_development work. The mapping is well-supported by all three sources.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"}],"outcome":"verified","quarantineReason":null},{"cellId":"sfx:research","verdicts":[{"lens":"source-fidelity","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.82,"reason":"Source 1 defines the 'research' canon super-function as 'dedicated investigative science work oriented to generating new knowledge... upstream of productization,' with Environmental Science as its member work-function. Source 3 defines R&D as 'creating the product or the knowledge behind it: scientific research, engineering of the product itself, product design and development' with the defining test being 'the output is the thing the company sells (or the science behind it).' The phrase 'the science behind it' and explicit inclusion of 'scientific research' in R&D's definition directly maps to 'research' super-function's upstream knowledge-generation mission. The claim of unambiguity is tested against alternatives: Industry Specific could partially apply (e.g., Environmental Science in a specific vertical), but the canon definition is industry-agnostic and the R&D key explicitly covers scientific research upstream of productization. No other key (G&A, IT, Professional Services, etc.) is a more natural home. The sources genuinely support the mapping under source-fidelity analysis.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"internal-consistency","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.91,"reason":"The internal-consistency test passes. SOURCE 1 defines the 'research' canon super-function as 'dedicated investigative science work oriented to generating new knowledge, upstream of productization.' SOURCE 3 defines R&D as 'creating the product or the knowledge behind it: scientific research, engineering of the product itself, product design and development. The defining test: the output is the thing the company sells (or the science behind it), not the running of the company.' The 'knowledge behind it' and 'scientific research' language in the R&D glossary directly matches the 'generating new knowledge' definition of the research super-function. No other pay key in SOURCE 2 is an equally or more natural home: G&A covers corporate overhead, Industry Specific covers vertical-specific work (not investigative science generically), and all other keys (Sales, Marketing, Physical Operations, Professional Services, Customer Support, IT) are clearly inapplicable. The only candidate that could create ambiguity would be 'Industry Specific,' but SOURCE 3 describes that as work with 'no cross-industry equivalent,' whereas the research super-function is described generically across field, laboratory, and environmental study—not tied to a single industry vertical. The mapping is internally consistent and unambiguous given the provided sources.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"domain-plausibility","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.92,"reason":"The claim asserts 'research' maps unambiguously to the 'R&D' pay key. Source 1 defines the canon superfunction 'research' as 'dedicated investigative science work oriented to generating new knowledge... upstream of productization.' Source 3 defines R&D as 'creating the product or the knowledge behind it: scientific research, engineering of the product itself, product design and development.' The phrase 'the science behind it' in the R&D glossary directly captures upstream investigative science. No other pay key in Source 2 is a plausible alternative: 'Industry Specific' could theoretically attract some research work, but Source 3 restricts it to work with 'no cross-industry equivalent' priced against a vertical market, whereas basic/applied research is a cross-industry labor market. 'G&A,' 'IT/Infrastructure,' 'Physical Operations,' 'Professional Services,' 'Sales,' 'Marketing,' and 'Customer Support' are all clearly inapplicable by definition. The mapping is semantically well-supported and no equally natural alternative pay key exists in the sources.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"}],"outcome":"verified","quarantineReason":null},{"cellId":"sfx:human_resources","verdicts":[{"lens":"source-fidelity","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.93,"reason":"Source 3 (pay-key-glossary.json) explicitly lists 'human resources' as one of the canonical examples of G&A: 'finance and accounting, legal and compliance, human resources, corporate administration, and executive management.' Source 3 also notes that 'In compensation surveys G&A is the standard home for these staff functions.' No other pay key in Source 2 plausibly competes: HR is not IT/Infrastructure (which covers internal IT systems), not R&D, not Sales, not Marketing, not Physical Operations, not Professional Services, not Customer Support, and not Industry Specific (HR is cross-industry). The claim that G&A is the unambiguous home for human_resources is directly and explicitly supported by the glossary, and no source contradicts it.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"internal-consistency","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.95,"reason":"Source 3 (pay-key-glossary.json) explicitly lists 'human resources' as one of the named examples under G&A: 'finance and accounting, legal and compliance, human resources, corporate administration, and executive management.' No other pay key in Source 2 includes HR in its definition or offers an equally natural home. IT/Infrastructure covers internal IT systems but not people functions. None of the other keys (Sales, Marketing, R&D, Physical Operations, Professional Services, Customer Support, Industry Specific) overlap with HR's canonical scope as defined in Source 1. The claim is internally consistent across all three sources and is not falsifiable under the available evidence.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"domain-plausibility","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.95,"reason":"Source 3 (pay-key-glossary.json) explicitly lists 'human resources' as an example of G&A: 'General & Administrative — the corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself rather than make, sell, or deliver its product: finance and accounting, legal and compliance, human resources, corporate administration, and executive management.' No other key in the list (Source 2) offers a plausible alternative home for the full Human Resources super-function as defined in Source 1. The member work-functions (Business Partnering, Compensation & Benefits, Learning & Development, Talent Acquisition, etc.) are all internal staff functions, not billable services, not product development, not sales, not IT infrastructure, not physical operations, not industry-specific, not marketing, and not customer support. The claim that G&A is the unambiguous and most natural home is directly supported by the glossary's explicit mention of HR as a paradigm G&A function, and no competing key provides an equally natural classification under the available definitions.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"}],"outcome":"verified","quarantineReason":null},{"cellId":"sfx:finance","verdicts":[{"lens":"source-fidelity","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.95,"reason":"Source 3 defines G&A explicitly as 'General & Administrative — the corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself rather than make, sell, or deliver its product: finance and accounting, legal and compliance, human resources, corporate administration, and executive management.' Finance is listed first and directly by name. Source 1 defines the 'finance' canon superfunction as stewardship of company money: accounting, planning and analysis, cash and financial management, and financial decision support — all of which map squarely into G&A's definition. No other pay key in Source 2 provides an equally natural home: Sales, Marketing, R&D, Customer Support, Physical Operations, Professional Services, IT/Infrastructure, and Industry Specific all have definitions (Source 3) that exclude or are clearly less appropriate for internal finance/accounting functions. The claim that G&A is the unambiguous home for 'finance' is directly supported by the sources, with no contradicting evidence found.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"internal-consistency","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.97,"reason":"Source 1 defines the 'finance' canon super-function as stewardship of company money including accounting, planning, cash management, and financial decision support — all classic corporate overhead/staff functions. Source 3 defines G&A explicitly as 'the corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself rather than make, sell, or deliver its product: finance and accounting, legal and compliance, human resources, corporate administration, and executive management.' The definition of G&A directly names 'finance and accounting' as its paradigm case. No other key in Source 2's list is a plausible alternative: R&D is for product creation, Sales is for revenue capture, Marketing is for demand creation, IT/Infrastructure is for internal systems, Professional Services is for billable client work, Physical Operations is for production labor, Industry Specific is for vertical-specific roles, and Customer Support is for post-sale service. None of these overlap with the finance super-function's defined scope. The mapping is internally consistent and unambiguous across all three sources.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"domain-plausibility","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.95,"reason":"Source 3 explicitly defines G&A as 'General & Administrative — the corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself rather than make, sell, or deliver its product: finance and accounting, legal and compliance, human resources, corporate administration, and executive management.' Finance is listed as a primary component of G&A. Source 1 defines the 'finance' canon super-function as stewardship of the company's money including accounting, planning and analysis, cash and financial management, and financial decision support — all of which fall squarely within the G&A definition. No other pay key in Source 2 competes meaningfully: Sales, Marketing, R&D, Physical Operations, Professional Services, Customer Support & Service, IT/Infrastructure, and Industry Specific are all defined in ways that exclude corporate finance functions. The mapping is unambiguous under domain-plausibility analysis.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"}],"outcome":"verified","quarantineReason":null},{"cellId":"sfx:legal","verdicts":[{"lens":"source-fidelity","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.95,"reason":"Source 3 explicitly defines G&A as 'General & Administrative — the corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself rather than make, sell, or deliver its product: finance and accounting, legal and compliance, human resources, corporate administration, and executive management.' Legal is directly named within the G&A definition. Source 1 defines the 'legal' super-function as 'Provision of legal counsel and protection to the enterprise: corporate legal services, transactional and litigation support, and the paralegal/operations work that enables them.' This is squarely an enterprise-support/overhead function. No other key in the pay-equation list (Source 2) offers a more natural home: none of the other keys (Customer Support & Service, IT/Infrastructure, Industry Specific, Marketing, Physical Operations, Professional Services, R&D, Sales) reference legal work in their definitions. The claim that G&A is unambiguously the correct pay key for 'legal' is directly supported by the sources.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"internal-consistency","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.97,"reason":"Under the internal-consistency lens, the claim holds cleanly. SOURCE 3 defines G&A explicitly as 'General & Administrative — the corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself… finance and accounting, legal and compliance, human resources, corporate administration, and executive management.' Legal and compliance is named directly within the G&A definition. SOURCE 1 defines the 'legal' superfunction as 'Provision of legal counsel and protection to the enterprise: corporate legal services, transactional and litigation support, and the paralegal/operations work that enables them' — this is precisely the internal, enterprise-support legal work described under G&A. No other pay key in SOURCE 2 offers a competing home: Sales, Marketing, R&D, Physical Operations, Professional Services, Customer Support & Service, IT/Infrastructure, and Industry Specific are all semantically distant from internal corporate legal services. Industry Specific could theoretically apply in a law firm context, but the canon definition anchors legal as an enterprise-support function (not an industry-vertical specialty). The mapping is unambiguous and internally consistent across all three sources.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"domain-plausibility","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.97,"reason":"Source 3 explicitly defines G&A as 'General & Administrative — the corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself rather than make, sell, or deliver its product: finance and accounting, legal and compliance, human resources, corporate administration, and executive management.' Legal and compliance is directly named as a constituent of G&A. Source 1 defines the 'legal' superfunction as provision of legal counsel and protection to the enterprise — corporate legal services, transactional and litigation support, and paralegal/operations work. This is squarely within the G&A definition. No other pay key in Source 2's list is a plausible alternative: legal work is not Customer Support, IT, Industry Specific, Marketing, Physical Operations, Professional Services, R&D, or Sales. The claim is domain-plausible and well-supported; the 'unambiguously' qualifier is also defensible because no competing key offers an equally natural home for internal corporate legal functions.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"}],"outcome":"verified","quarantineReason":null},{"cellId":"sfx:compliance","verdicts":[{"lens":"source-fidelity","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.92,"reason":"Source 3 (pay-key-glossary.json) explicitly defines G&A as covering 'legal and compliance' among the corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions, and Source 1 defines Compliance as ensuring regulatory obligations are met — a classic staff/overhead function. Source 3 further notes that 'In compensation surveys G&A is the standard home for these staff functions.' No other pay key in Source 2's list is a more natural home: Industry Specific requires work with no cross-industry equivalent (compliance is cross-industry), and no other key (Sales, Marketing, R&D, IT, etc.) fits regulatory/compliance work. The sources directly support the mapping compliance→G&A and the 'unambiguously' qualifier is backed by the glossary's explicit inclusion of compliance in G&A's definition.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"internal-consistency","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.92,"reason":"SOURCE 3 explicitly defines G&A as 'General & Administrative — the corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself rather than make, sell, or deliver its product: finance and accounting, legal and compliance, human resources, corporate administration, and executive management.' The phrase 'legal and compliance' directly names compliance as a constituent of G&A. SOURCE 1 defines the Compliance super-function as ensuring regulatory obligations — interpreting regulation, preparing and defending submissions, and operating controls — which aligns squarely with the G&A definition's 'legal and compliance' bucket. No other pay key in SOURCE 2 is an equally natural home: 'Industry Specific' could theoretically capture highly vertical regulatory work, but SOURCE 3 defines it as work with 'no cross-industry equivalent,' whereas compliance/regulatory affairs exists across virtually all industries. All other keys (Sales, R&D, Marketing, IT, etc.) are clearly inapplicable. The internal consistency between the super-function definition (SOURCE 1), the pay key list (SOURCE 2), and the glossary semantics (SOURCE 3) supports the claim without contradiction.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"domain-plausibility","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.92,"reason":"Source 3 explicitly defines G&A as covering 'legal and compliance' among the corporate overhead functions, and notes it is 'the standard home for these staff functions' in compensation surveys. Source 1 defines the compliance super-function as regulatory obligation work (interpreting regulation, preparing submissions, operating controls). No other pay key in Source 2 is a more natural home: Industry Specific applies only to vertical-specific work with no cross-industry equivalent (compliance is a cross-industry function), Professional Services requires billable client-facing work, and no other key plausibly covers enterprise regulatory/compliance staff. The mapping compliance→G&A is directly supported by the glossary definition and no source contradicts it.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"}],"outcome":"verified","quarantineReason":null},{"cellId":"sfx:corporate_affairs","verdicts":[{"lens":"source-fidelity","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.82,"reason":"Source 1 defines corporate_affairs as managing relationships with governments, regulators, and the public sphere — policy monitoring, government relations, and external-affairs advocacy. Source 3 defines G&A as 'corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself rather than make, sell, or deliver its product: finance and accounting, legal and compliance, human resources, corporate administration, and executive management.' Government relations and external affairs advocacy are classic corporate staff functions that run the company's external-stakeholder relationships — not product-making, selling, or delivery. No other pay key in Source 2 is a more natural home: Sales covers quota-carrying revenue capture; Marketing covers demand creation; Professional Services covers billable client engagements; none of the remaining keys (Customer Support, IT, Industry Specific, R&D, Physical Operations) plausibly captures government/regulatory/public-affairs work. The claim that G&A is the unambiguous home is genuinely supported by the sources under a source-fidelity lens. The only mild tension is that G&A's exemplars in Source 3 (finance, legal, HR, executive management) do not explicitly list government relations, but the definition's logic ('functions that run the company itself') clearly encompasses external-affairs functions, and no alternative key competes. Confidence is not 1.0 because Industry Specific could theoretically absorb heavily regulated-industry government affairs roles, but for a general cross-industry canon mapping, G&A remains the unambiguous choice.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"internal-consistency","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.82,"reason":"Internal consistency check: The canon definition of 'corporate_affairs' covers government relations, regulatory affairs, and external-affairs advocacy — these are corporate overhead/staff functions that run the enterprise rather than make, sell, or deliver product. The G&A pay key explicitly includes 'corporate administration' and 'legal and compliance' as examples of enterprise-support functions. No other available pay key is a more natural home: Sales, Marketing, R&D, Customer Support, IT/Infrastructure, Physical Operations, and Professional Services are clearly inapplicable. 'Industry Specific' could theoretically apply if government relations were industry-vertical-specific, but the canon definition treats it as a general cross-industry function. The mapping is internally consistent with the source definitions and no concrete contradiction exists within the provided sources.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"domain-plausibility","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.82,"reason":"Corporate Affairs as defined in the canon — government relations, regulatory affairs, external-affairs advocacy, public affairs — is squarely within the G&A definition's scope of 'corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself rather than make, sell, or deliver its product,' explicitly including 'legal and compliance' and 'corporate administration.' No other pay key is a plausible competitor: it is not Sales (no quota), not Marketing (not demand creation), not Professional Services (not billable client delivery), not R&D, not IT, not Physical Operations, not Industry Specific (GR/external affairs exists cross-industry), not Customer Support. G&A is the standard home in compensation surveys for staff functions like government relations and public affairs. The sources concretely support the mapping and no source provides contradicting evidence.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"}],"outcome":"verified","quarantineReason":null},{"cellId":"sfx:corporate_strategy","verdicts":[{"lens":"source-fidelity","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.85,"reason":"Source 1 confirms 'corporate_strategy' is defined as enterprise direction formulation, strategic planning, and portfolio choices — internal company-running work. Source 3's G&A definition explicitly covers 'corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself rather than make, sell, or deliver its product' including 'executive management,' which aligns directly with corporate strategy. Source 3 also explicitly excludes Professional Services (billable client-facing work), ruling out the nearest alternative. No other pay key from Source 2 is a more natural home: R&D is for product creation, Sales is for revenue capture, Marketing is demand creation, and none of the others fit internal strategic planning. The claim's rationale is directly traceable to the source definitions and the exclusion logic is sound per the glossary.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"internal-consistency","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.88,"reason":"Under the internal-consistency lens, the mapping holds. SOURCE 1 defines corporate_strategy as 'Formulation of enterprise direction: strategic planning, portfolio choices, and the analysis that decides where the company plays and how it wins' — explicitly internal, enterprise-direction work. SOURCE 3 defines G&A as 'the corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself rather than make, sell, or deliver its product,' listing executive management as a canonical member. Strategic planning at the enterprise level is squarely within 'running the company itself.' The claim's exclusion of Professional Services is supported by SOURCE 3's definition requiring billable, client-facing engagements — corporate_strategy is neither billable nor client-facing per SOURCE 1. No other pay key in SOURCE 2 is a more natural fit: Sales requires quota-carrying, R&D requires product creation, Marketing requires demand generation, and none of the remaining keys match internal strategic planning. The 'unambiguously' assertion is strong but defensible: the G&A definition explicitly calls out executive management and corporate overhead, and no competing key has an equally strong textual claim. Internal consistency between sources 1, 2, and 3 is intact with no contradictions found.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"domain-plausibility","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.92,"reason":"Source 1 defines corporate_strategy as 'Formulation of enterprise direction: strategic planning, portfolio choices, and the analysis that decides where the company plays and how it wins' — plainly internal, non-billable work. Source 3 defines G&A as 'the corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself rather than make, sell, or deliver its product: finance and accounting, legal and compliance, human resources, corporate administration, and executive management.' Strategic planning and enterprise direction-setting fits squarely within 'running the company itself' and executive management. No other key in the list (Source 2) is a more natural home: Professional Services requires billable client-facing work (excluded by Source 3), Sales requires quota-carrying revenue capture, R&D requires product creation, and none of the others (Marketing, IT, Industry Specific, Physical Operations, Customer Support) capture internal strategic planning. The 'unambiguously G&A' claim is well-supported by the glossary definitions and the elimination of alternatives.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"}],"outcome":"verified","quarantineReason":null},{"cellId":"sfx:corporate_services","verdicts":[{"lens":"source-fidelity","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.82,"reason":"Source 1 defines corporate_services as shared enterprise-support functions including legal-services delivery, with Legal as the sole member work-function. Source 3 defines G&A explicitly as 'corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself' including 'legal and compliance.' This is a direct semantic match. The claim of unambiguity is tested against Source 2's full key list: no other key is an equally natural home — Professional Services requires external/billable client-facing work (corporate_services is internal), IT/Infrastructure is about operating company systems (not legal/admin), and no other key covers internal enterprise-support staff functions. The sources genuinely support the mapping, and no concrete contradicting evidence exists to falsify it.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"internal-consistency","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.82,"reason":"The claim survives internal-consistency scrutiny. SOURCE 1 defines 'corporate_services' as shared enterprise-support services including legal-services delivery, with 'Legal' as the sole canon member. SOURCE 3 defines G&A as 'General & Administrative — the corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself ... finance and accounting, legal and compliance, human resources, corporate administration, and executive management.' Legal is explicitly enumerated under G&A. No other pay key in SOURCE 2 is a plausible home: Professional Services is billable/client-facing revenue work (not internal support), IT/Infrastructure is internal tech operations (not legal/admin), and all others are even further afield. The mapping corporate_services → G&A is internally consistent with the glossary definitions and no other key offers an equally or more natural fit. The only mild tension is that 'corporate services' could theoretically be broader than G&A (e.g., could include IT shared services), but the canon definition as given is anchored on legal, which lands squarely in G&A. No concrete contradiction found.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"domain-plausibility","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.82,"reason":"The claim asserts that 'corporate_services' unambiguously maps to 'G&A' with no equally or more natural alternative. Source 1 defines corporate_services as shared enterprise-support services including legal. Source 3 defines G&A as 'the corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself... finance and accounting, legal and compliance, human resources, corporate administration, and executive management.' This is a textbook match. The nearest alternative candidate would be 'Professional Services,' but Source 3 explicitly defines that as billable, client-facing, external-client revenue work — the opposite of internal shared-service delivery. No other key in Source 2's list (IT/Infrastructure, Industry Specific, Marketing, Physical Operations, R&D, Sales, Customer Support & Service) plausibly competes for internal corporate overhead functions. The domain-plausibility test is clearly satisfied: G&A is the standard compensation-survey home for these staff functions, as Source 3 explicitly states. No concrete contradicting evidence exists in the sources.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"}],"outcome":"verified","quarantineReason":null},{"cellId":"sfx:executive_management","verdicts":[{"lens":"source-fidelity","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.92,"reason":"Source 3 (pay-key-glossary.json) explicitly lists 'executive management' as one of the canonical members of G&A: 'General & Administrative — the corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself rather than make, sell, or deliver its product: finance and accounting, legal and compliance, human resources, corporate administration, and executive management.' Source 1 confirms the canon superfunction 'executive_management' covers general management, enterprise leadership, and direction-setting roles (including finance-leadership work). Source 2 confirms G&A is a valid key in the pay-equation list. No other key in Source 2 is a more natural home: Sales, Marketing, R&D, Customer Support, IT/Infrastructure, Physical Operations, Professional Services, and Industry Specific all have definitions that clearly exclude executive management. The claim that G&A is the unambiguous home is directly supported by the glossary's explicit enumeration of executive management within G&A's definition.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"internal-consistency","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.92,"reason":"The internal-consistency lens finds no contradiction. Source 3 defines G&A explicitly as covering 'executive management' among other corporate overhead functions, and Source 1 defines the canon super-function 'executive_management' as 'general management and enterprise leadership' including finance-leadership work. Source 3's G&A definition is the only key in the pay-equation list (Source 2) that explicitly names executive management as a member; no other key (Sales, R&D, Marketing, etc.) has any semantic claim on general enterprise leadership. The mapping is internally consistent across all three sources, and the 'unambiguous' qualifier is supported because every other pay key has a clearly distinct semantic domain that excludes executive/administrative leadership.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"domain-plausibility","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.92,"reason":"Source 3 (pay-key-glossary.json) explicitly lists 'executive management' as one of the named functions within the G&A pay key definition: 'finance and accounting, legal and compliance, human resources, corporate administration, and executive management.' This directly supports the mapping. Source 1 confirms that executive_management covers general management, enterprise leadership, and senior direction-setting roles — all of which align with the G&A glossary description of 'corporate overhead and enterprise-support functions that run the company itself.' No other available pay key (Source 2) is a plausible home for executive management: Sales requires quota-carrying, R&D requires product creation, Marketing requires demand generation, and none of the others fit general executive leadership. The claim that G&A is the unambiguous home is supported by the explicit naming in the glossary and the absence of any competing key with equivalent or stronger claim.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"}],"outcome":"verified","quarantineReason":null},{"cellId":"sfx:marketing","verdicts":[{"lens":"source-fidelity","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.97,"reason":"The canon superfunction 'marketing' is defined as 'Creating and capturing demand: brand, content, creative, communications, demand generation, growth marketing, and commercial strategy.' The pay key 'Marketing' is defined as 'Demand creation and brand: positioning, communications, content, campaigns, growth and product marketing — work whose output is awareness, preference, and pipeline rather than closed revenue.' These definitions are substantively identical in scope. No other pay key in the complete list (Customer Support & Service, G&A, IT/Infrastructure, Industry Specific, Physical Operations, Professional Services, R&D, Sales) covers demand creation, brand, content, or communications as a primary domain. The match is unambiguous and exclusive under source evidence.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"internal-consistency","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.97,"reason":"The pay-key glossary defines 'Marketing' as 'Demand creation and brand: positioning, communications, content, campaigns, growth and product marketing — work whose output is awareness, preference, and pipeline rather than closed revenue.' The canon superfunction 'marketing' is defined as 'Creating and capturing demand: brand, content, creative, communications, demand generation, growth marketing, and commercial strategy.' The two definitions are semantically co-extensive. Every member work-function in the canon (Brand Management, Communications, Content Marketing, Creative Services, Demand Generation, Digital Marketing, General Marketing, Growth Marketing, Product Marketing) maps squarely into the pay-key 'Marketing' definition. No other pay key in the complete list (Customer Support & Service, G&A, IT/Infrastructure, Industry Specific, Physical Operations, Professional Services, R&D, Sales) provides an equally or more natural home for marketing work as defined. 'Sales' is explicitly scoped to quota-carrying revenue capture, not demand creation. 'R&D' is for product-building. There is no internal inconsistency between the canon definition and the pay-key mapping; the claim of an exact, unambiguous match is fully supported by the sources.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"domain-plausibility","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.97,"reason":"The JobFrame canon 'marketing' superfunction covers brand, content, creative, communications, demand generation, growth marketing, and commercial strategy. The pay-equation key 'Marketing' is explicitly defined as 'demand creation and brand: positioning, communications, content, campaigns, growth and product marketing — work whose output is awareness, preference, and pipeline rather than closed revenue.' The overlap is near-total. No other pay key is a plausible alternative home: Sales covers quota-carrying revenue capture, Customer Support covers post-sale retention, G&A covers overhead functions, and none of the others (IT, R&D, Physical Operations, Professional Services, Industry Specific) have any meaningful overlap with marketing activities. The claim of an 'exact' and unambiguous match is well-supported by the source definitions.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"}],"outcome":"verified","quarantineReason":null},{"cellId":"sfx:sales","verdicts":[{"lens":"source-fidelity","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.97,"reason":"Source 1 defines the canon super-function 'sales' as direct revenue generation through customer acquisition and expansion, covering quota-carrying roles such as direct/inside sales, account management, channel management, and lead generation. Source 3 defines the pay-equation key 'Sales' as direct revenue capture involving quota-carrying customer acquisition and expansion — direct/inside/field sales, account executives, channel sales, and sales management. The definitions are substantively identical. No other pay key in Source 2 is an equally or more natural home: Marketing covers demand creation not closed revenue; Professional Services covers billable expertise delivery without quota; Customer Support covers post-sale retention. The mapping is directly and unambiguously supported by the source material.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"internal-consistency","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.97,"reason":"All three sources are mutually consistent and directly support the claim. Source 1 defines the canon super-function 'sales' as quota-carrying direct revenue generation through customer acquisition and expansion, with member functions like Direct Sales, Inside Sales, Account Management, etc. Source 3 defines the pay key 'Sales' as 'Direct revenue capture: quota-carrying customer acquisition and expansion — direct/inside/field sales, account executives, channel sales, and the sales management above them.' The definitions are semantically identical. Source 2 confirms 'Sales' is a valid key in the pay equation list. No other pay key in Source 2/3 competes: Marketing is demand creation not closed revenue; Professional Services is expertise-based not quota-carrying; Customer Support is post-sale retention. There is no internal inconsistency and no alternative key is an equally natural home. The 'exact' rationale is well-founded.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"domain-plausibility","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.99,"reason":"Source 1 defines the canon super-function 'sales' as direct revenue generation through customer acquisition and expansion, with quota-tied work-functions including Direct Sales, Inside Sales, Account Management, Channel & Partner Management, etc. Source 3 defines the pay key 'Sales' as 'Direct revenue capture: quota-carrying customer acquisition and expansion — direct/inside/field sales, account executives, channel sales, and the sales management above them.' The semantic overlap is essentially complete and definitional. No other pay key in Source 2 is a plausible competitor: Marketing explicitly excludes closed revenue, Professional Services is expertise-based/non-quota, and all others are clearly distinct domains. The claim of 'exact' match and unambiguity is fully supported by the sources.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"}],"outcome":"verified","quarantineReason":null},{"cellId":"sfx:customer_service","verdicts":[{"lens":"source-fidelity","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.92,"reason":"Source 1 defines the canon super-function 'customer_service' as post-sale service and success work supporting existing customers. Source 3 defines 'Customer Support & Service' as post-sale support and service of existing customers including help desks, support engineering, service delivery, and customer success. The semantic overlap is direct and near-complete. No other pay key in Source 2 is an equally natural home: 'Professional Services' covers billable client-facing engagements (revenue-generating), 'Sales' covers quota-carrying acquisition, and the remaining keys (G&A, IT, Marketing, R&D, Physical Operations, Industry Specific) are clearly inapplicable. The sources genuinely support the claimed 'exact' mapping without contradiction.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"internal-consistency","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.92,"reason":"Internal consistency check passes. The JobFrame canon superfunction 'customer_service' is defined as post-sale service and success work (supporting, retaining, and growing existing customers), which maps directly onto the pay-key 'Customer Support & Service' defined as post-sale support and service of existing customers (help desks, support engineering, service delivery, customer success). The definitions are substantively identical. No other pay key is an equally natural home: Professional Services requires billable/revenue-generating engagements sold to clients; Sales requires quota-carrying acquisition; G&A, IT, R&D, Marketing, Physical Operations, and Industry Specific are clearly distinct. There is no internal inconsistency in the structured payload, the canon definition, or the pay-key glossary. The 'exact' note is well-supported.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"domain-plausibility","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.95,"reason":"The domain-plausibility test passes cleanly. Source 1 defines 'customer_service' as post-sale service and success work (Client Interaction, Client Management, Customer Success). Source 3 defines 'Customer Support & Service' as post-sale support and service of existing customers including help desks, support engineering, service delivery, and customer success. The semantic overlap is near-total: both are explicitly post-sale, both focus on existing customers, both include customer success. No other pay key in Source 2 is a plausible competitor: Sales is pre-sale quota-carrying; Professional Services is billable expertise delivery; G&A is corporate overhead; the rest (IT, R&D, Marketing, Physical Operations, Industry Specific) are clearly inapplicable. There is no credible alternative home for this superfunction, and the sources directly support the 'exact' mapping claim.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"}],"outcome":"verified","quarantineReason":null},{"cellId":"sfx:manufacturing","verdicts":[{"lens":"source-fidelity","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.95,"reason":"Source 1 defines 'manufacturing' as physical production of goods, operating and supervising production lines and plants. Source 3 defines 'Physical Operations' as 'hands-on production and physical work: manufacturing, assembly, warehouse and logistics operations, facilities, and plant supervision.' The word 'manufacturing' appears explicitly in the Physical Operations definition, making it an unambiguous fit. The only plausible alternative is 'Industry Specific,' but Source 3 limits that key to work with 'no cross-industry equivalent,' whereas manufacturing is a cross-industry function. No other key in Source 2's complete list offers a more natural home. All three sources consistently support the claim.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"internal-consistency","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.95,"reason":"Internal consistency check passes on all fronts. Source 1 defines the 'manufacturing' super-function as physical production of goods, operating production lines/plants, with member functions including Biopharmaceutical Production, Production Supervision, and Semiconductor Production. Source 3 defines 'Physical Operations' as hands-on production and physical work: manufacturing, assembly, warehouse and logistics operations, facilities, and plant supervision — explicitly naming 'manufacturing' as the canonical example. No other pay key is an equally natural home: R&D is for product creation, Industry Specific could theoretically apply to biopharmaceutical or semiconductor production but the glossary says Industry Specific covers work with 'no cross-industry equivalent' whereas manufacturing/production supervision is a cross-industry function, G&A/IT/Sales/Marketing/Professional Services/Customer Support are all clearly inapplicable. The mapping is internally consistent across all three sources with no contradictions detected.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"domain-plausibility","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.97,"reason":"The claim is directly and concretely supported by all three sources. Source 1 defines the 'manufacturing' canon super-function as physical production of goods including operating production lines and plants. Source 2 confirms 'Physical Operations' is a valid pay-equation key. Source 3 defines 'Physical Operations' as 'hands-on production and physical work: manufacturing, assembly, warehouse and logistics operations, facilities, and plant supervision — labor markets priced against physical/industrial comparators.' The word 'manufacturing' appears verbatim in the Physical Operations definition. No other key in Source 2's list is a more natural home: Industry Specific could theoretically apply to biopharmaceutical or semiconductor production, but Source 3 defines Industry Specific as work with 'no cross-industry equivalent,' whereas manufacturing/production supervision spans multiple industries (biopharm and semiconductor both appear in the canon). R&D is excluded because manufacturing is not creating the product design but executing physical production. The mapping is unambiguous given the explicit inclusion of 'manufacturing' in the Physical Operations glossary definition.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"}],"outcome":"verified","quarantineReason":null},{"cellId":"sfx:consulting","verdicts":[{"lens":"source-fidelity","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.95,"reason":"Source 3 explicitly defines 'Professional Services' as 'Billable, client-facing expertise delivery: consulting, implementation, integration, and advisory engagements sold to external clients.' Source 1 defines the 'consulting' super-function as 'Client-facing advisory work sold as expertise: strategy, environmental, and advisory services delivered as engagements to external clients.' The definitions align directly and unambiguously. No other key in Source 2's complete list is an equally natural home: Sales requires quota-carrying, Customer Support is post-sale retention, G&A is internal overhead, Industry Specific requires vertical-exclusive work, and none of the remaining keys (IT, Marketing, Physical Operations, R&D) fit client-facing advisory engagements. The claim that 'consulting' maps unambiguously to 'Professional Services' is fully supported by the sources.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"internal-consistency","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.95,"reason":"The internal consistency check passes cleanly. SOURCE 1 defines the canon super-function 'consulting' as 'client-facing advisory work sold as expertise: strategy, environmental, and advisory services delivered as engagements to external clients.' SOURCE 3 defines 'Professional Services' as 'Billable, client-facing expertise delivery: consulting, implementation, integration, and advisory engagements sold to external clients — revenue-generating but expertise-based rather than quota-carrying.' The definitional language maps directly: both emphasize client-facing, expertise-based, engagement-style delivery to external clients. No other pay key in SOURCE 2 competes plausibly: Sales requires quota-carrying revenue capture (consulting is expertise-based, not quota-carrying per SOURCE 3); Customer Support is post-sale retention work; G&A is corporate overhead; the remaining keys (IT/Infrastructure, R&D, Marketing, Physical Operations, Industry Specific) are categorically distinct. The claim that 'Professional Services' is the unambiguous home for 'consulting' is fully supported by the source definitions with no internal contradiction.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"domain-plausibility","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.95,"reason":"The domain-plausibility lens finds strong, concrete support in the sources. Source 1 defines the 'consulting' super-function as 'client-facing advisory work sold as expertise: strategy, environmental, and advisory services delivered as engagements to external clients.' Source 3 defines 'Professional Services' as 'Billable, client-facing expertise delivery: consulting, implementation, integration, and advisory engagements sold to external clients — revenue-generating but expertise-based rather than quota-carrying.' The word 'consulting' appears explicitly in the Professional Services definition, and the conceptual alignment is near-perfect: both describe external client-facing advisory/expertise work sold as engagements. No other pay key in the list (Source 2) is a plausible competitor: Sales requires quota-carrying revenue capture, Industry Specific requires vertical-specific work with no cross-industry equivalent, and the remaining keys (G&A, IT, R&D, Marketing, Physical Operations, Customer Support) describe fundamentally different labor markets. The claim of unambiguous mapping is supported by the sources and no contradicting evidence exists.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"}],"outcome":"verified","quarantineReason":null},{"cellId":"sfx:professional_services","verdicts":[{"lens":"source-fidelity","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.93,"reason":"Source 1 defines the JobFrame canon super-function 'professional_services' as 'Billable technical and professional service delivery to external clients — implementation, integration, and expertise-based services attached to the company's offerings.' Source 3 defines the pay key 'Professional Services' as 'Billable, client-facing expertise delivery: consulting, implementation, integration, and advisory engagements sold to external clients — revenue-generating but expertise-based rather than quota-carrying.' The semantic overlap is direct and concrete: both emphasize billable, client-facing, expertise-based delivery to external clients. No other pay key in Source 2 is an equally natural home: Sales requires quota-carrying revenue capture; Customer Support & Service is post-sale retention-focused; R&D creates the product; IT/Infrastructure is internal. The mapping is well-supported by the sources under a source-fidelity lens.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"internal-consistency","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.92,"reason":"Internal consistency check passes. The JobFrame canon definition of 'professional_services' (billable technical and professional service delivery to external clients — implementation, integration, expertise-based services) maps directly and without ambiguity to the pay-equation key 'Professional Services' (billable, client-facing expertise delivery: consulting, implementation, integration, and advisory engagements sold to external clients — revenue-generating but expertise-based rather than quota-carrying). The definitions are substantively identical. No other pay key is an equally natural home: 'Customer Support & Service' is post-sale retention work for existing customers, not billable project delivery; 'Sales' is quota-carrying revenue capture; 'R&D' is product creation; 'Industry Specific' applies only to vertical-specific work with no cross-industry equivalent. The claim of 'exact' match and unambiguity is internally consistent across all three sources.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"},{"lens":"domain-plausibility","verdict":"stands","confidence":0.95,"reason":"Source 1 defines the JobFrame canon super-function 'professional_services' as 'Billable technical and professional service delivery to external clients — implementation, integration, and expertise-based services attached to the company's offerings.' Source 3 defines the pay key 'Professional Services' as 'Billable, client-facing expertise delivery: consulting, implementation, integration, and advisory engagements sold to external clients — revenue-generating but expertise-based rather than quota-carrying.' The semantic overlap is near-total: both emphasize billable, client-facing, expertise-based external delivery. No other pay key in Source 2 is a plausible competitor: Sales requires quota-carrying, Customer Support & Service targets post-sale retention rather than billable delivery, and none of the others (G&A, IT, R&D, Marketing, Physical Operations, Industry Specific) cover this domain. The 'exact' rationale is well-supported by the source material.","model":"anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6"}],"outcome":"verified","quarantineReason":null}],"startedAt":"2026-07-02T21:44:13.690Z","finishedAt":"2026-07-02T21:45:00.126Z"}