Page 297 - CyberSecurityEssentialsEnglish

by the volume of text, but by the clarity of the question, the fit of the method, the quality of
the sources, the honesty of the analysis, traceability, and the ability to state what we know
and what we do not.

We will therefore treat every output of a tool as a draft or a working hypothesis until each

important claim returns to a real source, to data, or to an analysis that can be inspected. The
difference between a review that looks scientific and a review that is evidence-based is not

style. It is whether the path can be traced from the question to the source, from the source
to the claim, and from the claim to the decision.

“Any claim that does not lead back to a checkable source is a risk, however scientific the
text may look.”

◆ Key idea: no evidence without an inspectable chain.

Use AI to widen your ability to discover, organize, compare, and test, not to replace the
source, the method, or the scientific judgment. Every important claim must return to real
evidence, and every consequential use of the tool must be one you can describe and
review.

296