# Competing hypotheses: {observation, in a few words}

_Prepared {YYYY-MM-DD} · Evidence as of {date} · Method: analysis of competing hypotheses_

## Observation

{One sentence: what happened, when, and how big. Example: "Mobile checkout conversion fell 18%
from Tue 8 Sep, against a flat four-week baseline."}

## Assumptions to confirm first

- [assumption] {anything inferred rather than given, most important first}

## Hypotheses

| Id | Hypothesis | Could be true alongside |
|---|---|---|
| H1 | {one sentence that could be false} | {other ids, or "none"} |
| H2 | … | … |
| H3 | … | … |
| H4 | {the measurement hypothesis: tracking, definitions, sampling} | … |

## Evidence and matrix

Ratings: CC very consistent · C consistent · N neutral · NA not applicable · I inconsistent · II very inconsistent.
Weight: 2 primary record · 1 reliable · 0.5 weak or loosely related.

| Id | Evidence (source) | Weight | H1 | H2 | H3 | H4 | Diagnostic? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | {observation} ({source}) | 1 | C | N | I | N | yes |

{One line for each weight that isn't 1, saying why.}

## Ranking

| Rank | Hypothesis | Inconsistency score |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | … | … |

{Script output or hand arithmetic. Ranked by inconsistency, lowest first.}

## What the ranking rests on

- **Diagnostic evidence:** {ids, and what each separates}
- **Non-diagnostic evidence, set aside:** {ids, and why they felt persuasive}
- **Linchpins:** {ids whose removal changes first place, where each came from, and how to confirm it}

## Conclusion

**{Leader}** is the least contradicted explanation. Confidence: **{high / moderate / low}**,
because {reason in one sentence}.

What would rule out each survivor:

- {H?}: {the observation that would rate it I or II}

## Next observation

| Check | H{a} predicts | H{b} predicts | Who | How long |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| {what to look at} | {result} | {result} | {team or role} | {estimate} |