The Epistemic Suite: A Post-Foundational Diagnostic Methodology for Assessing AI Knowledge Claims
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large Language Models (LLMs) generate fluent, plausible text that can mislead users into mistaking simulated coherence for genuine understanding. This paper introduces the Epistemic Suite, a post-foundational diagnostic methodology for surfacing the epistemic conditions under which AI outputs are produced and received. Rather than determining truth or falsity, the Suite operates through twenty diagnostic lenses, applied by practitioners as context warrants, to reveal patterns such as confidence laundering, narrative compression, displaced authority, and temporal drift. It is grounded in three design principles: diagnosing production before evaluating claims, preferring diagnostic traction over foundational settlement, and embedding reflexivity as a structural requirement rather than an ethical ornament. When enacted, the Suite shifts language models into a diagnostic stance, producing inspectable artifacts-flags, annotations, contradiction maps, and suspension logs (the FACS bundle)-that create an intermediary layer between AI output and human judgment. A key innovation is epistemic suspension, a practitioner-enacted circuit breaker that halts continuation when warrant is exceeded, with resumption based on judgment rather than rule. The methodology also includes an Epistemic Triage Protocol and a Meta-Governance Layer to manage proportionality and link activation to relational accountability, consent, historical context, and pluralism safeguards. Unlike internalist approaches that embed alignment into model architectures (e.g., RLHF or epistemic-integrity proposals), the Suite operates externally as scaffolding, preserving expendability and refusal as safeguards rather than failures. It preserves the distinction between performance and understanding, enabling accountable deliberation while maintaining epistemic modesty.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 20 Sep 2025.
Builds on
0 of 0 references.
No references here yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Epistemological Fault Lines Between Human and Artificial Intelligence
- 2025Beyond "Hallucinations": A Framework for Stable Human-AI Reasoning
- 2026Architecting Trust in Artificial Epistemic Agents
- 2026Retrieval Is Not Enough: Why Organizational AI Needs Epistemic Infrastructure
- 2026TRACES: A Benchmark for Epistemic Reliability in Scientific Reasoning by LLMs
- 2026Thinking Through Signs: PEEL as a Semiotic Scaffolding for Epistemically Accountable AI-Enabled Research
- 2024Understanding Epistemic Language with a Language-augmented Bayesian Theory of Mind
- 2026Diagnosing and Mitigating Sycophancy and Skepticism in LLM Causal Judgment