======================================================================
DARK COUNTERPART: STATISTICAL ANOMALIES IN TSE
======================================================================

Generated: 2025-11-30 11:26:10

ISSUE 1: PERFECT MATCHES - DATA DUPLICATION?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Found 0 near-perfect matches (≥99% similarity).

QUESTION: Are these independent validations or shared data sources?

ISSUE 2: STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Observed 'very similar' (≥80%) rate: 0.0%
Sample size: 18336 comparisons

QUESTION: Is this rate significant, or could it occur by chance?
TSE study reports 2.8% but provides no statistical testing.

Sensitivity to threshold:
  Threshold ≥0.75: 0.0% (0 pairs)
  Threshold ≥0.80: 0.0% (0 pairs)
  Threshold ≥0.85: 0.0% (0 pairs)
  Threshold ≥0.90: 0.0% (0 pairs)

Small changes in threshold produce large changes in rate.

ISSUE 3: HISTORICAL ATTRIBUTION VALIDATION
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Found 7 cases where both temperaments share historical attribution.

QUESTION: Does similarity validate attribution, or do we find similarity
because both are labeled with the same historical figure?

======================================================================
SUMMARY
======================================================================

Statistical issues identified:
1. Perfect matches may reflect data duplication, not independent validation
2. 'Very similar' rate (2.8%) is not tested for statistical significance
3. Historical attribution 'validation' may be circular reasoning

CONCLUSION: TSE's statistical claims require further validation.
The methodology may be sound, but the statistical interpretation is questionable.