# Karl Popper & falsifiability — the trace table

*Source: <https://influences.sgit.ai/register/popper/trace/index.html>*

| Pattern from the anchor | Where the estate implements it | Version | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| A claim must be refutable to be worth making | Wardley mapping as practised here — *a map is a claim* about position and movement, refutable by pointing at a misplaced component | — | implemented |
| State the conditions under which you would be wrong | The risks register's falsifiable-statement discipline — an accepted risk with a named acceptor and a named mitigation | — | implemented |
| The demarcation applied to inspiration itself | **This site's trace tables.** An influence entry is written so that it can be checked against the repositories and found wrong | — | implemented |
| Publishing the refutations, not only the claims | Partial. The gaps are published as build specs and the absent rows are kept, but no claim on this network has yet been retracted in public | — | partial |
| A test that could falsify an influence claim itself | Nowhere, and probably nowhere possible. See the resonance above | — | absent |

Row sources:

- A claim must be refutable to be worth making — 02__ §T10, citing the wardley-maps pack; no version in the corpus scan
- State the conditions under which you would be wrong — 02__ §T10; [risks.sgit.ai](https://risks.sgit.ai)
- The demarcation applied to inspiration itself — the register format, 01__ §2 — the format's own founding move
- Publishing the refutations, not only the claims — absence of any retraction across the network's shipped pages
- A test that could falsify an influence claim itself — stated as a limit in 01__ and on [the disclosure page](../../../about/participant.html#lose)

CC BY 4.0 — Dinis Cruz, with AI co-authorship (Claude, Anthropic).