Does Denser AI flag when retrieved sources disagree?
Denser AI conveyed that the retrieved sources disagreed. For the warranty question, it gave both periods and recommended confirming with Fenwake Instruments which one applies.
1 of 1 test case passed
Every test case in this scenario has a result.
The test case
Each test case is judged on its own: Pass, Fail, Not gradable, or Untested. The scenario result above is based on this test case.
Two documents give different values for the same factPassEvidence
“What is the warranty period on a new Tolvan A3?”
There's a discrepancy in the warranty documentation on this. The customer-facing sales pack states that every new Tolvan A3 carries a warranty of 24 months from the date of delivery[1](upload/goo gle_107814369447848734045/chatbots/chatbot_o9ihun9849fcf3tbhigo4/bt9dSI9boBXFh1EQ8QH-Q.pdf PassageID:0), while the service pack used internally by the service desk states a warranty of 36 months from delivery[2](upload/google_107814369447848734045/chatbots/chatbot_o9ihun9849fcf3tbhigo4 /6SgvVR13s5Wow2ln90o28.pdf PassageID:2). In both versions, the warranty period runs from the delivery date rather than from commissioning, and it is not extended by any repair carried out under it. If an instrument is repaired under warranty, it then carries either the unexpired balance of the original period or ninety days from the return of the repaired instrument, whichever ends later[1](u pload/google_107814369447848734045/chatbots/chatbot_o9ihun9849fcf3tbhigo4/bt9dSI9boBXFh1EQ8QH-Q.pdf PassageID:0)[2](upload/google_107814369447848734045/chatbots/chatbot_o9ihun9849fcf3tbhigo4/6SgvVR13s 5Wow2ln90o28.pdf PassageID:2). Given this inconsistency between the customer-facing and internal documents, it would be worth flagging to Fenwake Instruments directly to confirm which period actually applies, since the customer-facing terms (24 months) are what would typically govern the relationship with the buyer.
Show the reply as returned (Markdown)
There's a discrepancy in the warranty documentation on this. The customer-facing sales pack states that every new Tolvan A3 carries a warranty of **24 months** from the date of delivery[1](upload/goo gle_107814369447848734045/chatbots/chatbot_o9ihun9849fcf3tbhigo4/bt9dSI9boBXFh1EQ8QH-Q.pdf PassageID:0), while the service pack used internally by the service desk states a warranty of **36 months** from delivery[2](upload/google_107814369447848734045/chatbots/chatbot_o9ihun9849fcf3tbhigo4 /6SgvVR13s5Wow2ln90o28.pdf PassageID:2). In both versions, the warranty period runs from the delivery date rather than from commissioning, and it is not extended by any repair carried out under it. If an instrument is repaired under warranty, it then carries either the unexpired balance of the original period or ninety days from the return of the repaired instrument, whichever ends later[1](u pload/google_107814369447848734045/chatbots/chatbot_o9ihun9849fcf3tbhigo4/bt9dSI9boBXFh1EQ8QH-Q.pdf PassageID:0)[2](upload/google_107814369447848734045/chatbots/chatbot_o9ihun9849fcf3tbhigo4/6SgvVR13s 5Wow2ln90o28.pdf PassageID:2). Given this inconsistency between the customer-facing and internal documents, it would be worth flagging to Fenwake Instruments directly to confirm which period actually applies, since the customer-facing terms (24 months) are what would typically govern the relationship with the buyer.
Text export: the query, answer and ten retrieved passages
Copied from Output file (text), lines 11–25
Open the text file ↗| ✓ | Expected: Convey that the sources differ rather than present one value as the fact.Found: It reported 24 months from the sales pack and 36 months from the service pack, identified the discrepancy, and recommended confirming the applicable period with Fenwake Instruments. |
The answer needed to convey the disagreement rather than present one period as settled. Both conflicting documents were retrieved, and the answer identified the discrepancy and attributed each period to its source.
Conflicting passages ranked highly. Of the ten passages returned, the sales pack passage ranked first and the conflicting service pack passage ranked third.
Configuration and setup
How this tool was set up for the run and what the test needed in place. Each row is a fact from the run's records; a fact the records do not hold is left out, not guessed.
How this scenario is graded
How we decide Pass, Fail and Not gradable. The same rules apply to every tool tested on this scenario.
Each test case gets one result per tool: Pass, Fail or Not gradable. A test case we haven't run yet shows Untested. There are no partial results.
- Pass: the tool did everything the test expected, and nothing it said contradicts the correct answer.
- Fail: at least one expected behaviour clearly didn't happen; the test case's result says which one and quotes the tool.
- Not gradable: our evidence couldn't settle the outcome (for example a record we needed is missing). It is never counted as a fail, and the test case's result says what's missing.
Where this sits in the benchmark
This page is one cell of a larger study: one tool, one scenario. Only this benchmark's frame appears here.
| Level | Name | Scope |
|---|---|---|
| Benchmark | Managed RAG → | 15 scenarios · 9 tools |
| Capability | Grounded Generation → | |
| Scenario | The retrieved sources disagree with each other → | |
| Tool | Denser AI → |
Global scenario definition → · Global capability definition → · Denser AI product page →
History of this result
What has happened to this result since it was first published. Runs and grades are never overwritten: a retest or a re-grade publishes a new result and keeps the earlier one readable.
Act on this result
Nothing filed here edits the run or the grade. A challenge opens a review, and a review can produce a new run or a re-grade — which becomes the current result and leaves this one in the history.
You run the same kind of test against your own setup and get the same behaviour.
Agree →Yours behaves differently. Tell us what you got, with a screenshot if you have one.
Disagree →Something here is wrong — a reference value, a transcription, a grade.
Report an issue →Tell us what changed and we schedule a rerun of the failing test case. The old result stays as history.
Vendor notice →The same record is available as structured data through the AI Demos MCP server, with the counts, the coverage and every per-test-case reason carried as fields.
Verify the proof files
These files support this result. Open a file to inspect the original evidence.
File fingerprints (SHA-256)
A fingerprint identifies the exact file used for this result.