Exam CCAO-F Topic 1 Question 19 Discussion

When cited sources conflict, the analyst must resolve the discrepancy through source hierarchy and corroboration. Option C is correct because a primary or authoritative source-such as the original announcement, official record, regulatory filing, or responsible organization's publication-provides stronger evidence than assumptions based on publication timing or repetition.
Publishing both dates without resolution transfers the analyst's verification responsibility to the reader.
Averaging dates is logically invalid because event dates are categorical facts, not measurements that can be meaningfully averaged. Selecting the newer source is also unreliable; a later publication can repeat an earlier error, refer to a different milestone, or introduce a transcription mistake. The analyst should determine whether the sources describe the same event, locate the most authoritative record, and retain a citation showing how the final date was confirmed.
Anthropic recommends making claims auditable through citations and checking generated statements against supporting source material. Its hallucination guidance further advises retracting a claim when adequate support cannot be found. Consequently, if no authoritative source resolves the discrepancy, the report should clearly disclose the uncertainty rather than manufacture a definitive date. Anthropic's guidance on reducing hallucinations