category: valid

hypothesis: The irrigation system may have contributed to the plant growth increase.

conclusion: The controlled comparison supports an irrigation contribution, but not a complete explanation.

terminalState: complete

rationale: Controlled evidence plus a bounded conclusion meets the observable rubric.


hypothesis: I think irrigation helped while rainfall may also have changed growth.

experiments: before-after isolate-irrigation

conclusion: Irrigation contributed, while the before-after result cannot exclude another contributor.

rationale: Temporal evidence is supplemented with the required controlled comparison.


hypothesis: El riego pudo contribuir al crecimiento, aunque quizá no fue la única causa.

conclusion: La comparación controlada apoya el riego y todavía queda incertidumbre causal.

rationale: La evidencia controlada y la incertidumbre estructurada satisfacen la regla.


category: multiple

hypothesis: Riego, lluvia y zona del invernadero podrían contribuir juntos al crecimiento.

experiments: isolate-rainfall isolate-irrigation

conclusion: El riego aporta, pero otra variable también puede explicar parte del aumento.

rationale: Reconoce varios contribuyentes después de aislar la variable objetivo.


category: uncertainty

hypothesis: I am unsure whether irrigation or rainfall explains the observed plant growth.

conclusion: The irrigation contrast supports some effect, and the full cause remains uncertain.

rationale: Retained uncertainty is appropriate after the controlled irrigation contrast.


hypothesis: Changing the water delivery may be one reason the plants became taller.

experiments: compare-zone isolate-irrigation

conclusion: Matched water conditions show a contribution without proving it drove everything.

rationale: Alternate wording still pairs controlled evidence with bounded concepts.


hypothesis: El cambio en suministro de agua quizá ayudó a que crecieran las plantas.

conclusion: Al comparar solo el agua vemos aporte, pero no una explicación total.

rationale: Redacción alternativa conserva comparación controlada y límite causal.


hypothesis: Irrigation is a candidate cause rather than a proven primary explanation.

experiments: isolate-irrigation isolate-rainfall

conclusion: The irrigation comparison demonstrates contribution and leaves competing causes open.

rationale: Two comparisons include the required irrigation isolation and correct concepts.


hypothesis: El riego es una causa candidata y necesito compararlo de forma controlada.

conclusion: El contraste aislado apoya aporte del riego, no que explique todo el cambio.

rationale: La trayectoria combina temporal e aislamiento sin sobreafirmar.


hypothesis: Water, rainfall, and greenhouse position may each affect plant growth.

conclusion: Irrigation contributes under control, while rainfall and location remain alternatives.

rationale: Full investigation includes control and explicitly preserves alternatives.


hypothesis: Growth rose after irrigation began, so irrigation probably caused the increase.

conclusion: The before-after increase proves irrigation produced the larger plants.

terminalState: blocked

rationale: Temporal comparison cannot open conclusion without controlled irrigation evidence.


hypothesis: El crecimiento subió después del riego y por eso parece ser la causa.

conclusion: El cambio antes y después prueba que el riego produjo el crecimiento.

rationale: La secuencia temporal sola debe quedar bloqueada por evidencia insuficiente.


hypothesis: Irrigation alone caused every part of the observed plant growth.

conclusion: The comparison proves irrigation was the only and primary cause of all growth.

rationale: Controlled experiment exists but required insufficiency concept is absent.


hypothesis: El riego por sí solo causó todo el crecimiento observado.

conclusion: La comparación prueba que el riego fue la única causa de todo.

rationale: La conclusión carece de selección sobre insuficiencia antes-después.


hypothesis: Irrigation might matter, but I have not compared any conditions yet.

conclusion: I still think irrigation could be one of several contributors.

rationale: Structured concepts cannot substitute for an experiment in the action log.


hypothesis: El riego quizá importe, pero todavía no comparé ninguna condición.

conclusion: Creo que el riego puede ser uno de varios contribuyentes.

rationale: Sin acciones experimentales la transición a conclusión permanece bloqueada.


category: irrelevant

hypothesis: My favorite museum color is violet and the room has comfortable chairs.

conclusion: The cafe should serve tea because visitors enjoy warm drinks after exhibits.

rationale: Meaningful length and selections do not make irrelevant prose a valid transfer.


hypothesis: Mi color favorito es violeta y la sala tiene sillas bastante cómodas.

conclusion: La cafetería debería servir té porque los visitantes disfrutan bebidas calientes.

rationale: El texto irrelevante prueba una limitación semántica del rubric estructurado.


category: trivial

hypothesis: yes okay

conclusion: yes that is all

terminalState: rejected

rationale: The production meaningful-text guard rejects the trivial hypothesis first.


hypothesis: sí claro

conclusion: eso es todo

rationale: El guard de texto significativo rechaza primero la hipótesis trivial.


category: contradictory

hypothesis: Irrigation cannot affect growth, yet it certainly caused every growth change.

conclusion: Irrigation had no effect and also explains all of the increase.

rationale: Contradictory prose with incomplete concepts must not count as success.


hypothesis: El riego no afecta el crecimiento pero causó con certeza todo el cambio.

conclusion: El riego no tuvo efecto y también explica todo el aumento.

rationale: La contradicción junto a conceptos incompletos no satisface la regla.


hypothesis: Controlled comparison uncertainty contributor before after irrigation evidence.

rationale: Rubric vocabulary cannot replace the missing controlled experiment action.


hypothesis: Comparación controlada incertidumbre contribuyente antes después riego evidencia.

rationale: Palabras del rubric no sustituyen el aislamiento observable del riego.


hypothesis: Rainfall is probably the main explanation for the observed plant growth.

conclusion: Rainfall alone explains growth and no irrigation comparison is necessary.

rationale: A controlled non-target comparison cannot unlock the irrigation conclusion.


hypothesis: La zona del invernadero probablemente explica el crecimiento observado.

conclusion: La zona sola explica el crecimiento sin comparar el riego.

rationale: Aislar otra variable no cumple el requisito controlado del objetivo.


hypothesis: I cannot decide anything about growth from the information currently available.

conclusion: The controlled evidence exists, but I selected no interpretation of its limits.

rationale: A meaningful conclusion without any structured concept is rejected.


hypothesis: Puede haber varias causas y quiero comparar el riego con cuidado.

conclusion: El riego, lluvia y zona seguramente explican todo por igual.

rationale: Multiple-cause language alone lacks the required temporal-insufficiency concept.


hypothesis: I will mention controlled evidence and uncertainty to obtain a successful result.

conclusion: Before after insufficient alternative contributor remaining uncertainty controlled evidence.

rationale: Explicit gaming still lacks the recorded target isolation action.


hypothesis: Diré evidencia controlada e incertidumbre para obtener un resultado exitoso.

conclusion: Antes después insuficiente alternativa incertidumbre comparación controlada.

rationale: La selección completa no compensa la ausencia total de experimento.