Three Within-Session Falsifications: A Case Series and Hypothesis for Methodological Discipline

This note documents three cases in which candidate constructs of the AIKintsugi governance-framework development process were submitted to hostile audit and rejected, while the underlying problems that motivated them were preserved. The three cases — a Checkpoint Auditability Test, a Carve-out Boundary Test, and a Developmental-Trajectory Autonomy definition — were produced and audited in a single analytical session on 14 September 2026. The note treats the cross-case observation as a working hypothesis and a documented case series, not as a validated or repeatable methodological pattern. Two failure modes are named: Retroactive Thresholding and Mandatory-Category Misclassification. An open limitation is identified: problem-preservation requires an exit condition to avoid unfalsifiable problem statements