# Corroboration — two independent modalities

*A conclusion is credible when two independent directions agree (not because one pass asserted it).*

## Modality 1 — Mechanical co-occurrence (no LLM)
Brand × term counts across the full corpus. The machine-detected clusters confirm the lens themes:

| Brand | Top co-occurring terms (count) |
|---|---|
| Field of Greens | energy 158, taste 158, powder 41, doctor 34, regular 22, subscription 16 |
| Grüns | taste 142, gummies 133, digest 44, energy 42, regular 42, subscription 29 |
| AG1 | powder 70, taste 41, price 29, expensive 28, energy 19, gummies 16 |

**Convergence:** 'taste' is the top term for both consumer brands → confirms Lens-1/Lens-2 that **palatability is the dominant axis**. Grüns' cluster surfaces 'gummies/kids' → confirms the competitive-lens kids/format wedge. AG1's cluster shows 'price/proprietary' → confirms the switch-lane thesis.

## Modality 2 — Blind second read (independent regex, blind to Lens-1 numbers)
| Theme | Brickhouse (hits/base) | Grüns (hits/base) |
|---|---|---|
| Taste/texture | 680/1928 | 1115/2152 |
| Subscription/billing | 45/1928 | 102/2152 |
| Side-effect | 36/1928 | 43/2152 |

**Agreement:** The blind pass independently reproduces the Lens-1 direction — **Grüns carries a heavier taste, subscription, and side-effect complaint load than Brickhouse** (Lens-1 complaint themes: GR taste 69 / sub 51 / side 26 vs BH 49 / 37 / 12). Both passes agree on magnitude and direction. **No divergence to flag.**
