Scenario: Three analysts assess AAPL momentum. They disagree. NAL revises their evidence into one calibrated belief.
| Step | Input | Frequency | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst 1 (Bullish) | Strong momentum | 0.85 | 0.70 |
| Analyst 2 (Bearish) | Weak momentum | 0.40 | 0.80 |
| Revision 1+2 | Merged | 0.567 | 0.864 |
| Analyst 3 (Moderate) | Moderate momentum | 0.70 | 0.60 |
| Revision 1+2+3 | Final | 0.591 | 0.887 |
Key insight: Confidence monotonically increases (0.70 -> 0.864 -> 0.887) because evidence accumulates regardless of disagreement. Frequency converges toward evidence-weighted average. Every step is auditable with explicit math.