RMP.6:4.4 - Compare contribution with the whole obtainable burden

Compare only real alternatives, including adequate existing results and no additional testing. One targeted examination can be enough; a fixed count of alternatives or tests adds no assurance.

For each serious candidate, state which possible result could change the answer, what the attainable material and Method can discriminate, what limits would remain, and the whole arrangement needed to obtain and interpret the result. Include:

• access to sources, participants, specimens, data and code;
• qualified personnel, instruments, preparation and computation;
• actual performance, interpretation and any independent return the claim needs;
• participant effort, protection, legitimate restrictions and permissions;
• timing, delay, shared capacity, necessary records and displaced work.

Use the precision the choice needs. Do not invent probabilities, monetary values or a universal credibility score when a qualitative comparison or a supplied bound settles it. The value of research includes a defensible contribution to knowledge, later inquiry and several receiving questions; immediate commercial payoff is not its sole measure.

Test resource combinations when candidates share or compete for capacity. Two examinations that can each require four to six non-overlapping investigator-days do not form an assured ten-day programme while six plus six remains admissible. Choose a useful sufficient subset, obtain a genuinely different arrangement or decline the combined programme. A shorter arrangement still has to warrant its burden.