{
  "title": "Agricultural chemical data for AI label identity review",
  "source_page": "https://fiund.com/industries/pesticide-label-product-establishment-data",
  "authorship": "Original fictional Fiund editorial exercise. No actual operating records or third-party source assets are included.",
  "example": {
    "title": "Product identity and packing-site identity occupy different fields",
    "context": "Two fictitious cartons contain blank paper. Labels use deliberately invalid example identifiers and make no regulatory claim.",
    "records": [
      [
        "1",
        "Mock packing order",
        "Product QA; site mark EAST; art rev D."
      ],
      [
        "2",
        "Proof D1",
        "Product QA, site WEST, rev D."
      ],
      [
        "3",
        "Proof D2",
        "Product QB, site EAST, rev D."
      ]
    ],
    "question": "Which proof matches the packing order?",
    "answer": "Neither proof satisfies the combination in record 1. D1 in record 2 has the correct product and art revision but a different site mark. D2 in record 3 matches the site and revision but names another product. Keep the two mismatches separate.",
    "failureModes": [
      "Using a site match as proof of product identity",
      "Treating the shared art revision as approval"
    ],
    "fields": [
      [
        "product_key",
        "Identifies the carton variant"
      ],
      [
        "site_mark",
        "Identifies the fictional packing location field"
      ],
      [
        "proof_revision",
        "Compares the named art version"
      ]
    ],
    "holdout": "Give a late packing-site change with an effective order interval and require checking the order timestamp.",
    "boundary": "No real pesticide labels, application instructions, registration numbers or regulatory determinations."
  }
}