Behavioral analysis often starts by checking files: which participant they belong to, whether clocks agree, where a segment is missing, and which records are usable.
A model can still produce fluent text if those checks are wrong. It may simply explain the wrong data.
How I break down the work
In PsyPhiClaw, I explore using programs for explicit processing steps, an agent to coordinate tools and intermediate results, and a researcher to review exceptions and conclusions. Files, parameters, and processing records need to remain available throughout.
An agent earns its place if that coordination helps. A fixed process may only need a script; comparison is needed before choosing.
The validation gap
The project has 18 behavioral-analysis modules, and validation is paused. Code shows how I divided the steps. It does not yet establish accuracy, stability, or time saved on real data.
The next comparison needs the same input data, checks for agreement and error detection, and a measure of review cost. Those results would tell me more about further investment than another module.