<s>[INST] One witness at a trial says that he distinctly heard a cell phone ringing, with 4 distinct tones in a repetitive pattern, during the time the crime was occurring, but he can't recall what pattern of tones it was. This is terrible evidence, because there are only 4 choices, none of which can be ruled out, and many different cell phone rings are available; this indicates that the witness probably won't even be sure what pattern he heard until after he's been told what pattern the defendant's cell phone actually has. Besides, in order to know what you're listening for, it's necessary to know the tones, and what each of them sounds like, as well as the pattern in which they're arranged. Lacking the latter knowledge beforehand, it's not possible to know with certainty what you're listening for - you'd basically be making a guess and just trying to convince yourself. Consider the following:
a. Faulty logic Variations:
'Yes, that is what I heard! I could swear it was that pattern.'
'Oh yeah, I remember that one. That is it.'
Subconscious confirmation bias could arrive at this incorrect conclusion. Conversely, sound patterns in general dont have distinct sounds that can be clearly identified as the other sound does not exist - so how can we clearly identify cell phones ring tones if a sound pattern had been used as the tone - to the fact that the sound is so different that even in an array of other sound it is quite distinctive?[/INST]