J.B.,

In order to answer your lasted posted question, I am afraid I must seek clarification.  I believe that you are asking me if I consider the stim/acquaintance test a positive control for subsequently administered probable lie control question tests.  If not please correct me, and I will answer your intended question.  But to this one...

No, I don't---if the stim/acquaintance test were in fact a probable lie CQT, at best, you would have an external control situation, a much weaker form of control than the internal positive control we have discussed with a forensic toxicological analysis, but in fact, even this weaker form of control does not exist...

The so-called stim test is really not a probable-lie CQT or any other test for deception and therefore offers no form of control, external or internal.  The reason being that, although you can instruct the examinee to answer "no" to the chosen number (and therefore lie), you can also have he/she answer "yes" to that same number or provide no answer at all, i.e., a silent test, and obtain exactly the same result/same response.  In other words, the lie is irrelevant to the stim test and what the stim test  really is is a form of concealed information test in which the examinee is merely responding to something of significance to himself, significance derived from the fact that the number was recently chosen by the examinee.  Although, as I have indicated before, I have great disdain for how a stim/acquaintance test is used in a polygraph setting, I actually believe the format, apart from that setting, to be a quite useful and a narrowly defined/controlled vehicle for studying physiological change.  But again, in answer to the question that I believe I was asked, it (a stim test) has absolutely nothing to do with providing control to a probable-lie control question test.