VyDex Entry v2 Methodology
How VyDex researches, assesses, publishes, and revises the simpler Entry v2 evidence record while preserving its immutable publication history.
- Current Version
- v2.0.0
- Effective From
- Version Type
- major
- Entry linkage
- Entry pages link to the Methodology Version used for that entry record.
Inclusion Rule
An Entry records a specific, consequential development or threshold claim that can be investigated with identifiable public evidence.
The current Entry v2 record separates the reader-facing development, its immediate qualification, researched context, and considered takeaway from the evidence judgments applied to it.
Claim Appraisal
Claim Status describes the conclusion VyDex can support about the Entry's subject. Evidence Strength describes the breadth, directness, and independence of the evidence behind that conclusion.
What exactly is being asserted, and what is the material scope of the assertion?
Which source or artifact directly supports the development being described?
What qualification, counterevidence, or interpretive limit must a reader see immediately?
How independent are the sources and how directly do they observe the relevant outcome?
Which parts of the assessment are source facts and which parts are VyDex interpretation?
What would materially change the Entry's status, strength, or takeaway on a later revision?
Public Labels
Claim Status and Evidence Strength are controlled public labels. Each current Entry also records a short rationale for why those labels apply to that Entry rather than repeating generic definitions.
Claim Status
| Status | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Confirmed | The central development is established by sufficiently direct and reliable evidence for the stated scope. |
| Supported | The available evidence supports the central development, but important limits or unresolved uncertainty remain. |
| Provisional | The development is plausible or partially supported, but the evidence is not yet sufficient for a stronger conclusion. |
| Reported But Unverified | A credible source reports the development, but independent or direct verification is not yet available. |
| Disputed | The development or its interpretation is materially contested by evidence or credible analysis. |
| Failed / Retracted | The central development has failed later checking or has been retracted by the relevant source. |
Evidence Strength
Evidence Strength is not a credibility score for a source. It summarizes how directly, independently, and comprehensively the source set bears on the Entry's stated scope.
| Level | Score | Meaning | Typical Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Thin | 1 | The evidence is narrow, indirect, preliminary, or substantially dependent on one unverified account. | A single report, early claim, or limited artifact with important unanswered questions. |
| Moderate | 2 | The evidence is meaningful and partly direct, but its independence, method, scope, or reproducibility has material limits. | Several relevant sources or a direct claim with incomplete methodological disclosure or independent checking. |
| Strong | 3 | The evidence is direct and well-supported across the material dimensions of the stated scope, with only bounded uncertainty. | A detailed artifact, transparent evaluation, or converging sources that support the same material conclusion. |
| Very Strong | 4 | The evidence is exceptionally direct, transparent, independently supported, and comprehensive for the stated scope. | A robust, inspectable result with independent confirmation and no material unresolved evidentiary gap. |
Entry-specific assessment rationales
Rationales are concise Entry-specific explanations. They identify the evidence or limitation that led to the selected labels and do not substitute for the controlled definitions above.
- Claim Status Rationale
Explain why the development receives its Claim Status, including the most important scope or qualification when relevant.
- Evidence Strength Rationale
Explain why the source set receives its Evidence Strength, including directness, independence, method disclosure, and remaining gaps when relevant.
Removal lifecycle
Withdrawal is a publication and release lifecycle operation. It is represented by a removal revision and release resolution, not by an authored Entry v2 field. Historical snapshots remain immutable.
Entry v2 Fields
- summary
A concise standfirst that tells a reader what happened without carrying every technical qualification.
Use plain language and identify the actor, development, and material scope. Do not reuse a dense canonical claim as the Summary.
- reality check
The most important immediate qualification, correction, or interpretive limit needed to read the development accurately.
Lead with the likely misreading and correct it using sourced facts. Keep it concise enough to function before Context.
- context
The main researched explanatory body for the Entry.
Use safe block Markdown where useful. Distinguish source facts, chronology, method, scope, and interpretation without recreating rigid schema-shaped subsections.
- takeaway
The considered conclusion a reader should carry forward after reading the evidence and Context.
Explain what should change in the reader's view and what should not be inferred. Nuance is expected.
- claim status rationale
A short explanation of why this Entry received its Claim Status.
Refer to the Entry's actual scope and evidence. Do not paste the generic status definition.
- evidence strength rationale
A short explanation of why this Entry received its Evidence Strength.
Refer to directness, independence, method disclosure, and material gaps in this Entry's source set.
Sources and Evidence Types
Sources preserve the evidence ledger behind an Entry. Each source keeps its title, publisher or domain, URL, Source Role, one or more Evidence Types, and Used For explanation.
Evidence Types
| Evidence Type | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Preprint | A research paper or working paper made public before completing formal peer review. |
| Peer-Reviewed Paper | A research paper published by a journal or conference after formal peer review. |
| Independent Replication | A study or test by a separate party that attempts to reproduce or verify a reported result. |
| Official Claim | A formal claim made by a government body, regulator, court, public institution, or other authority acting in an official capacity. |
| Researcher / Organization Claim | A claim made by a researcher, project maintainer, research organization, or non-government investigator about its own analysis, maintained record, or investigation when it is neither an Official Claim nor a Developer / Vendor Claim about a system it makes or operates. |
| Developer / Vendor Claim | A claim made by the people or organization that developed, operates, or sells the system, product, or service being discussed. |
| Benchmark Result | A reported score or outcome from a defined benchmark, test suite, or evaluation procedure. |
| Technical Artifact | Code, datasets, model weights, logs, executables, or other technical material that can be directly inspected. |
| Government Report | A report published by a government body or agency. |
| Court Filing | A document filed in a court or other formal legal proceeding. |
| Audit | A documented audit or formal assessment of a system, process, claim, or set of controls. |
| Media Report | A report published by a journalistic or news organization. |
| Leaked / Internal Claim | A claim or document originating from non-public internal material or an unauthorized disclosure. |
Source Roles
| Source Role | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Primary Evidence | The source most directly documents the development or result being assessed. |
| Independent Replication | A separate source that tests, reproduces, or independently checks the reported result. |
| Official Record | An official record or statement relevant to the development's status or scope. |
| Strong Artifact | An inspectable technical artifact that materially bears on the development. |
| Context Source | A source that explains background, method, chronology, or interpretation without being the principal evidence. |
| Media Report | A journalistic report used to establish reporting, reaction, or accessible context. |
Source Role describes what a citation does for this Entry. Evidence Type describes what kind of source or evidence it is. They are intentionally separate and a source may carry multiple Evidence Types.
Used For
- Definition
Used For states what the source establishes, checks, or contextualizes in this specific Entry.
- Public Statement
Write it so a reader can understand why the source appears without opening the source first.
- Example
Used to establish the reported result, its measurement, and the qualification that limits the conclusion.
Dates and Evidence Monitoring
| Field | Meaning |
|---|---|
| date added | The calendar date on which the first material publication revision entered the public history, derived from publication history. |
| date updated | The calendar date of the latest material publication activity, derived from publication history. |
| date last checked | The calendar date on which a maintainer last re-checked the current evidence without necessarily changing content. |
A review check may update Date Last Checked without changing authored content. A material change publishes a new immutable snapshot and records the relevant v2 content change.
Re-check when a primary source changes, is withdrawn, or is contradicted.
Re-check when a new result materially changes the Entry's scope or interpretation.
Re-check when a source, method, or qualification previously treated as stable becomes unavailable or ambiguous.
Topic Trails and Domains
A Topic Trail is a durable storyline that groups Entries tracking a coherent frontier change across actors, methods, and measurements.
Use the primary trail that best explains the Entry's durable storyline.
Add a secondary trail only when it materially improves interpretation.
Reuse an existing trail when its full inclusion boundary fits the Entry.
Use a unique, neutral, stable Title Case name in normal readers' language and preserve useful specialist terms as aliases.
| Domain | Scope |
|---|---|
| AI Capabilities | General capabilities of AI systems and models. |
| AI Evaluation | Methods, benchmarks, and evidence used to evaluate AI systems. |
| Robotics | Robots, embodied systems, and robotic operation. |
| Biology | Biological systems, biotechnology, and life-science research. |
| Mathematics | Mathematical results, conjectures, and formal reasoning. |
| Physical Sciences | Physics, chemistry, materials, and related physical research. |
| Cybersecurity | Security research, vulnerabilities, defense, and cyber operations. |
| Hardware | Computing hardware, chips, devices, and infrastructure. |
| Economics | Economic effects, markets, productivity, and resource allocation. |
| Governance | Rules, institutions, policy, and public oversight. |
| National Security | Defense, intelligence, and national-security applications. |
| Space | Spaceflight, astronomy, and space systems. |
Versioning
Canonical Entries and Methodologies are versioned at publication boundaries. A new schema or substantive editorial contract is a major Methodology change; each published snapshot retains the exact Methodology version used.
| Change Type | When It Changes |
|---|---|
| major | Use for incompatible public contract changes or a new methodology that changes how current Entries are authored and interpreted. |
| minor | Use for additive methodology guidance that does not invalidate the existing public contract. |
| patch | Use for corrections or clarifications that do not change the public contract's meaning. |
Historical v1 records remain valid evidence. New v2 revisions are validated against the v2 contract, and release resolution selects the exact referenced Methodology for each current Entry.