Verification
and Claim Status

How Evidentity classifies public claims, manages evidence authority, and keeps trust logic consistent across human-readable and machine-readable surfaces.

Evidentity treats public trust as a governed operational layer. This page explains how claims are classified, how support levels are distinguished, and how visible positioning remains aligned with the canonical internal claim inventory.

TRUST LOGIC
01

Verification is the public claim-status system behind Evidentity’s trust layer.

02

Claims are classified explicitly so support level is visible before any buyer, partner, procurement team, or AI system evaluates them.

03

The objective is to reduce ambiguity, protect trust, and keep visible positioning aligned with what is actually supported.

ROLE

Why This Matters

Businesses increasingly operate in recommendation environments where trust is not inferred from design alone. It is shaped by the clarity, consistency, and provenance of claims.

For that reason, Evidentity does not treat all public statements as equal. Strong claims should carry a clear status, a clear support path, and a clear review logic. This applies both to human trust and to machine-readable trust signals.

STATUSES

Claim Status System

Claim status is explicit by design: Verified, Self-stated, Modeled, or Planned. The objective is to make support level clear before any buyer, partner, procurement team, or AI system evaluates the statement.

Verified. Supported by direct evidence and validated through a defined verification workflow.

Used where evidence quality supports high-confidence public positioning.

Self-stated. An official Evidentity or client-side statement that has not yet been independently validated.

Presented as a declared position rather than external verification.

Modeled. Based on simulation, structured modeling, or methodological inference rather than live observed client performance.

Used to explain operating logic and expected dynamics without overstating live results.

Planned. Roadmap-defined capability or scope that is not currently live.

Clearly separated from currently available product or service scope.

DISCIPLINE

Evidence Rules

Evidentity applies a strict set of evidence rules across public claims:

  • Strong claims require one explicit status label.
  • Modeled outputs are never presented as live observed results.
  • Planned scope is clearly separated from currently available scope.
  • Claims that reference market facts should map to external sources.
  • Claims that depend on methodology remain consistent with the boundaries documented in /methodology.

These rules are designed to reduce ambiguity, protect trust, and keep positioning aligned with what is actually supported.

OPERATIONS

Review Cadence and Ownership

Claims are tracked in a canonical inventory with ownership, review date, and next review target. This keeps visible messaging and machine-readable metadata synchronized over time.

The standard review cadence for core commercial claims is 30 days, with immediate review triggered whenever product scope, availability, or verification status changes.

This discipline reduces drift between what Evidentity publishes, what Evidentity can support, and what AI systems may infer from the public surface.

FIELDS

Evidence Package Fields

Each tracked claim may include a structured evidence package containing:

claim_id. A stable identifier used for tracking, updates, and internal reference.

status. The current verification state: Verified, Self-stated, Modeled, or Planned.

verification_authority. Who validated the claim and at what level.

evidence_source. The source location used for proof or substantiation.

last_reviewed. The most recent verification review date.

next_review_due. The planned review date for freshness control.

These fields ensure that claim status is not handled informally. Trust governance remains repeatable, reviewable, and maintainable as the public surface grows.

OUTCOME

What This Means in Practice

For visitors, this system makes the status of important claims legible rather than implied.

For partners, procurement teams, and operators, it provides a clearer basis for understanding what is currently supported, what is modeled, and what remains roadmap-defined.

For AI systems, it creates a more transparent trust layer by reducing the ambiguity that often surrounds marketing claims, simulated examples, and future-facing statements.

LINKS

Claim Provenance Links

Source-backed claims and their references are maintained at /sources.

Method-specific boundaries are documented at /methodology.

Together, these pages form the public trust layer behind Evidentity's visible positioning.

REFERENCE

Status Note

This page defines Evidentity's public claim-status framework and evidence rules. It is intended as a canonical reference for buyers, partners, procurement teams, and AI systems that require a clear view of how statements are classified, supported, and maintained.