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 source path, and a clear review logic. This applies to human trust and to machine-readable trust signals.
Claim Status System
Claim status is explicit by design: Verified, Self-stated, Modeled, or Planned. The goal is to make support level clear before any buyer, partner, or model evaluates the statement.
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 stay consistent with boundaries documented in /methodology.
These rules are designed to reduce ambiguity, protect trust, and keep positioning aligned with what is actually supported.
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.
Standard review cadence for core commercial claims is 30 days, with immediate review triggered when 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.
Evidence Package Fields
Each tracked claim may include a structured evidence package:
These fields ensure claim status is not handled informally. Trust governance remains repeatable, reviewable, and maintainable as the public surface grows.
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.
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.
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 and maintained.