Claims are the connective tissue between what happened (events) and the evidence (sources). Sources are the foundation that gives your investigation credibility.
Claims are always attached to an event. You cannot create a standalone claim.
| Field | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Claim Text | Yes | The factual assertion (e.g., "The CEO was present at the board meeting on March 15") |
| Source | Yes | The document or reference that supports this claim. Search existing sources or create a new one inline. |
| Status | Yes | The verification grade for this claim |
| Confidence | No | Your confidence score, 0–100 |
The claim appears on the event card and in the context panel.
/events/[eventId]./events/[eventId].This dialog lets you update:
What you'll see:
Click Save to apply changes. The revision history records the before/after state.
Claims move through statuses as you gather and verify evidence:
rumored → reported → verifiable → fact
↘ ↘
unverifiable retracted| Status | Description | When to Assign |
|---|---|---|
rumored | Heard through informal channels, not yet attached to a formal source | Early in investigation, before sources are collected |
reported | A source asserts this claim, but you haven't assessed it | Right after attaching a source — the starting point for most claims |
verifiable | You have the evidence needed to check this claim | When you've gathered sources that can confirm or refute |
unverifiable | Cannot be verified with available evidence — a dead end | When the source is credible but the claim itself is inherently uncheckable, or when investigation is exhausted |
fact | Verified as accurate by multiple reliable sources, no credible contradiction | The terminal state for a true claim — represents your team's conclusion |
retracted | A human reviewer has determined this claim is no longer supported by its source. The source content backing this claim has been removed or substantially changed. | When verification detects that a claim's source text no longer matches the current article, and a reviewer confirms the claim should be withdrawn |
A typical curated claim progresses:
reported→verifiable→fact. Claims proven false should have their status updated tounverifiablewith a supporting note — do not delete them. The record of disproven claims is as valuable as proven ones. Theretractedstatus is for claims whose source backing has been removed — always assigned by a human reviewer, never by the system.
Confidence is a 0–100 score representing your quantitative assessment of how likely the claim is to be accurate. Use these thresholds as a guide:
| Range | Label | When to Use |
|---|---|---|
| 0–25 | Very Low | Single source, unverified, or source has credibility issues |
| 26–50 | Low | Limited sourcing, conflicting information, or early in investigation |
| 51–75 | Moderate | Good sourcing but not multiple independent confirmations |
| 76–100 | High | Multiple reliable independent sources, no credible contradiction |
Use the slider in the Claim Review dialog to adjust confidence. The numeric value updates in real time. The confidence is always your judgment — the system records who set it and when.
Confidence is displayed:
Sources are the evidence foundation. Every claim must cite a source.
| Field | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Title | Yes | The document's name (e.g., "SEC Filing Q1 2024 — Acme Corp") |
| Source Type | Yes | Choose from the type dropdown. Over 175 types available, including news_article, court_document, intelligence_report, satellite_imagery, diplomatic_cable, leaked_document, and many more |
| Author | No | Who created, wrote, or published the source |
| Publication Date | No | When the source was published |
| URL | No | A link to the source online |
When creating a claim, you can create a source inline:
Each source has a dedicated page at /sources/[sourceId]. Navigate to it from:
Articles can be corrected, updated, or retracted after publication. The Verify Source button checks whether the current article content has changed since you extracted claims from it.
- Checksum matches: "Source content has not changed since extraction."
- Checksum changed: "Source content has changed. Claims attached to this source have been flagged for review."
- Source unavailable: "Source could not be reached. Try again later."
needs_review = true). They appear in the Workspace > Review Queue.When a source changes and claims are flagged:
- Retract — the source text backing this claim was removed. Set status to retracted.
- Confirm — the claim is still supported. Clear the review flag.
- Downgrade confidence — the text changed but the claim may still hold. Reduce confidence score.
On the source detail page, the extracted content highlights claim text in amber. Non-claim text renders faded italic. This is a reading aid — no red or strikethrough styling. The source change is a signal for review, not a judgment.
Warning: Deleting a source that is cited by active claims will break those claims' provenance. Consider archiving rather than deleting.
Navigate to Sources in the sidebar to see all sources in your account.
Features:
The system includes 175+ predefined source types, organized by domain. Each has a name, description, color, and icon.
| Domain | Example Types |
|---|---|
| Journalism | news_article, press_release, editorial, investigative_report |
| Government | court_document, legislation, government_report, diplomatic_cable |
| Intelligence | intelligence_report, field_report, wire_intercept, classified_document |
| Financial | sec_filing, annual_report, financial_statement, audit_report |
| Scientific | research_paper, academic_journal, expert_testimony |
| Media | satellite_imagery, photograph, video_footage, audio_recording |
| Leaked | leaked_document, leaked_email, leaked_memo |
Custom source types can be created per account via Type Management (sidebar > Tools > Type Management).