Wiki source code of Specification
Last modified by Robert Schaub on 2025/12/24 20:30
Hide last authors
| author | version | line-number | content |
|---|---|---|---|
 |
2.1 | 1 | {{warning title="Version 0.9.32 (Draft)"}} |
| |
1.1 | 2 | This document describes the **Specification** of FactHarbor. It is a working draft. |
| 3 | {{/warning}} | ||
| 4 | |||
| 5 | = Specification = | ||
| 6 | |||
| 7 | This section defines the technical architecture, data models, and functional requirements of FactHarbor. | ||
| 8 | |||
| 9 | == 1. Mission == | ||
| 10 | |||
| 11 | **FactHarbor brings clarity and transparency to a world full of unclear, controversial, and misleading information by shedding light on the context, assumptions, and evidence behind claims — empowering people to better understand and judge wisely.** | ||
| 12 | |||
| 13 | == 2. Purpose == | ||
| 14 | |||
| 15 | Modern society faces a deep informational crisis: | ||
| 16 | * Misinformation spreads faster than corrections. | ||
| 17 | * High-quality evidence is buried under noise. | ||
| 18 | * Meanings shift depending on context — but this is rarely made explicit. | ||
| 19 | * Users lack tools to understand *why* information conflicts. | ||
| 20 | * Claims are evaluated without clearly defined assumptions. | ||
| 21 | |||
| 22 | FactHarbor introduces structure, transparency, and comparative reasoning. It provides: | ||
| 23 | * Multiple valid scenarios for ambiguous claims. | ||
| 24 | * Transparent assumptions, definitions, and boundaries. | ||
| 25 | * Full evidence provenance. | ||
| 26 | * Likelihood-based verdicts (one per scenario). | ||
| 27 | * Versioning and temporal change tracking. | ||
| 28 | * Hybrid AI–human collaboration. | ||
| 29 | |||
| 30 | == 3. Core Concepts == | ||
| 31 | |||
| 32 | * **Claim**: A statement needing structured interpretation. | ||
| 33 | * **Scenario**: Definitions, assumptions, boundaries, and context. | ||
| 34 | * **Evidence**: Information supporting or contradicting a scenario. | ||
| 35 | * **Verdict**: Likelihood estimate based on weighted evidence **for a specific scenario**. | ||
| 36 | * **Summary View**: User-facing overview. | ||
| 37 | * **AKEL**: AI subsystem for drafting and assistance (human supervised). | ||
| 38 | * **Federation**: Decentralized nodes hosting datasets. | ||
| 39 | * **Truth Landscape**: The aggregation of multiple scenario-dependent verdicts showing where a claim is plausible. | ||
| 40 | * **Time Evolution**: Versioning of all entities allowing historical views. | ||
| 41 | |||
| 42 | == 4. Functional Lifecycle == | ||
| 43 | |||
| 44 | The system follows a six-step lifecycle: | ||
| 45 | |||
| 46 | 1. **Claim submission**: Automatic extraction and normalisation; Cluster detection. | ||
| 47 | 2. **Scenario building**: Clarifying definitions and assumptions; AI proposals with human approval. | ||
| 48 | 3. **Evidence handling**: AI-assisted retrieval; Human assessment of reliability; Explicit scenario linking. | ||
| 49 | 4. **Verdict creation**: AI-generated draft verdicts; Human refinement; Reasoning explanations. | ||
| 50 | 5. **Public presentation**: Concise summaries; Truth Landscape comparison; Deep dives. | ||
| 51 | 6. **Time evolution**: Versioning of all entities; Re-evaluation triggers when evidence changes. | ||
| 52 | |||
| 53 | == 5. Chapters == | ||
| 54 | |||
| 55 |