Changes for page FAQ
Last modified by Robert Schaub on 2026/02/08 08:32
To version 1.5
edited by Robert Schaub
on 2026/02/08 08:31
on 2026/02/08 08:31
Change comment:
Update document after refactoring.
Summary
-
Page properties (2 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)
Details
- Page properties
-
- Parent
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@ 1 -FactHarbor.Specification.WebHome 1 +Archive.FactHarbor 2026\.02\.08.Specification.WebHome - Content
-
... ... @@ -1,13 +1,20 @@ 1 1 = Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) = 2 + 2 2 Common questions about FactHarbor's design, functionality, and approach. 4 + 3 3 == 1. How do claims get evaluated in FactHarbor? == 6 + 4 4 === 1.1 User Submission === 8 + 5 5 **Who**: Anyone can submit claims 6 6 **Process**: User submits claim text + source URLs 7 7 **Speed**: Typically <20 seconds to verdict 12 + 8 8 === 1.2 AKEL Processing (Automated) === 14 + 9 9 **What**: AI Knowledge Extraction Layer analyzes claim 10 10 **Steps**: 17 + 11 11 * Parse claim into testable components 12 12 * Extract evidence from provided sources 13 13 * Score source credibility ... ... @@ -16,9 +16,12 @@ 16 16 * Publish automatically 17 17 **Authority**: AKEL makes all content decisions 18 18 **Scale**: Can process millions of claims 26 + 19 19 === 1.3 Continuous Improvement (Human Role) === 28 + 20 20 **What**: Humans improve the system, not individual verdicts 21 21 **Activities**: 31 + 22 22 * Monitor aggregate performance metrics 23 23 * Identify systematic errors 24 24 * Propose algorithm improvements ... ... @@ -26,8 +26,11 @@ 26 26 * Test changes before deployment 27 27 **NOT**: Reviewing individual claims for approval 28 28 **Focus**: Fix the system, not the data 39 + 29 29 === 1.4 Exception Handling === 41 + 30 30 **When AKEL flags for review**: 43 + 31 31 * Low confidence verdict 32 32 * Detected manipulation attempt 33 33 * Unusual pattern requiring attention ... ... @@ -36,14 +36,19 @@ 36 36 * Takes action on abuse/manipulation 37 37 * Proposes detection improvements 38 38 * Does NOT override verdicts 52 + 39 39 === 1.5 Why This Model Works === 54 + 40 40 **Scale**: Automation handles volume humans cannot 41 41 **Consistency**: Same rules applied uniformly 42 42 **Transparency**: Algorithms can be audited 43 43 **Improvement**: Systematic fixes benefit all claims 59 + 44 44 == 2. What prevents FactHarbor from becoming another echo chamber? == 61 + 45 45 FactHarbor includes multiple safeguards against echo chambers and filter bubbles: 46 46 **Mandatory Contradiction Search**: 64 + 47 47 * AI must actively search for counter-evidence, not just confirmations 48 48 * System checks for echo chamber patterns in source clusters 49 49 * Flags tribal or ideological source clustering ... ... @@ -64,16 +64,19 @@ 64 64 * Multiple independent nodes with different perspectives 65 65 * No single entity controls "the truth" 66 66 * Cross-node contradiction detection 85 + 67 67 == 3. How does FactHarbor handle claims that are "true in one context but false in another"? == 87 + 68 68 This is exactly what FactHarbor is designed for: 69 69 **Scenarios capture contexts**: 90 + 70 70 * Each scenario defines specific boundaries, definitions, and assumptions 71 71 * The same claim can have different verdicts in different scenarios 72 72 * Example: "Coffee is healthy" depends on: 73 - ** Definition of "healthy" (reduces disease risk? improves mood? affects specific conditions?)74 - ** Population (adults? pregnant women? people with heart conditions?)75 - ** Consumption level (1 cup/day? 5 cups/day?)76 - ** Time horizon (short-term? long-term?)94 +** Definition of "healthy" (reduces disease risk? improves mood? affects specific conditions?) 95 +** Population (adults? pregnant women? people with heart conditions?) 96 +** Consumption level (1 cup/day? 5 cups/day?) 97 +** Time horizon (short-term? long-term?) 77 77 **Truth Landscape**: 78 78 * Shows all scenarios and their verdicts side-by-side 79 79 * Users see *why* interpretations differ ... ... @@ -82,8 +82,11 @@ 82 82 * Every scenario states its assumptions clearly 83 83 * Users can compare how changing assumptions changes conclusions 84 84 * Makes context-dependence visible, not hidden 106 + 85 85 == 4. What makes FactHarbor different from traditional fact-checking sites? == 108 + 86 86 **Traditional Fact-Checking**: 110 + 87 87 * Binary verdicts: True / Mostly True / False 88 88 * Single interpretation chosen by fact-checker 89 89 * Often hides legitimate contextual differences ... ... @@ -95,8 +95,11 @@ 95 95 * **Version history**: Shows how understanding evolves 96 96 * **Contradiction search**: Actively seeks opposing evidence 97 97 * **Federated**: No single authority controls truth 122 + 98 98 == 5. How do you prevent manipulation or coordinated misinformation campaigns? == 124 + 99 99 **Quality Gates**: 126 + 100 100 * Automated checks before AI-generated content publishes 101 101 * Source quality verification 102 102 * Mandatory contradiction search ... ... @@ -119,9 +119,12 @@ 119 119 * No single point of control 120 120 * Cross-node contradiction detection 121 121 * Trust model prevents malicious node influence 149 + 122 122 == 6. What happens when new evidence contradicts an existing verdict? == 151 + 123 123 FactHarbor is designed for evolving knowledge: 124 124 **Automatic Re-evaluation**: 154 + 125 125 1. New evidence arrives 126 126 2. System detects affected scenarios and verdicts 127 127 3. AKEL proposes updated verdicts ... ... @@ -129,6 +129,7 @@ 129 129 5. New verdict version published 130 130 6. Old versions remain accessible 131 131 **Version History**: 162 + 132 132 * Every verdict has complete history 133 133 * Users can see "as of date X, what did we know?" 134 134 * Timeline shows how understanding evolved ... ... @@ -140,9 +140,12 @@ 140 140 * Users following claims are notified of updates 141 141 * Can compare old vs new verdicts 142 142 * Can see which evidence changed conclusions 174 + 143 143 == 7. Who can submit claims to FactHarbor? == 176 + 144 144 **Anyone** - even without login: 145 145 **Readers** (no login required): 179 + 146 146 * Browse and search all published content 147 147 * Submit text for analysis 148 148 * New claims added automatically unless duplicates exist ... ... @@ -153,6 +153,7 @@ 153 153 * Suggest scenarios 154 154 * Participate in discussions 155 155 **Workflow**: 190 + 156 156 1. User submits text (as Reader or Contributor) 157 157 2. AKEL extracts claims 158 158 3. Checks for existing duplicates ... ... @@ -161,9 +161,12 @@ 161 161 6. Generates scenarios (draft) 162 162 7. Runs quality gates 163 163 8. Publishes as AI-Generated (Mode 2) if passes 199 + 164 164 == 8. What are "risk tiers" and why do they matter? == 201 + 165 165 Risk tiers determine review requirements and publication workflow: 166 166 **Tier A (High Risk)**: 204 + 167 167 * **Domains**: Medical, legal, elections, safety, security, major financial 168 168 * **Publication**: AI can publish with warnings, expert review required for "AKEL-Generated" status 169 169 * **Audit rate**: Recommendation 30-50% ... ... @@ -182,8 +182,11 @@ 182 182 * AKEL suggests tier based on domain, keywords, impact 183 183 * Moderators and Trusted Contributors can override 184 184 * Risk tiers reviewed based on audit outcomes 223 + 185 185 == 9. How does federation work and why is it important? == 225 + 186 186 **Federation Model**: 227 + 187 187 * Multiple independent FactHarbor nodes 188 188 * Each node has own database, AKEL, governance 189 189 * Nodes exchange claims, scenarios, evidence, verdicts ... ... @@ -195,6 +195,7 @@ 195 195 * **Specialization**: Domain-focused nodes (health, energy, etc.) 196 196 * **Trust diversity**: Multiple perspectives, not single truth source 197 197 **How Nodes Exchange Data**: 239 + 198 198 1. Local node creates versions 199 199 2. Builds signed bundle 200 200 3. Pushes to trusted neighbor nodes ... ... @@ -202,12 +202,16 @@ 202 202 5. Accept or branch versions 203 203 6. Local re-evaluation if needed 204 204 **Trust Model**: 247 + 205 205 * Trusted nodes → auto-import 206 206 * Neutral nodes → import with review 207 207 * Untrusted nodes → manual only 251 + 208 208 == 10. Can experts disagree in FactHarbor? == 253 + 209 209 **Yes - and that's a feature, not a bug**: 210 210 **Multiple Scenarios**: 256 + 211 211 * Trusted Contributors can create different scenarios with different assumptions 212 212 * Each scenario gets its own verdict 213 213 * Users see *why* experts disagree (different definitions, boundaries, evidence weighting) ... ... @@ -224,9 +224,12 @@ 224 224 * Different nodes can have different expert conclusions 225 225 * Cross-node branching allowed 226 226 * Users can see how conclusions vary across nodes 273 + 227 227 == 11. What prevents AI from hallucinating or making up facts? == 275 + 228 228 **Multiple Safeguards**: 229 229 **Quality Gate 4: Structural Integrity**: 278 + 230 230 * Fact-checking against sources 231 231 * No hallucinations allowed 232 232 * Logic chain must be valid and traceable ... ... @@ -249,9 +249,12 @@ 249 249 * Tier A marked as highest risk 250 250 * Audit sampling catches errors 251 251 * Community can flag issues 301 + 252 252 == 12. How does FactHarbor make money / is it sustainable? == 303 + 253 253 [ToDo: Business model and sustainability to be defined] 254 254 Potential models under consideration: 306 + 255 255 * Non-profit foundation with grants and donations 256 256 * Institutional subscriptions (universities, research organizations, media) 257 257 * API access for third-party integrations ... ... @@ -258,25 +258,37 @@ 258 258 * Premium features for power users 259 259 * Federated node hosting services 260 260 Core principle: **Public benefit** mission takes priority over profit. 313 + 261 261 == 13. Related Pages == 315 + 262 262 * [[Requirements (Roles)>>FactHarbor.Specification.Requirements.WebHome]] 263 -* [[AKEL (AI Knowledge Extraction Layer)>>FactHarbor.Specification.AI Knowledge Extraction Layer (AKEL).WebHome]] 264 -* [[Automation>>FactHarbor.Specification.Automation.WebHome]] 317 +* [[AKEL (AI Knowledge Extraction Layer)>>Archive.FactHarbor 2026\.02\.08.Specification.AI Knowledge Extraction Layer (AKEL).WebHome]] 318 +* [[Automation>>Archive.FactHarbor 2026\.02\.08.Specification.Automation.WebHome]] 265 265 * [[Federation & Decentralization>>FactHarbor.Specification.Federation & Decentralization.WebHome]] 266 -* [[Mission & Purpose>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Core Problems FactHarbor Solves.WebHome]] 320 +* [[Mission & Purpose>>Archive.FactHarbor 2026\.02\.08.Organisation.Core Problems FactHarbor Solves.WebHome]] 321 + 267 267 == 20. Glossary / Key Terms == 323 + 268 268 === Phase 0 vs POC v1 === 325 + 269 269 These terms refer to the same stage of FactHarbor's development: 327 + 270 270 * **Phase 0** - Organisational perspective: Pre-alpha stage with founder-led governance 271 271 * **POC v1** - Technical perspective: Proof of Concept demonstrating AI-generated publication 272 272 Both describe the current development stage where the platform is being built and initially validated. 331 + 273 273 === Beta 0 === 333 + 274 274 The next development stage after POC, featuring: 335 + 275 275 * External testers 276 276 * Basic federation experiments 277 277 * Enhanced automation 339 + 278 278 === Release 1.0 === 341 + 279 279 The first public release featuring: 343 + 280 280 * Full federation support 281 281 * 2000+ concurrent users 282 282 * Production-grade infrastructure