Skip to Content

Changes for page User Needs

Last modified by Robert Schaub on 2026/02/08 08:27
From version 2.1
edited by Robert Schaub
on 2025/12/19 09:56
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 4.3
edited by Robert Schaub
on 2026/01/20 20:24
Change comment: Renamed back-links.

Summary

Details

Page properties
Parent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -FactHarbor.Specification.Requirements.WebHome
1 +Archive.FactHarbor V0\.9\.50 Plus (Prev Rel).Specification.Requirements.WebHome
Content
... ... @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
9 9  == 1. Core Reading & Discovery ==
10 10  
11 11  === UN-1: Trust Assessment at a Glance ===
12 +
12 12  **As** an article reader (any content type),
13 13  **I want** to see a trust score and overall verdict summary at a glance,
14 14  **so that** I can quickly decide if the content is worth my time to read in detail.
... ... @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
16 16  **Maps to**: FR7 (Automated Verdicts), NFR3 (Transparency)
17 17  
18 18  === UN-2: Claim Extraction and Verification ===
20 +
19 19  **As** an article reader,
20 20  **I want** to see the key factual claims extracted from content with verification verdicts (likelihood ranges + uncertainty ratings) for each relevant scenario,
21 21  **so that** I can distinguish proven facts from speculation and understand context-dependent truth.
... ... @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
23 23  **Maps to**: FR1 (Claim Intake), FR4 (Scenario Generation), FR7 (Automated Verdicts)
24 24  
25 25  === UN-3: Article Summary with FactHarbor Analysis Summary ===
28 +
26 26  **As** an article reader,
27 27  **I want** to see an article summary (the document's position, key claims, and reasoning) side-by-side with FactHarbor's analysis summary (source credibility assessment, claim-by-claim verdicts, methodology evaluation, and overall quality verdict),
28 28  **so that** I can quickly understand both what the document claims and FactHarbor's complete analysis of its credibility without reading the full detailed report.
... ... @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@
39 39  **Credibility:** Very High (peer-reviewed expert consensus)
40 40  
41 41  === The Big Picture ===
45 +
42 42  **Old belief:** "A glass of wine is good for your heart"
43 43  **New position:** We're no longer sure that's true
44 44  
... ... @@ -50,9 +50,11 @@
50 50  |None|(% style="color:green" %)✅ **Don't start drinking for heart health**
51 51  
52 52  === Why the Shift? ===
57 +
53 53  Newer genetic studies (Mendelian randomization) found **no evidence** that moderate drinking protects the heart. The apparent benefits in older studies were likely due to lifestyle differences and methodological bias.
54 54  
55 55  === AHA Bottom Line ===
61 +
56 56  (% class="box" %)
57 57  (((
58 58  If you don't drink, don't start. If you do drink, keep it to ≤2/day (men) or ≤1/day (women). Focus on proven healthy behaviors instead—exercise, diet, not smoking.
... ... @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@
65 65  **Document:** AHA Scientific Statement on Alcohol and Cardiovascular Disease (2025)
66 66  
67 67  === Source Assessment ===
74 +
68 68  **Credibility:** (% style="color:green" %)**VERY HIGH**(%%) – Official AHA statement, peer-reviewed, expert panel, published in top journal (//Circulation//)
69 69  
70 70  === Analysis Findings ===
... ... @@ -96,6 +96,7 @@
96 96  **Key Elements of Two-Panel Layout**:
97 97  
98 98  **Left Panel (Article Summary)**:
106 +
99 99  * Document title and source
100 100  * Source credibility (document's own authority)
101 101  * "The Big Picture" - old belief vs. new position
... ... @@ -104,6 +104,7 @@
104 104  * "Bottom Line" - document's conclusion
105 105  
106 106  **Right Panel (FactHarbor Analysis Summary)**:
115 +
107 107  * FactHarbor's source assessment (independent credibility check)
108 108  * Claim-by-claim analysis with verdicts and confidence scores
109 109  * Assessment of methodology (strengths/limitations)
... ... @@ -113,6 +113,7 @@
113 113  **Design Principle**: User sees **what they claim** and **FactHarbor's complete analysis** side-by-side without scrolling.
114 114  
115 115  === UN-4: Social Media Fact-Checking ===
125 +
116 116  **As** a social media user,
117 117  **I want** to check claims in posts before sharing,
118 118  **so that** I can avoid spreading misinformation.
... ... @@ -119,9 +119,39 @@
119 119  
120 120  **Maps to**: FR1 (Claim Intake), FR7 (Automated Verdicts), NFR1 (Performance - fast processing)
121 121  
132 +=== UN-17: In-Article Claim Highlighting ===
133 +
134 +**As** a reader viewing an article,
135 +**I want** to see factual claims highlighted with color-coded credibility indicators (green for well-supported, yellow for uncertain, red for refuted),
136 +**so that** I can immediately identify which statements are trustworthy and which require skepticism without interrupting my reading flow.
137 +
138 +**Maps to**: FR7 (Automated Verdicts), FR13 (In-Article Claim Highlighting), NFR1 (Performance - real-time highlighting)
139 +
140 +==== Visual Concept ====
141 +
142 +When reading an article on FactHarbor:
143 +
144 +(% style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#f5f5f5; padding:10px; display:block;" %)
145 +(((
146 +Regular article text flows normally...
147 +
148 +(% style="background-color:#90EE90; padding:2px 5px;" %)This claim is well-supported by evidence(%%) and you can continue reading...
149 +
150 +More context and explanation...
151 +
152 +(% style="background-color:#FFD700; padding:2px 5px;" %)This claim is uncertain with conflicting evidence(%%) but the article continues...
153 +
154 +Additional information...
155 +
156 +(% style="background-color:#FFB6C6; padding:2px 5px;" %)This claim has been refuted by research(%%) and understanding that helps readers...
157 +)))
158 +
159 +**Hover/Click on any highlighted claim** → See verdict, confidence score, and evidence summary
160 +
122 122  == 2. Source Tracing & Credibility ==
123 123  
124 124  === UN-5: Source Provenance and Track Records ===
164 +
125 125  **As** an article reader,
126 126  **I want** to trace each piece of evidence back to its original source and see that source's historical track record,
127 127  **so that** I can assess the reliability of the information chain and learn which sources are consistently trustworthy.
... ... @@ -129,6 +129,7 @@
129 129  **Maps to**: FR5 (Evidence Linking), Section 4.1 (Source Requirements - track record system)
130 130  
131 131  === UN-6: Publisher Reliability History ===
172 +
132 132  **As** an article reader,
133 133  **I want** to see historical accuracy track records for sources and publishers,
134 134  **so that** I can learn which outlets are consistently reliable over time.
... ... @@ -138,6 +138,7 @@
138 138  == 3. Understanding the Analysis ==
139 139  
140 140  === UN-7: Evidence Transparency ===
182 +
141 141  **As** a skeptical reader,
142 142  **I want** to see the evidence and reasoning behind each verdict,
143 143  **so that** I can judge whether I agree with the assessment and form my own conclusions.
... ... @@ -145,6 +145,7 @@
145 145  **Maps to**: FR5 (Evidence Linking), NFR3 (Transparency)
146 146  
147 147  === UN-8: Understanding Disagreement and Consensus ===
190 +
148 148  **As** an article reader,
149 149  **I want** to see which scenarios have strong supporting evidence versus which have conflicting evidence or high uncertainty,
150 150  **so that** I can understand where legitimate disagreement exists versus where consensus is clear.
... ... @@ -152,6 +152,7 @@
152 152  **Maps to**: FR6 (Scenario Comparison), FR7 (Automated Verdicts - uncertainty factors), AKEL Gate 2 (Contradiction Search)
153 153  
154 154  === UN-9: Methodology Transparency ===
198 +
155 155  **As** an article reader,
156 156  **I want** to understand how likelihood ranges and confidence scores are calculated,
157 157  **so that** I can trust the verification process itself.
... ... @@ -161,6 +161,7 @@
161 161  == 4. Pattern Recognition & Learning ==
162 162  
163 163  === UN-10: Manipulation Tactics Detection ===
208 +
164 164  **As** an article reader,
165 165  **I want** to see common manipulation tactics or logical fallacies identified in content,
166 166  **so that** I can recognize them elsewhere and become a more critical consumer of information.
... ... @@ -168,6 +168,7 @@
168 168  **Maps to**: AKEL (Bubble Detection), Section 5 (Automated Risk Scoring)
169 169  
170 170  === UN-11: Filtered Research ===
216 +
171 171  **As** a researcher,
172 172  **I want** to filter content by verification status, confidence levels, and source quality,
173 173  **so that** I can work only with reliable information appropriate for my research needs.
... ... @@ -177,6 +177,7 @@
177 177  == 5. Taking Action ==
178 178  
179 179  === UN-12: Submit Unchecked Claims ===
226 +
180 180  **As** a reader who finds unchecked claims,
181 181  **I want** to submit them for verification,
182 182  **so that** I can help expand fact-checking coverage and contribute to the knowledge base.
... ... @@ -184,6 +184,7 @@
184 184  **Maps to**: FR1 (Claim Intake), Section 1.1 (Reader role)
185 185  
186 186  === UN-13: Cite FactHarbor Verdicts ===
234 +
187 187  **As** a content creator,
188 188  **I want** to cite FactHarbor verdicts when sharing content,
189 189  **so that** I can add credibility to what I publish and help my audience distinguish fact from speculation.
... ... @@ -193,6 +193,7 @@
193 193  == 6. Professional Use ==
194 194  
195 195  === UN-14: API Access for Integration ===
244 +
196 196  **As** a journalist/researcher,
197 197  **I want** API access to verification data and claim histories,
198 198  **so that** I can integrate fact-checking into my professional workflow without manual lookups.
... ... @@ -202,6 +202,7 @@
202 202  == 7. Understanding Evolution & Trust Labels ==
203 203  
204 204  === UN-15: Verdict Evolution Timeline ===
254 +
205 205  **As** an article reader,
206 206  **I want** to see how a claim's verdict has evolved over time with clear timestamps,
207 207  **so that** I can understand whether the current assessment is stable or recently changed based on new evidence.
... ... @@ -209,6 +209,7 @@
209 209  **Maps to**: FR8 (Time Evolution), Data Model (Versioned entities), NFR3 (Transparency)
210 210  
211 211  === UN-16: AI vs. Human Review Status ===
262 +
212 212  **As** an article reader,
213 213  **I want** to know if the verdict was AI-generated, human-reviewed, or expert-validated,
214 214  **so that** I can gauge the appropriate level of trust and understand the review process used.
... ... @@ -227,16 +227,17 @@
227 227  |(% style="width:10%" %)FR4|(% style="width:35%" %)Scenario Generation|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-2, UN-3
228 228  |(% style="width:10%" %)FR5|(% style="width:35%" %)Evidence Linking|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-5, UN-7
229 229  |(% style="width:10%" %)FR6|(% style="width:35%" %)Scenario Comparison|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-3, UN-8
230 -|(% style="width:10%" %)FR7|(% style="width:35%" %)Automated Verdicts|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-1, UN-2, UN-3, UN-4, UN-13
281 +|(% style="width:10%" %)FR7|(% style="width:35%" %)Automated Verdicts|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-1, UN-2, UN-3, UN-4, UN-13, UN-17
231 231  |(% style="width:10%" %)FR8|(% style="width:35%" %)Time Evolution|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-15
232 232  |(% style="width:10%" %)FR11|(% style="width:35%" %)Audit Trail|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-14, UN-16
233 233  |(% style="width:10%" %)FR12|(% style="width:35%" %)Two-Panel Summary View|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-3
285 +|(% style="width:10%" %)FR13|(% style="width:35%" %)In-Article Claim Highlighting|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-17
234 234  
235 235  === 8.2 Non-Functional Requirements Coverage ===
236 236  
237 237  (% style="width:100%" %)
238 238  |=(% style="width:10%" %)NFR#|=(% style="width:35%" %)Requirement|=(% style="width:55%" %)Fulfills User Needs
239 -|(% style="width:10%" %)NFR1|(% style="width:35%" %)Performance|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-4 (fast fact-checking), UN-11 (responsive filtering)
291 +|(% style="width:10%" %)NFR1|(% style="width:35%" %)Performance|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-4 (fast fact-checking), UN-11 (responsive filtering), UN-17 (real-time highlighting)
240 240  |(% style="width:10%" %)NFR2|(% style="width:35%" %)Scalability|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-14 (API access at scale)
241 241  |(% style="width:10%" %)NFR3|(% style="width:35%" %)Transparency|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-1, UN-7, UN-9, UN-13, UN-15
242 242  
... ... @@ -265,6 +265,7 @@
265 265  This section identifies user needs that may emerge as the platform matures:
266 266  
267 267  **Potential Future Needs**:
320 +
268 268  * **Collaborative annotation**: Users want to discuss verdicts with others
269 269  * **Personal tracking**: Users want to track claims they're following
270 270  * **Custom alerts**: Users want notifications when tracked claims are updated
... ... @@ -272,6 +272,7 @@
272 272  * **Comparative analysis**: Users want to compare how different fact-checkers rate the same claim
273 273  
274 274  **When to address**: These needs should be considered when:
328 +
275 275  1. User feedback explicitly requests them
276 276  2. Usage metrics show users attempting these workflows
277 277  3. Competitive analysis shows these as differentiators
... ... @@ -283,5 +283,5 @@
283 283  * [[Requirements>>FactHarbor.Specification.Requirements.WebHome]] - Parent page with roles, rules, and functional requirements
284 284  * [[Architecture>>FactHarbor.Specification.Architecture.WebHome]] - How requirements are implemented
285 285  * [[Data Model>>FactHarbor.Specification.Data Model.WebHome]] - Data structures supporting user needs
286 -* [[AKEL (AI Knowledge Extraction Layer)>>FactHarbor.Specification.AI Knowledge Extraction Layer (AKEL).WebHome]] - AI system fulfilling automation needs
340 +* [[AKEL (AI Knowledge Extraction Layer)>>Archive.FactHarbor.Specification.AI Knowledge Extraction Layer (AKEL).WebHome]] - AI system fulfilling automation needs
287 287  * [[Workflows>>FactHarbor.Specification.Workflows.WebHome]] - User interaction workflows