Changes for page User Needs

Summary

• Page properties (2 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Parent

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-Archive.FactHarbor V0\.9\.50 Plus (Prev Rel).Specification.Requirements.WebHome
	1	+FactHarbor.Specification.Requirements.WebHome

Content

...	...	@@ -9,7 +9,6 @@
9	9	== 1. Core Reading & Discovery ==
10	10
11	11	=== UN-1: Trust Assessment at a Glance ===
12		-
13	13	**As** an article reader (any content type),
14	14	**I want** to see a trust score and overall verdict summary at a glance,
15	15	**so that** I can quickly decide if the content is worth my time to read in detail.
...	...	@@ -17,7 +17,6 @@
17	17	**Maps to**: FR7 (Automated Verdicts), NFR3 (Transparency)
18	18
19	19	=== UN-2: Claim Extraction and Verification ===
20		-
21	21	**As** an article reader,
22	22	**I want** to see the key factual claims extracted from content with verification verdicts (likelihood ranges + uncertainty ratings) for each relevant scenario,
23	23	**so that** I can distinguish proven facts from speculation and understand context-dependent truth.
...	...	@@ -24,105 +24,14 @@
24	24
25	25	**Maps to**: FR1 (Claim Intake), FR4 (Scenario Generation), FR7 (Automated Verdicts)
26	26
27		-=== UN-3: Article Summary with FactHarbor Analysis Summary ===
28		-
	25	+=== UN-3: Summary with Verdict Context ===
29	29	**As** an article reader,
30		-**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),
31		-**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.
	27	+**I want** to see a concise summary of the article's main claims alongside verdict summaries for each scenario,
	28	+**so that** I can quickly understand both what is claimed and how credible those claims are under different interpretations.
32	32
33		-**Maps to**: FR7 (Automated Verdicts), FR6 (Scenario Comparison), FR12 (Two-Panel Summary View - Article Summary with FactHarbor Analysis Summary)
	30	+**Maps to**: FR7 (Automated Verdicts), FR6 (Scenario Comparison)
34	34
35		-==== Example: Two-Panel Summary Layout ====
36		-
37		-|=**ARTICLE SUMMARY**|=**FACTHARBOR ANALYSIS SUMMARY**
38		-|(((
39		-**FactHarbor Summary: AHA Alcohol & Heart Health Statement (2025)**
40		-
41		-**Source:** American Heart Association Scientific Statement, //Circulation//, June 2025
42		-**Credibility:** Very High (peer-reviewed expert consensus)
43		-
44		-=== The Big Picture ===
45		-
46		-**Old belief:** "A glass of wine is good for your heart"
47		-**New position:** We're no longer sure that's true
48		-
49		-=== Key Findings ===
50		-
51		-|=**Drinking Level**|=**Verdict**
52		-|Heavy (≥3 drinks/day)|(% style="color:red" %)❌ **Harmful** – consistent across ALL studies
53		-|Moderate (1-2 drinks/day)|(% style="color:orange" %)❓ **Uncertain** – benefits may have been overstated
54		-|None|(% style="color:green" %)✅ **Don't start drinking for heart health**
55		-
56		-=== Why the Shift? ===
57		-
58		-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.
59		-
60		-=== AHA Bottom Line ===
61		-
62		-(% class="box" %)
63		-(((
64		-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		-
66		-//The "wine for heart health" era appears to be over.//
67		-)))
68		-)))|(((
69		-**FactHarbor Analysis Summary**
70		-
71		-**Document:** AHA Scientific Statement on Alcohol and Cardiovascular Disease (2025)
72		-
73		-=== Source Assessment ===
74		-
75		-**Credibility:** (% style="color:green" %)**VERY HIGH**(%%) – Official AHA statement, peer-reviewed, expert panel, published in top journal (//Circulation//)
76		-
77		-=== Analysis Findings ===
78		-
79		-|=**Claim in Document**|=**FactHarbor Verdict**|=**Confidence**
80		-|Heavy drinking harms heart health|(% style="color:green" %)**STRONGLY SUPPORTED**|(% style="color:green" %)**95%**
81		-|Moderate drinking benefits uncertain|(% style="color:green" %)**WELL SUPPORTED**|(% style="color:green" %)**85%**
82		-|Prior "cardioprotective" claims overstated|(% style="color:green" %)**SUPPORTED**|(% style="color:green" %)**80%**
83		-|More research needed|**APPROPRIATE**|N/A
84		-
85		-=== Assessment ===
86		-
87		-(% style="color:green" %)✅(%%) **Strengths:** Transparent about methodological limitations, incorporates newer Mendelian randomization evidence, appropriately cautious, avoids overstatement
88		-
89		-(% style="color:green" %)✅(%%) **Methodology:** Sound synthesis of observational and genetic evidence
90		-
91		-(% style="color:orange" %)⚠️(%%) **Limitation:** Still relies heavily on observational data; RCT evidence limited
92		-
93		-=== Verdict on the Statement Itself ===
94		-
95		-(% class="box successmessage" %)
96		-(((
97		-**WELL-SUPPORTED SCIENTIFIC SYNTHESIS** – The AHA statement is credible, balanced, and appropriately reflects the current state of evidence. It correctly signals a shift away from previous assumptions about moderate drinking benefits without overclaiming in either direction.
98		-)))
99		-
100		-**Analysis ID:** FH-AHA-ALCO-2025-12-17
101		-)))
102		-
103		-**Key Elements of Two-Panel Layout**:
104		-
105		-**Left Panel (Article Summary)**:
106		-
107		-* Document title and source
108		-* Source credibility (document's own authority)
109		-* "The Big Picture" - old belief vs. new position
110		-* "Key Findings" - document's main claims in structured format
111		-* "Why the Shift?" - document's reasoning
112		-* "Bottom Line" - document's conclusion
113		-
114		-**Right Panel (FactHarbor Analysis Summary)**:
115		-
116		-* FactHarbor's source assessment (independent credibility check)
117		-* Claim-by-claim analysis with verdicts and confidence scores
118		-* Assessment of methodology (strengths/limitations)
119		-* Overall verdict on the document itself
120		-* Analysis ID for reference
121		-
122		-**Design Principle**: User sees **what they claim** and **FactHarbor's complete analysis** side-by-side without scrolling.
123		-
124	124	=== UN-4: Social Media Fact-Checking ===
125		-
126	126	**As** a social media user,
127	127	**I want** to check claims in posts before sharing,
128	128	**so that** I can avoid spreading misinformation.
...	...	@@ -129,39 +129,9 @@
129	129
130	130	**Maps to**: FR1 (Claim Intake), FR7 (Automated Verdicts), NFR1 (Performance - fast processing)
131	131
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		-
161	161	== 2. Source Tracing & Credibility ==
162	162
163	163	=== UN-5: Source Provenance and Track Records ===
164		-
165	165	**As** an article reader,
166	166	**I want** to trace each piece of evidence back to its original source and see that source's historical track record,
167	167	**so that** I can assess the reliability of the information chain and learn which sources are consistently trustworthy.
...	...	@@ -169,7 +169,6 @@
169	169	**Maps to**: FR5 (Evidence Linking), Section 4.1 (Source Requirements - track record system)
170	170
171	171	=== UN-6: Publisher Reliability History ===
172		-
173	173	**As** an article reader,
174	174	**I want** to see historical accuracy track records for sources and publishers,
175	175	**so that** I can learn which outlets are consistently reliable over time.
...	...	@@ -179,7 +179,6 @@
179	179	== 3. Understanding the Analysis ==
180	180
181	181	=== UN-7: Evidence Transparency ===
182		-
183	183	**As** a skeptical reader,
184	184	**I want** to see the evidence and reasoning behind each verdict,
185	185	**so that** I can judge whether I agree with the assessment and form my own conclusions.
...	...	@@ -187,7 +187,6 @@
187	187	**Maps to**: FR5 (Evidence Linking), NFR3 (Transparency)
188	188
189	189	=== UN-8: Understanding Disagreement and Consensus ===
190		-
191	191	**As** an article reader,
192	192	**I want** to see which scenarios have strong supporting evidence versus which have conflicting evidence or high uncertainty,
193	193	**so that** I can understand where legitimate disagreement exists versus where consensus is clear.
...	...	@@ -195,7 +195,6 @@
195	195	**Maps to**: FR6 (Scenario Comparison), FR7 (Automated Verdicts - uncertainty factors), AKEL Gate 2 (Contradiction Search)
196	196
197	197	=== UN-9: Methodology Transparency ===
198		-
199	199	**As** an article reader,
200	200	**I want** to understand how likelihood ranges and confidence scores are calculated,
201	201	**so that** I can trust the verification process itself.
...	...	@@ -205,7 +205,6 @@
205	205	== 4. Pattern Recognition & Learning ==
206	206
207	207	=== UN-10: Manipulation Tactics Detection ===
208		-
209	209	**As** an article reader,
210	210	**I want** to see common manipulation tactics or logical fallacies identified in content,
211	211	**so that** I can recognize them elsewhere and become a more critical consumer of information.
...	...	@@ -213,7 +213,6 @@
213	213	**Maps to**: AKEL (Bubble Detection), Section 5 (Automated Risk Scoring)
214	214
215	215	=== UN-11: Filtered Research ===
216		-
217	217	**As** a researcher,
218	218	**I want** to filter content by verification status, confidence levels, and source quality,
219	219	**so that** I can work only with reliable information appropriate for my research needs.
...	...	@@ -223,7 +223,6 @@
223	223	== 5. Taking Action ==
224	224
225	225	=== UN-12: Submit Unchecked Claims ===
226		-
227	227	**As** a reader who finds unchecked claims,
228	228	**I want** to submit them for verification,
229	229	**so that** I can help expand fact-checking coverage and contribute to the knowledge base.
...	...	@@ -231,7 +231,6 @@
231	231	**Maps to**: FR1 (Claim Intake), Section 1.1 (Reader role)
232	232
233	233	=== UN-13: Cite FactHarbor Verdicts ===
234		-
235	235	**As** a content creator,
236	236	**I want** to cite FactHarbor verdicts when sharing content,
237	237	**so that** I can add credibility to what I publish and help my audience distinguish fact from speculation.
...	...	@@ -241,7 +241,6 @@
241	241	== 6. Professional Use ==
242	242
243	243	=== UN-14: API Access for Integration ===
244		-
245	245	**As** a journalist/researcher,
246	246	**I want** API access to verification data and claim histories,
247	247	**so that** I can integrate fact-checking into my professional workflow without manual lookups.
...	...	@@ -251,7 +251,6 @@
251	251	== 7. Understanding Evolution & Trust Labels ==
252	252
253	253	=== UN-15: Verdict Evolution Timeline ===
254		-
255	255	**As** an article reader,
256	256	**I want** to see how a claim's verdict has evolved over time with clear timestamps,
257	257	**so that** I can understand whether the current assessment is stable or recently changed based on new evidence.
...	...	@@ -259,7 +259,6 @@
259	259	**Maps to**: FR8 (Time Evolution), Data Model (Versioned entities), NFR3 (Transparency)
260	260
261	261	=== UN-16: AI vs. Human Review Status ===
262		-
263	263	**As** an article reader,
264	264	**I want** to know if the verdict was AI-generated, human-reviewed, or expert-validated,
265	265	**so that** I can gauge the appropriate level of trust and understand the review process used.
...	...	@@ -272,45 +272,43 @@
272	272
273	273	=== 8.1 Functional Requirements Coverage ===
274	274
275		-(% style="width:100%" %)
276		-|=(% style="width:10%" %)FR#|=(% style="width:35%" %)Requirement|=(% style="width:55%" %)Fulfills User Needs
277		-|(% style="width:10%" %)FR1|(% style="width:35%" %)Claim Intake|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-2, UN-4, UN-12
278		-|(% style="width:10%" %)FR4|(% style="width:35%" %)Scenario Generation|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-2, UN-3
279		-|(% style="width:10%" %)FR5|(% style="width:35%" %)Evidence Linking|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-5, UN-7
280		-|(% style="width:10%" %)FR6|(% style="width:35%" %)Scenario Comparison|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-3, UN-8
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
282		-|(% style="width:10%" %)FR8|(% style="width:35%" %)Time Evolution|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-15
283		-|(% style="width:10%" %)FR11|(% style="width:35%" %)Audit Trail|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-14, UN-16
284		-|(% 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
	141	+| FR# | Requirement | Fulfills User Needs |
	142	+|-----|-------------|-------------------|
	143	+| FR1 | Claim Intake | UN-2, UN-4, UN-12 |
	144	+| FR4 | Scenario Generation | UN-2, UN-3 |
	145	+| FR5 | Evidence Linking | UN-5, UN-7 |
	146	+| FR6 | Scenario Comparison | UN-3, UN-8 |
	147	+| FR7 | Automated Verdicts | UN-1, UN-2, UN-3, UN-4, UN-13 |
	148	+| FR8 | Time Evolution | UN-15 |
	149	+| FR11 | Audit Trail | UN-14, UN-16 |
286	286
287	287	=== 8.2 Non-Functional Requirements Coverage ===
288	288
289		-(% style="width:100%" %)
290		-|=(% style="width:10%" %)NFR#|=(% style="width:35%" %)Requirement|=(% style="width:55%" %)Fulfills User Needs
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)
292		-|(% style="width:10%" %)NFR2|(% style="width:35%" %)Scalability|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-14 (API access at scale)
293		-|(% style="width:10%" %)NFR3|(% style="width:35%" %)Transparency|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-1, UN-7, UN-9, UN-13, UN-15
	153	+| NFR# | Requirement | Fulfills User Needs |
	154	+|------|-------------|-------------------|
	155	+| NFR1 | Performance | UN-4 (fast fact-checking), UN-11 (responsive filtering) |
	156	+| NFR2 | Scalability | UN-14 (API access at scale) |
	157	+| NFR3 | Transparency | UN-1, UN-7, UN-9, UN-13, UN-15 |
294	294
295	295	=== 8.3 AKEL System Coverage ===
296	296
297		-(% style="width:100%" %)
298		-|=(% style="width:45%" %)AKEL Component|=(% style="width:55%" %)Fulfills User Needs
299		-|(% style="width:45%" %)Quality Gates|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-9 (methodology transparency)
300		-|(% style="width:45%" %)Contradiction Search (Gate 2)|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-8 (understanding disagreement)
301		-|(% style="width:45%" %)Bubble Detection|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-10 (manipulation tactics)
302		-|(% style="width:45%" %)Publication Modes|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-16 (AI vs. human review status)
303		-|(% style="width:45%" %)Risk Tiers|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-16 (appropriate review level)
	161	+| AKEL Component | Fulfills User Needs |
	162	+|----------------|-------------------|
	163	+| Quality Gates | UN-9 (methodology transparency) |
	164	+| Contradiction Search (Gate 2) | UN-8 (understanding disagreement) |
	165	+| Bubble Detection | UN-10 (manipulation tactics) |
	166	+| Publication Modes | UN-16 (AI vs. human review status) |
	167	+| Risk Tiers | UN-16 (appropriate review level) |
304	304
305	305	=== 8.4 Data Model Coverage ===
306	306
307		-(% style="width:100%" %)
308		-|=(% style="width:45%" %)Entity|=(% style="width:55%" %)Fulfills User Needs
309		-|(% style="width:45%" %)Source (with track_record_score)|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-5, UN-6 (source reliability)
310		-|(% style="width:45%" %)Scenario|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-2, UN-3, UN-8 (context-dependent truth)
311		-|(% style="width:45%" %)Verdict (with likelihood_range, uncertainty_factors)|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-1, UN-2, UN-3, UN-8 (detailed assessment)
312		-|(% style="width:45%" %)Versioned entities|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-15 (evolution timeline)
313		-|(% style="width:45%" %)AuthorType field|(% style="width:55%" %)UN-16 (AI vs. human status)
	171	+| Entity | Fulfills User Needs |
	172	+|--------|-------------------|
	173	+| Source (with track_record_score) | UN-5, UN-6 (source reliability) |
	174	+| Scenario | UN-2, UN-3, UN-8 (context-dependent truth) |
	175	+| Verdict (with likelihood_range, uncertainty_factors) | UN-1, UN-2, UN-3, UN-8 (detailed assessment) |
	176	+| Versioned entities | UN-15 (evolution timeline) |
	177	+| AuthorType field | UN-16 (AI vs. human status) |
314	314
315	315	== 9. User Need Gaps & Future Considerations ==
316	316
...	...	@@ -317,7 +317,6 @@
317	317	This section identifies user needs that may emerge as the platform matures:
318	318
319	319	**Potential Future Needs**:
320		-
321	321	* **Collaborative annotation**: Users want to discuss verdicts with others
322	322	* **Personal tracking**: Users want to track claims they're following
323	323	* **Custom alerts**: Users want notifications when tracked claims are updated
...	...	@@ -325,7 +325,6 @@
325	325	* **Comparative analysis**: Users want to compare how different fact-checkers rate the same claim
326	326
327	327	**When to address**: These needs should be considered when:
328		-
329	329	1. User feedback explicitly requests them
330	330	2. Usage metrics show users attempting these workflows
331	331	3. Competitive analysis shows these as differentiators
...	...	@@ -334,8 +334,8 @@
334	334
335	335	== 10. Related Pages ==
336	336
337		-* [[Requirements>>Archive.FactHarbor.Specification.Requirements.WebHome]] - Parent page with roles, rules, and functional requirements
338		-* [[Architecture>>Archive.FactHarbor.Specification.Architecture.WebHome]] - How requirements are implemented
339		-* [[Data Model>>Archive.FactHarbor.Specification.Data Model.WebHome]] - Data structures supporting user needs
340		-* [[AKEL (AI Knowledge Extraction Layer)>>Archive.FactHarbor.Specification.AI Knowledge Extraction Layer (AKEL).WebHome]] - AI system fulfilling automation needs
	199	+* [[Requirements>>FactHarbor.Specification.Requirements.WebHome]] - Parent page with roles, rules, and functional requirements
	200	+* [[Architecture>>FactHarbor.Specification.Architecture.WebHome]] - How requirements are implemented
	201	+* [[Data Model>>FactHarbor.Specification.Data Model.WebHome]] - Data structures supporting user needs
	202	+* [[AKEL (AI Knowledge Extraction Layer)>>FactHarbor.Specification.AI Knowledge Extraction Layer (AKEL).WebHome]] - AI system fulfilling automation needs
341	341	* [[Workflows>>FactHarbor.Specification.Workflows.WebHome]] - User interaction workflows