Changes for page POC Requirements (POC1 & POC2)

Summary

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

Details

Page properties

Parent

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-WebHome
	1	+Test.FactHarbor.Specification.POC.WebHome

Content

...	...	@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
1	1	= POC Requirements =
2	2
3		-**Status:** ✅ Approved for Development
4		-**Version:** 2.0 (Updated after Specification Cross-Check)
	3	+**Status:** ✅ Approved for Development
	4	+**Version:** 2.0 (Updated after Specification Cross-Check)
5	5	**Goal:** Prove that AI can extract claims and determine verdicts automatically without human intervention
6	6
7	7	== 1. POC Overview ==
...	...	@@ -9,11 +9,9 @@
9	9	=== 1.1 What POC Tests ===
10	10
11	11	**Core Question:**
12		-
13	13	> Can AI automatically extract factual claims from articles and evaluate them with reasonable verdicts?
14	14
15	15	**What we're proving:**
16		-
17	17	* AI can identify factual claims from text
18	18	* AI can evaluate those claims and produce verdicts
19	19	* Output is comprehensible and useful
...	...	@@ -20,7 +20,6 @@
20	20	* Fully automated approach is viable
21	21
22	22	**What we're NOT testing:**
23		-
24	24	* Scenario generation (deferred to POC2)
25	25	* Evidence display (deferred to POC2)
26	26	* Production scalability
...	...	@@ -34,7 +34,6 @@
34	34	Scenarios are a core component of the full FactHarbor system (Claims → Scenarios → Evidence → Verdicts), but are **deliberately excluded from POC1**.
35	35
36	36	**Rationale:**
37		-
38	38	* **POC1 tests:** Can AI extract claims and generate verdicts?
39	39	* **POC2 will add:** Scenario generation and management
40	40	* **Open questions remain:** Should scenarios be separate entities? How are they sequenced with evidence gathering? What's the optimal workflow?
...	...	@@ -46,7 +46,6 @@
46	46	**No Risk:**
47	47
48	48	Scenarios are additive complexity, not foundational. Deferring them to POC2 allows:
49		-
50	50	* Faster POC1 validation
51	51	* Learning from POC1 to inform scenario design
52	52	* Iterative approach: fail fast if basic AI doesn't work
...	...	@@ -53,10 +53,14 @@
53	53	* Flexibility to adjust scenario architecture based on POC1 insights
54	54
55	55	**Full System Workflow (Future):**
56		-{{code}}Claims → Scenarios → Evidence → Verdicts{{/code}}
	51	+{{code}}
	52	+Claims → Scenarios → Evidence → Verdicts
	53	+{{/code}}
57	57
58	58	**POC1 Simplified Workflow:**
59		-{{code}}Claims → Verdicts (scenarios implicit in reasoning){{/code}}
	56	+{{code}}
	57	+Claims → Verdicts (scenarios implicit in reasoning)
	58	+{{/code}}
60	60
61	61	== 2. POC Output Specification ==
62	62
...	...	@@ -64,10 +64,9 @@
64	64
65	65	**What:** Context-aware overview that considers both individual claims AND their relationship to the article's main argument
66	66
67		-**Length:** 4-6 sentences
	66	+**Length:** 4-6 sentences
68	68
69	69	**Content (Required Elements):**
70		-
71	71	1. **Article's main thesis/claim** - What is the article trying to argue or prove?
72	72	2. **Claim count and verdicts** - How many claims analyzed, distribution of verdicts
73	73	3. **Central vs. supporting claims** - Which claims are central to the article's argument?
...	...	@@ -77,28 +77,30 @@
77	77	**Critical Innovation:**
78	78
79	79	POC1 tests whether AI can understand that **article credibility ≠ simple average of claim verdicts**. An article might:
80		-
81	81	* Make accurate supporting facts but draw unsupported conclusions
82	82	* Have one false central claim that invalidates the whole argument
83	83	* Misframe accurate information to mislead
84	84
85	85	**Good Example (Context-Aware):**
86		-{{code}}This article argues that coffee cures cancer based on its antioxidant
	83	+{{code}}
	84	+This article argues that coffee cures cancer based on its antioxidant
87	87	content. We analyzed 3 factual claims: 2 about coffee's chemical
88	88	properties are well-supported, but the main causal claim is refuted
89	89	by current evidence. The article confuses correlation with causation.
90	90	Overall assessment: MISLEADING - makes an unsupported medical claim
91		-despite citing some accurate facts.{{/code}}
	89	+despite citing some accurate facts.
	90	+{{/code}}
92	92
93	93	**Poor Example (Simple Aggregation - Don't Do This):**
94		-{{code}}This article makes 3 claims. 2 are well-supported and 1 is refuted.
95		-Overall assessment: mostly accurate (67% accurate).{{/code}}
	93	+{{code}}
	94	+This article makes 3 claims. 2 are well-supported and 1 is refuted.
	95	+Overall assessment: mostly accurate (67% accurate).
	96	+{{/code}}
96	96	↑ This misses that the refuted claim IS the article's main point!
97	97
98	98	**What POC1 Tests:**
99	99
100	100	Can AI identify and assess:
101		-
102	102	* ✅ The article's main thesis/conclusion?
103	103	* ✅ Which claims are central vs. supporting?
104	104	* ✅ Whether the evidence supports the conclusion?
...	...	@@ -107,7 +107,6 @@
107	107	**If AI Cannot Do This:**
108	108
109	109	That's valuable to learn in POC1! We'll:
110		-
111	111	* Note as limitation
112	112	* Fall back to simple aggregation with warning
113	113	* Design explicit article-level analysis for POC2
...	...	@@ -114,30 +114,30 @@
114	114
115	115	=== 2.2 Component 2: CLAIMS IDENTIFICATION ===
116	116
117		-**What:** List of factual claims extracted from article
118		-**Format:** Numbered list
119		-**Quantity:** 3-5 claims
	116	+**What:** List of factual claims extracted from article
	117	+**Format:** Numbered list
	118	+**Quantity:** 3-5 claims
120	120	**Requirements:**
121		-
122	122	* Factual claims only (not opinions/questions)
123	123	* Clearly stated
124	124	* Automatically extracted by AI
125	125
126	126	**Example:**
127		-{{code}}CLAIMS IDENTIFIED:
	125	+{{code}}
	126	+CLAIMS IDENTIFIED:
128	128
129	129	[1] Coffee reduces diabetes risk by 30%
130	130	[2] Coffee improves heart health
131	131	[3] Decaf has same benefits as regular
132		-[4] Coffee prevents Alzheimer's completely{{/code}}
	131	+[4] Coffee prevents Alzheimer's completely
	132	+{{/code}}
133	133
134	134	=== 2.3 Component 3: CLAIMS VERDICTS ===
135	135
136		-**What:** Verdict for each claim identified
137		-**Format:** Per claim structure
	136	+**What:** Verdict for each claim identified
	137	+**Format:** Per claim structure
138	138
139	139	**Required Elements:**
140		-
141	141	* **Verdict Label:** WELL-SUPPORTED / PARTIALLY SUPPORTED / UNCERTAIN / REFUTED
142	142	* **Confidence Score:** 0-100%
143	143	* **Brief Reasoning:** 1-3 sentences explaining why
...	...	@@ -144,7 +144,8 @@
144	144	* **Risk Tier:** A (High) / B (Medium) / C (Low) - for demonstration
145	145
146	146	**Example:**
147		-{{code}}VERDICTS:
	146	+{{code}}
	147	+VERDICTS:
148	148
149	149	[1] WELL-SUPPORTED (85%) [Risk: C]
150	150	Multiple studies confirm 25-30% risk reduction with regular consumption.
...	...	@@ -156,12 +156,12 @@
156	156	Some benefits overlap, but caffeine-related benefits are reduced in decaf.
157	157
158	158	[4] REFUTED (90%) [Risk: B]
159		-No evidence for complete prevention. Claim is significantly overstated.{{/code}}
	159	+No evidence for complete prevention. Claim is significantly overstated.
	160	+{{/code}}
160	160
161	161	**Risk Tier Display:**
162		-
163	163	* **Tier A (Red):** High Risk - Medical/Legal/Safety/Elections
164		-* **Tier B (Yellow):** Medium Risk - Policy/Science/Causality
	164	+* **Tier B (Yellow):** Medium Risk - Policy/Science/Causality
165	165	* **Tier C (Green):** Low Risk - Facts/Definitions/History
166	166
167	167	**Note:** Risk tier shown for demonstration purposes in POC. Full system uses risk tiers to determine review workflow.
...	...	@@ -168,16 +168,18 @@
168	168
169	169	=== 2.4 Component 4: ARTICLE SUMMARY (Optional) ===
170	170
171		-**What:** Brief summary of original article content
172		-**Length:** 3-5 sentences
	171	+**What:** Brief summary of original article content
	172	+**Length:** 3-5 sentences
173	173	**Tone:** Neutral (article's position, not FactHarbor's analysis)
174	174
175	175	**Example:**
176		-{{code}}ARTICLE SUMMARY:
	176	+{{code}}
	177	+ARTICLE SUMMARY:
177	177
178	178	Health News Today article discusses coffee benefits, citing studies
179	179	on diabetes and Alzheimer's. Author highlights research linking coffee
180		-to disease prevention. Recommends 2-3 cups daily for optimal health.{{/code}}
	181	+to disease prevention. Recommends 2-3 cups daily for optimal health.
	182	+{{/code}}
181	181
182	182	=== 2.5 Component 5: USAGE STATISTICS (Cost Tracking) ===
183	183
...	...	@@ -184,7 +184,6 @@
184	184	**What:** LLM usage metrics for cost optimization and scaling decisions
185	185
186	186	**Purpose:**
187		-
188	188	* Understand cost per analysis
189	189	* Identify optimization opportunities
190	190	* Project costs at scale
...	...	@@ -191,7 +191,8 @@
191	191	* Inform architecture decisions
192	192
193	193	**Display Format:**
194		-{{code}}USAGE STATISTICS:
	195	+{{code}}
	196	+USAGE STATISTICS:
195	195	• Article: 2,450 words (12,300 characters)
196	196	• Input tokens: 15,234
197	197	• Output tokens: 892
...	...	@@ -199,18 +199,17 @@
199	199	• Estimated cost: $0.24 USD
200	200	• Response time: 8.3 seconds
201	201	• Cost per claim: $0.048
202		-• Model: claude-sonnet-4-20250514{{/code}}
	204	+• Model: claude-sonnet-4-20250514
	205	+{{/code}}
203	203
204	204	**Why This Matters:**
205	205
206	206	At scale, LLM costs are critical:
207		-
208	208	* 10,000 articles/month ≈ $200-500/month
209	209	* 100,000 articles/month ≈ $2,000-5,000/month
210	210	* Cost optimization can reduce expenses 30-50%
211	211
212	212	**What POC1 Learns:**
213		-
214	214	* How cost scales with article length
215	215	* Prompt optimization opportunities (caching, compression)
216	216	* Output verbosity tradeoffs
...	...	@@ -218,7 +218,6 @@
218	218	* Article length limits (if needed)
219	219
220	220	**Implementation:**
221		-
222	222	* Claude API already returns usage data
223	223	* No extra API calls needed
224	224	* Display to user + log for aggregate analysis
...	...	@@ -228,8 +228,7 @@
228	228
229	229	=== 2.6 Total Output Size ===
230	230
231		-**Combined:** 220-350 words
232		-
	231	+**Combined:** ~220-350 words
233	233	* Analysis Summary (Context-Aware): 60-90 words (4-6 sentences)
234	234	* Claims Identification: 30-50 words
235	235	* Claims Verdicts: 100-150 words
...	...	@@ -244,7 +244,6 @@
244	244	The following are **explicitly excluded** from POC:
245	245
246	246	**Content Features:**
247		-
248	248	* ❌ Scenarios (deferred to POC2)
249	249	* ❌ Evidence display (supporting/opposing lists)
250	250	* ❌ Source links (clickable references)
...	...	@@ -254,7 +254,6 @@
254	254	* ❌ Risk assessment (shown but not workflow-integrated)
255	255
256	256	**Platform Features:**
257		-
258	258	* ❌ User accounts / authentication
259	259	* ❌ Saved history
260	260	* ❌ Search functionality
...	...	@@ -264,7 +264,6 @@
264	264	* ❌ Social sharing
265	265
266	266	**Technical Features:**
267		-
268	268	* ❌ Browser extensions
269	269	* ❌ Mobile apps
270	270	* ❌ API endpoints
...	...	@@ -272,7 +272,6 @@
272	272	* ❌ Export features (PDF, CSV)
273	273
274	274	**Quality Features:**
275		-
276	276	* ❌ Accessibility (WCAG compliance)
277	277	* ❌ Multilingual support
278	278	* ❌ Mobile optimization
...	...	@@ -279,7 +279,6 @@
279	279	* ❌ Media verification (images/videos)
280	280
281	281	**Production Features:**
282		-
283	283	* ❌ Security hardening
284	284	* ❌ Privacy compliance (GDPR)
285	285	* ❌ Terms of service
...	...	@@ -293,13 +293,17 @@
293	293	=== 4.1 Architecture Comparison ===
294	294
295	295	**POC Architecture (Simplified):**
296		-{{code}}User Input → Single AKEL Call → Output Display
297		- (all processing){{/code}}
	290	+{{code}}
	291	+User Input → Single AKEL Call → Output Display
	292	+ (all processing)
	293	+{{/code}}
298	298
299	299	**Full System Architecture:**
300		-{{code}}User Input → Claim Extractor → Claim Classifier → Scenario Generator
	296	+{{code}}
	297	+User Input → Claim Extractor → Claim Classifier → Scenario Generator
301	301	→ Evidence Summarizer → Contradiction Detector → Verdict Generator
302		-→ Quality Gates → Publication → Output Display{{/code}}
	299	+→ Quality Gates → Publication → Output Display
	300	+{{/code}}
303	303
304	304	**Key Differences:**
305	305
...	...	@@ -315,14 +315,12 @@
315	315	=== 4.2 Workflow Comparison ===
316	316
317	317	**POC1 Workflow:**
318		-
319	319	1. User submits text/URL
320	320	2. Single AKEL call (all processing in one prompt)
321	321	3. Display results
322		-**Total: 3 steps, 10-18 seconds**
	319	+**Total: 3 steps, ~10-18 seconds**
323	323
324	324	**Full System Workflow:**
325		-
326	326	1. **Claim Submission** (extraction, normalization, clustering)
327	327	2. **Scenario Building** (definitions, assumptions, boundaries)
328	328	3. **Evidence Handling** (retrieval, assessment, linking)
...	...	@@ -329,7 +329,7 @@
329	329	4. **Verdict Creation** (synthesis, reasoning, approval)
330	330	5. **Public Presentation** (summaries, landscapes, deep dives)
331	331	6. **Time Evolution** (versioning, re-evaluation triggers)
332		-**Total: 6 phases with quality gates, 10-30 seconds**
	328	+**Total: 6 phases with quality gates, ~10-30 seconds**
333	333
334	334	=== 4.3 Why POC is Simplified ===
335	335
...	...	@@ -352,7 +352,6 @@
352	352	=== 4.4 Gap Between POC1 and POC2/Beta ===
353	353
354	354	**What needs to be built for POC2:**
355		-
356	356	* Scenario generation component
357	357	* Evidence Model structure (full)
358	358	* Scenario-evidence linking
...	...	@@ -360,7 +360,6 @@
360	360	* Truth landscape visualization
361	361
362	362	**What needs to be built for Beta:**
363		-
364	364	* Multi-component AKEL pipeline
365	365	* Quality gate infrastructure
366	366	* Review workflow system
...	...	@@ -377,7 +377,6 @@
377	377	**Mode:** Mode 2 (AI-Generated, No Prior Human Review)
378	378
379	379	Per FactHarbor Specification Section 11 "POC v1 Behavior":
380		-
381	381	* Produces public AI-generated output
382	382	* No human approval gate
383	383	* Clear AI-Generated labeling
...	...	@@ -387,20 +387,21 @@
387	387	=== 5.2 User-Facing Labels ===
388	388
389	389	**Primary Label (top of analysis):**
390		-{{code}}╔════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
391		-║ [AI-GENERATED - POC/DEMO] ║
392		-║ ║
393		-║ This analysis was produced entirely by AI and has not ║
394		-║ been human-reviewed. Use for demonstration purposes. ║
395		-║ ║
396		-║ Source: AI/AKEL v1.0 (POC) ║
397		-║ Review Status: Not Reviewed (Proof-of-Concept) ║
398		-║ Quality Gates: 4/4 Passed (Simplified) ║
399		-║ Last Updated: [timestamp] ║
400		-╚════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝{{/code}}
	383	+{{code}}
	384	+╔════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
	385	+║ [AI-GENERATED - POC/DEMO] ║
	386	+║ ║
	387	+║ This analysis was produced entirely by AI and has not ║
	388	+║ been human-reviewed. Use for demonstration purposes. ║
	389	+║ ║
	390	+║ Source: AI/AKEL v1.0 (POC) ║
	391	+║ Review Status: Not Reviewed (Proof-of-Concept) ║
	392	+║ Quality Gates: 4/4 Passed (Simplified) ║
	393	+║ Last Updated: [timestamp] ║
	394	+╚════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝
	395	+{{/code}}
401	401
402	402	**Per-Claim Risk Labels:**
403		-
404	404	* **[Risk: A]** 🔴 High Risk (Medical/Legal/Safety)
405	405	* **[Risk: B]** 🟡 Medium Risk (Policy/Science)
406	406	* **[Risk: C]** 🟢 Low Risk (Facts/Definitions)
...	...	@@ -408,7 +408,6 @@
408	408	=== 5.3 Display Requirements ===
409	409
410	410	**Must Show:**
411		-
412	412	* AI-Generated status (prominent)
413	413	* POC/Demo disclaimer
414	414	* Risk tier per claim
...	...	@@ -417,7 +417,6 @@
417	417	* Timestamp
418	418
419	419	**Must NOT Claim:**
420		-
421	421	* Human review
422	422	* Production quality
423	423	* Medical/legal advice
...	...	@@ -441,7 +441,6 @@
441	441	Per FactHarbor Specification Section 6, all AI-generated content must pass quality gates before publication. POC implements **simplified versions** of the 4 mandatory gates.
442	442
443	443	**Full System Has 4 Gates:**
444		-
445	445	1. Source Quality
446	446	2. Contradiction Search (MANDATORY)
447	447	3. Uncertainty Quantification
...	...	@@ -448,7 +448,6 @@
448	448	4. Structural Integrity
449	449
450	450	**POC Implements Simplified Versions:**
451		-
452	452	* Focus on demonstrating concept
453	453	* Basic implementations sufficient
454	454	* Failures displayed to user (not blocking)
...	...	@@ -457,7 +457,6 @@
457	457	=== 6.2 Gate 1: Source Quality (Basic) ===
458	458
459	459	**Full System Requirements:**
460		-
461	461	* Primary sources identified and accessible
462	462	* Source reliability scored against whitelist
463	463	* Citation completeness verified
...	...	@@ -465,7 +465,6 @@
465	465	* Author credentials validated
466	466
467	467	**POC Implementation:**
468		-
469	469	* ✅ At least 2 sources found
470	470	* ✅ Sources accessible (URLs valid)
471	471	* ❌ No whitelist checking
...	...	@@ -479,7 +479,6 @@
479	479	=== 6.3 Gate 2: Contradiction Search (Basic) ===
480	480
481	481	**Full System Requirements:**
482		-
483	483	* Counter-evidence actively searched
484	484	* Reservations and limitations identified
485	485	* Alternative interpretations explored
...	...	@@ -488,7 +488,6 @@
488	488	* Academic literature (supporting AND opposing)
489	489
490	490	**POC Implementation:**
491		-
492	492	* ✅ Basic search for counter-evidence
493	493	* ✅ Identify obvious contradictions
494	494	* ❌ No comprehensive academic search
...	...	@@ -503,7 +503,6 @@
503	503	=== 6.4 Gate 3: Uncertainty Quantification (Basic) ===
504	504
505	505	**Full System Requirements:**
506		-
507	507	* Confidence scores calculated for all claims/verdicts
508	508	* Limitations explicitly stated
509	509	* Data gaps identified and disclosed
...	...	@@ -511,7 +511,6 @@
511	511	* Alternative scenarios considered
512	512
513	513	**POC Implementation:**
514		-
515	515	* ✅ Confidence scores (0-100%)
516	516	* ✅ Basic uncertainty acknowledgment
517	517	* ❌ No detailed limitation disclosure
...	...	@@ -525,7 +525,6 @@
525	525	=== 6.5 Gate 4: Structural Integrity (Basic) ===
526	526
527	527	**Full System Requirements:**
528		-
529	529	* No hallucinations detected (fact-checking against sources)
530	530	* Logic chain valid and traceable
531	531	* References accessible and verifiable
...	...	@@ -533,7 +533,6 @@
533	533	* Premises clearly stated
534	534
535	535	**POC Implementation:**
536		-
537	537	* ✅ Basic coherence check
538	538	* ✅ References accessible
539	539	* ❌ No comprehensive hallucination detection
...	...	@@ -547,20 +547,24 @@
547	547	=== 6.6 Quality Gate Display ===
548	548
549	549	**POC shows simplified status:**
550		-{{code}}Quality Gates: 4/4 Passed (Simplified)
	532	+{{code}}
	533	+Quality Gates: 4/4 Passed (Simplified)
551	551	✓ Source Quality: 3 sources found
552	552	✓ Contradiction Search: Basic search completed
553	553	✓ Uncertainty: Confidence scores assigned
554		-✓ Structural Integrity: Output coherent{{/code}}
	537	+✓ Structural Integrity: Output coherent
	538	+{{/code}}
555	555
556	556	**If any gate fails:**
557		-{{code}}Quality Gates: 3/4 Passed (Simplified)
	541	+{{code}}
	542	+Quality Gates: 3/4 Passed (Simplified)
558	558	✓ Source Quality: 3 sources found
559	559	✗ Contradiction Search: Search failed - limited evidence
560	560	✓ Uncertainty: Confidence scores assigned
561	561	✓ Structural Integrity: Output coherent
562	562
563		-Note: This analysis has limited evidence. Use with caution.{{/code}}
	548	+Note: This analysis has limited evidence. Use with caution.
	549	+{{/code}}
564	564
565	565	=== 6.7 Simplified vs. Full System ===
566	566
...	...	@@ -577,7 +577,6 @@
577	577	=== 7.1 POC AKEL (Simplified) ===
578	578
579	579	**Implementation:**
580		-
581	581	* Single Claude API call (Sonnet 4.5)
582	582	* One comprehensive prompt
583	583	* All processing in single request
...	...	@@ -585,19 +585,21 @@
585	585	* No orchestration layer
586	586
587	587	**Prompt Structure:**
588		-{{code}}Task: Analyze this article and provide:
	573	+{{code}}
	574	+Task: Analyze this article and provide:
589	589
590	590	1. Extract 3-5 factual claims
591	591	2. For each claim:
592		- - Determine verdict (WELL-SUPPORTED/PARTIALLY/UNCERTAIN/REFUTED)
593		- - Assign confidence score (0-100%)
594		- - Assign risk tier (A/B/C)
595		- - Write brief reasoning (1-3 sentences)
	578	+ - Determine verdict (WELL-SUPPORTED/PARTIALLY/UNCERTAIN/REFUTED)
	579	+ - Assign confidence score (0-100%)
	580	+ - Assign risk tier (A/B/C)
	581	+ - Write brief reasoning (1-3 sentences)
596	596	3. Generate analysis summary (3-5 sentences)
597	597	4. Generate article summary (3-5 sentences)
598	598	5. Run basic quality checks
599	599
600		-Return as structured JSON.{{/code}}
	586	+Return as structured JSON.
	587	+{{/code}}
601	601
602	602	**Processing Time:** 10-18 seconds (estimate)
603	603
...	...	@@ -604,7 +604,8 @@
604	604	=== 7.2 Full System AKEL (Production) ===
605	605
606	606	**Architecture:**
607		-{{code}}AKEL Orchestrator
	594	+{{code}}
	595	+AKEL Orchestrator
608	608	├── Claim Extractor
609	609	├── Claim Classifier (with risk tier assignment)
610	610	├── Scenario Generator
...	...	@@ -612,10 +612,10 @@
612	612	├── Contradiction Detector
613	613	├── Quality Gate Validator
614	614	├── Audit Sampling Scheduler
615		-└── Federation Sync Adapter (Release 1.0+){{/code}}
	603	+└── Federation Sync Adapter (Release 1.0+)
	604	+{{/code}}
616	616
617	617	**Processing:**
618		-
619	619	* Parallel processing where possible
620	620	* Separate component calls
621	621	* Quality gates between phases
...	...	@@ -627,7 +627,6 @@
627	627	=== 7.3 Why POC Uses Single Call ===
628	628
629	629	**Advantages:**
630		-
631	631	* ✅ Simpler to implement
632	632	* ✅ Faster POC development
633	633	* ✅ Easier to debug
...	...	@@ -635,7 +635,6 @@
635	635	* ✅ Good enough for concept validation
636	636
637	637	**Limitations:**
638		-
639	639	* ❌ No component reusability
640	640	* ❌ No parallel processing
641	641	* ❌ All-or-nothing (can't partially succeed)
...	...	@@ -662,7 +662,6 @@
662	662	**Requirement:** User can submit article for analysis
663	663
664	664	**Functionality:**
665		-
666	666	* Text input field (paste article text, up to 5000 characters)
667	667	* URL input field (paste article URL)
668	668	* "Analyze" button to trigger processing
...	...	@@ -669,7 +669,6 @@
669	669	* Loading indicator during analysis
670	670
671	671	**Excluded:**
672		-
673	673	* No user authentication
674	674	* No claim history
675	675	* No search functionality
...	...	@@ -676,7 +676,6 @@
676	676	* No saved templates
677	677
678	678	**Acceptance Criteria:**
679		-
680	680	* User can paste text from article
681	681	* User can paste URL of article
682	682	* System accepts input and triggers analysis
...	...	@@ -686,7 +686,6 @@
686	686	**Requirement:** AI automatically extracts 3-5 factual claims
687	687
688	688	**Functionality:**
689		-
690	690	* AI reads article text
691	691	* AI identifies factual claims (not opinions/questions)
692	692	* AI extracts 3-5 most important claims
...	...	@@ -693,7 +693,6 @@
693	693	* System displays numbered list
694	694
695	695	**Critical:** NO MANUAL EDITING ALLOWED
696		-
697	697	* AI selects which claims to extract
698	698	* AI identifies factual vs. non-factual
699	699	* System processes claims as extracted
...	...	@@ -700,13 +700,11 @@
700	700	* No human curation or correction
701	701
702	702	**Error Handling:**
703		-
704	704	* If extraction fails: Display error message
705	705	* User can retry with different input
706	706	* No manual intervention to fix extraction
707	707
708	708	**Acceptance Criteria:**
709		-
710	710	* AI extracts 3-5 claims automatically
711	711	* Claims are factual (not opinions)
712	712	* Claims are clearly stated
...	...	@@ -717,17 +717,15 @@
717	717	**Requirement:** AI automatically generates verdict for each claim
718	718
719	719	**Functionality:**
720		-
721	721	* For each claim, AI:
722		-* Evaluates claim based on available evidence/knowledge
723		-* Determines verdict: WELL-SUPPORTED / PARTIALLY SUPPORTED / UNCERTAIN / REFUTED
724		-* Assigns confidence score (0-100%)
725		-* Assigns risk tier (A/B/C)
726		-* Writes brief reasoning (1-3 sentences)
	700	+ * Evaluates claim based on available evidence/knowledge
	701	+ * Determines verdict: WELL-SUPPORTED / PARTIALLY SUPPORTED / UNCERTAIN / REFUTED
	702	+ * Assigns confidence score (0-100%)
	703	+ * Assigns risk tier (A/B/C)
	704	+ * Writes brief reasoning (1-3 sentences)
727	727	* System displays verdict for each claim
728	728
729	729	**Critical:** NO MANUAL EDITING ALLOWED
730		-
731	731	* AI computes verdicts based on evidence
732	732	* AI generates confidence scores
733	733	* AI writes reasoning
...	...	@@ -734,13 +734,11 @@
734	734	* No human review or adjustment
735	735
736	736	**Error Handling:**
737		-
738	738	* If verdict generation fails: Display error message
739	739	* User can retry
740	740	* No manual intervention to adjust verdicts
741	741
742	742	**Acceptance Criteria:**
743		-
744	744	* Each claim has a verdict
745	745	* Confidence score is displayed (0-100%)
746	746	* Risk tier is displayed (A/B/C)
...	...	@@ -753,17 +753,15 @@
753	753	**Requirement:** AI generates brief summary of analysis
754	754
755	755	**Functionality:**
756		-
757	757	* AI summarizes findings in 3-5 sentences:
758		-* How many claims found
759		-* Distribution of verdicts
760		-* Overall assessment
	732	+ * How many claims found
	733	+ * Distribution of verdicts
	734	+ * Overall assessment
761	761	* System displays at top of results
762	762
763	763	**Critical:** NO MANUAL EDITING ALLOWED
764	764
765	765	**Acceptance Criteria:**
766		-
767	767	* Summary is coherent
768	768	* Accurately reflects analysis
769	769	* 3-5 sentences
...	...	@@ -774,7 +774,6 @@
774	774	**Requirement:** AI generates brief summary of original article
775	775
776	776	**Functionality:**
777		-
778	778	* AI summarizes article content (not FactHarbor's analysis)
779	779	* 3-5 sentences
780	780	* System displays
...	...	@@ -784,7 +784,6 @@
784	784	**Critical:** NO MANUAL EDITING ALLOWED
785	785
786	786	**Acceptance Criteria:**
787		-
788	788	* Summary is neutral (article's position)
789	789	* Accurately reflects article content
790	790	* 3-5 sentences
...	...	@@ -795,7 +795,6 @@
795	795	**Requirement:** Clear labeling of AI-generated content
796	796
797	797	**Functionality:**
798		-
799	799	* Display Mode 2 publication label
800	800	* Show POC/Demo disclaimer
801	801	* Display risk tiers per claim
...	...	@@ -803,7 +803,6 @@
803	803	* Display timestamp
804	804
805	805	**Acceptance Criteria:**
806		-
807	807	* Label is prominent and clear
808	808	* User understands this is AI-generated POC output
809	809	* Risk tiers are color-coded
...	...	@@ -814,7 +814,6 @@
814	814	**Requirement:** Execute simplified quality gates
815	815
816	816	**Functionality:**
817		-
818	818	* Check source quality (basic)
819	819	* Attempt contradiction search (basic)
820	820	* Calculate confidence scores
...	...	@@ -822,7 +822,6 @@
822	822	* Display gate results
823	823
824	824	**Acceptance Criteria:**
825		-
826	826	* All 4 gates attempted
827	827	* Pass/fail status displayed
828	828	* Failures explained to user
...	...	@@ -837,7 +837,6 @@
837	837	**Critical Rule:** NO MANUAL EDITING AT ANY STAGE
838	838
839	839	**What this means:**
840		-
841	841	* Claims: AI selects (no human curation)
842	842	* Scenarios: N/A (deferred to POC2)
843	843	* Evidence: AI evaluates (no human selection)
...	...	@@ -845,12 +845,13 @@
845	845	* Summaries: AI writes (no human editing)
846	846
847	847	**Pipeline:**
848		-{{code}}User Input → AKEL Processing → Output Display
849		- ↓
850		- ZERO human editing{{/code}}
	814	+{{code}}
	815	+User Input → AKEL Processing → Output Display
	816	+ ↓
	817	+ ZERO human editing
	818	+{{/code}}
851	851
852	852	**If AI output is poor:**
853		-
854	854	* ❌ Do NOT manually fix it
855	855	* ✅ Document the failure
856	856	* ✅ Improve prompts and retry
...	...	@@ -857,7 +857,6 @@
857	857	* ✅ Accept that POC might fail
858	858
859	859	**Why this matters:**
860		-
861	861	* Tests whether AI can do this without humans
862	862	* Validates scalability (humans can't review every analysis)
863	863	* Honest test of technical feasibility
...	...	@@ -867,19 +867,16 @@
867	867	**Requirement:** Analysis completes in reasonable time
868	868
869	869	**Acceptable Performance:**
870		-
871	871	* Processing time: 1-5 minutes (acceptable for POC)
872	872	* Display loading indicator to user
873	873	* Show progress if possible ("Extracting claims...", "Generating verdicts...")
874	874
875	875	**Not Required:**
876		-
877	877	* Production-level speed (< 30 seconds)
878	878	* Optimization for scale
879	879	* Caching
880	880
881	881	**Acceptance Criteria:**
882		-
883	883	* Analysis completes within 5 minutes
884	884	* User sees loading indicator
885	885	* No timeout errors
...	...	@@ -889,19 +889,16 @@
889	889	**Requirement:** System works for manual testing sessions
890	890
891	891	**Acceptable:**
892		-
893	893	* Occasional errors (< 20% failure rate)
894	894	* Manual restart if needed
895	895	* Display error messages clearly
896	896
897	897	**Not Required:**
898		-
899	899	* 99.9% uptime
900	900	* Automatic error recovery
901	901	* Production monitoring
902	902
903	903	**Acceptance Criteria:**
904		-
905	905	* System works for test demonstrations
906	906	* Errors are handled gracefully
907	907	* User receives clear error messages
...	...	@@ -911,7 +911,6 @@
911	911	**Requirement:** Runs on simple infrastructure
912	912
913	913	**Acceptable:**
914		-
915	915	* Single machine or simple cloud setup
916	916	* No distributed architecture
917	917	* No load balancing
...	...	@@ -919,7 +919,6 @@
919	919	* Local development environment viable
920	920
921	921	**Not Required:**
922		-
923	923	* Production infrastructure
924	924	* Multi-region deployment
925	925	* Auto-scaling
...	...	@@ -930,7 +930,6 @@
930	930	**Requirement:** Track and display LLM usage metrics to inform optimization decisions
931	931
932	932	**Must Track:**
933		-
934	934	* Input tokens (article + prompt)
935	935	* Output tokens (generated analysis)
936	936	* Total tokens
...	...	@@ -939,19 +939,16 @@
939	939	* Article length (words/characters)
940	940
941	941	**Must Display:**
942		-
943	943	* Usage statistics in UI (Component 5)
944	944	* Cost per analysis
945	945	* Cost per claim extracted
946	946
947	947	**Must Log:**
948		-
949	949	* Aggregate metrics for analysis
950	950	* Cost distribution by article length
951	951	* Token efficiency trends
952	952
953	953	**Purpose:**
954		-
955	955	* Understand unit economics
956	956	* Identify optimization opportunities
957	957	* Project costs at scale
...	...	@@ -958,7 +958,6 @@
958	958	* Inform architecture decisions (caching, model selection, etc.)
959	959
960	960	**Acceptance Criteria:**
961		-
962	962	* ✅ Usage data displayed after each analysis
963	963	* ✅ Metrics logged for aggregate analysis
964	964	* ✅ Cost calculated accurately (Claude API pricing)
...	...	@@ -966,7 +966,6 @@
966	966	* ✅ POC1 report includes cost analysis section
967	967
968	968	**Success Target:**
969		-
970	970	* Average cost per analysis < $0.05 USD
971	971	* Cost scaling behavior understood (linear/exponential)
972	972	* 2+ optimization opportunities identified
...	...	@@ -978,13 +978,11 @@
978	978	=== 10.1 System Components ===
979	979
980	980	**Frontend:**
981		-
982	982	* Simple HTML form (text input + URL input + button)
983	983	* Loading indicator
984	984	* Results display page (single page, no tabs/navigation)
985	985
986	986	**Backend:**
987		-
988	988	* Single API endpoint
989	989	* Calls Claude API (Sonnet 4.5 or latest)
990	990	* Parses response
...	...	@@ -991,12 +991,10 @@
991	991	* Returns JSON to frontend
992	992
993	993	**Data Storage:**
994		-
995	995	* None required (stateless POC)
996	996	* Optional: Simple file storage or SQLite for demo examples
997	997
998	998	**External Services:**
999		-
1000	1000	* Claude API (Anthropic) - required
1001	1001	* Optional: URL fetch service for article text extraction
1002	1002
...	...	@@ -1004,23 +1004,23 @@
1004	1004
1005	1005	{{code}}
1006	1006	1. User submits text or URL
1007		- ↓
	955	+ ↓
1008	1008	2. Backend receives request
1009		- ↓
	957	+ ↓
1010	1010	3. If URL: Fetch article text
1011		- ↓
	959	+ ↓
1012	1012	4. Call Claude API with single prompt:
1013		- "Extract claims, evaluate each, provide verdicts"
1014		- ↓
	961	+ "Extract claims, evaluate each, provide verdicts"
	962	+ ↓
1015	1015	5. Claude API returns:
1016		- - Analysis summary
1017		- - Claims list
1018		- - Verdicts for each claim (with risk tiers)
1019		- - Article summary (optional)
1020		- - Quality gate results
1021		- ↓
	964	+ - Analysis summary
	965	+ - Claims list
	966	+ - Verdicts for each claim (with risk tiers)
	967	+ - Article summary (optional)
	968	+ - Quality gate results
	969	+ ↓
1022	1022	6. Backend parses response
1023		- ↓
	971	+ ↓
1024	1024	7. Frontend displays results with Mode 2 labeling
1025	1025	{{/code}}
1026	1026
...	...	@@ -1029,43 +1029,45 @@
1029	1029	=== 10.3 AI Prompt Strategy ===
1030	1030
1031	1031	**Single Comprehensive Prompt:**
1032		-{{code}}Task: Analyze this article and provide:
	980	+{{code}}
	981	+Task: Analyze this article and provide:
1033	1033
1034	1034	1. Identify the article's main thesis/conclusion
1035		- - What is the article trying to argue or prove?
1036		- - What is the primary claim or conclusion?
	984	+ - What is the article trying to argue or prove?
	985	+ - What is the primary claim or conclusion?
1037	1037
1038	1038	2. Extract 3-5 factual claims from the article
1039		- - Note which claims are CENTRAL to the main thesis
1040		- - Note which claims are SUPPORTING facts
	988	+ - Note which claims are CENTRAL to the main thesis
	989	+ - Note which claims are SUPPORTING facts
1041	1041
1042	1042	3. For each claim:
1043		- - Determine verdict (WELL-SUPPORTED / PARTIALLY SUPPORTED / UNCERTAIN / REFUTED)
1044		- - Assign confidence score (0-100%)
1045		- - Assign risk tier (A: Medical/Legal/Safety, B: Policy/Science, C: Facts/Definitions)
1046		- - Write brief reasoning (1-3 sentences)
	992	+ - Determine verdict (WELL-SUPPORTED / PARTIALLY SUPPORTED / UNCERTAIN / REFUTED)
	993	+ - Assign confidence score (0-100%)
	994	+ - Assign risk tier (A: Medical/Legal/Safety, B: Policy/Science, C: Facts/Definitions)
	995	+ - Write brief reasoning (1-3 sentences)
1047	1047
1048	1048	4. Assess relationship between claims and main thesis:
1049		- - Do the claims actually support the article's conclusion?
1050		- - Are there logical leaps or unsupported inferences?
1051		- - Is the article's framing misleading even if individual facts are accurate?
	998	+ - Do the claims actually support the article's conclusion?
	999	+ - Are there logical leaps or unsupported inferences?
	1000	+ - Is the article's framing misleading even if individual facts are accurate?
1052	1052
1053	1053	5. Run quality gates:
1054		- - Check: ≥2 sources found
1055		- - Attempt: Basic contradiction search
1056		- - Calculate: Confidence scores
1057		- - Verify: Structural integrity
	1003	+ - Check: ≥2 sources found
	1004	+ - Attempt: Basic contradiction search
	1005	+ - Calculate: Confidence scores
	1006	+ - Verify: Structural integrity
1058	1058
1059	1059	6. Write context-aware analysis summary (4-6 sentences):
1060		- - State article's main thesis
1061		- - Report claims found and verdict distribution
1062		- - Note if central claims are problematic
1063		- - Assess whether evidence supports conclusion
1064		- - Overall credibility considering claim importance
	1009	+ - State article's main thesis
	1010	+ - Report claims found and verdict distribution
	1011	+ - Note if central claims are problematic
	1012	+ - Assess whether evidence supports conclusion
	1013	+ - Overall credibility considering claim importance
1065	1065
1066	1066	7. Write article summary (3-5 sentences: neutral summary of article content)
1067	1067
1068		-Return as structured JSON with quality gate results.{{/code}}
	1017	+Return as structured JSON with quality gate results.
	1018	+{{/code}}
1069	1069
1070	1070	**One prompt generates everything.**
1071	1071
...	...	@@ -1076,30 +1076,25 @@
1076	1076	=== 10.4 Technology Stack Suggestions ===
1077	1077
1078	1078	**Frontend:**
1079		-
1080	1080	* HTML + CSS + JavaScript (minimal framework)
1081	1081	* OR: Next.js (if team prefers)
1082	1082	* Hosted: Local machine OR Vercel/Netlify free tier
1083	1083
1084	1084	**Backend:**
1085		-
1086	1086	* Python Flask/FastAPI (simple REST API)
1087	1087	* OR: Next.js API routes (if using Next.js)
1088	1088	* Hosted: Local machine OR Railway/Render free tier
1089	1089
1090	1090	**AKEL Integration:**
1091		-
1092	1092	* Claude API via Anthropic SDK
1093	1093	* Model: Claude Sonnet 4.5 or latest available
1094	1094
1095	1095	**Database:**
1096		-
1097	1097	* None (stateless acceptable)
1098	1098	* OR: SQLite if want to store demo examples
1099	1099	* OR: JSON files on disk
1100	1100
1101	1101	**Deployment:**
1102		-
1103	1103	* Local development environment sufficient for POC
1104	1104	* Optional: Deploy to cloud for remote demos
1105	1105
...	...	@@ -1108,7 +1108,6 @@
1108	1108	=== 11.1 Minimum Success (POC Passes) ===
1109	1109
1110	1110	**Required for GO decision:**
1111		-
1112	1112	* ✅ AI extracts 3-5 factual claims automatically
1113	1113	* ✅ AI provides verdict for each claim automatically
1114	1114	* ✅ Verdicts are reasonable (≥70% make logical sense)
...	...	@@ -1122,7 +1122,6 @@
1122	1122	* ✅ **Optimization opportunities identified** (≥2 potential improvements documented)
1123	1123
1124	1124	**Quality Definition:**
1125		-
1126	1126	* "Reasonable verdict" = Defensible given general knowledge
1127	1127	* "Coherent summary" = Logically structured, grammatically correct
1128	1128	* "Comprehensible" = Reviewers understand what analysis means
...	...	@@ -1130,7 +1130,6 @@
1130	1130	=== 11.2 POC Fails If ===
1131	1131
1132	1132	**Automatic NO-GO if any of these:**
1133		-
1134	1134	* ❌ Claim extraction poor (< 60% accuracy - extracts non-claims or misses obvious ones)
1135	1135	* ❌ Verdicts nonsensical (< 60% reasonable - contradictory or random)
1136	1136	* ❌ Output incomprehensible (reviewers can't understand analysis)
...	...	@@ -1142,15 +1142,14 @@
1142	1142	**POC quality expectations:**
1143	1143
1144	1144	|=Component|=Quality Threshold|=Definition
1145		-|Claim Extraction|(% class="success" %)≥70% accuracy |Identifies obvious factual claims, may miss some edge cases
1146		-|Verdict Logic|(% class="success" %)≥70% defensible |Verdicts are logical given reasoning provided
1147		-|Reasoning Clarity|(% class="success" %)≥70% clear |1-3 sentences are understandable and relevant
1148		-|Overall Analysis|(% class="success" %)≥70% useful |Output helps user understand article claims
	1087	+|Claim Extraction|(% class="success" %)≥70% accuracy(%%) |Identifies obvious factual claims, may miss some edge cases
	1088	+|Verdict Logic|(% class="success" %)≥70% defensible(%%) |Verdicts are logical given reasoning provided
	1089	+|Reasoning Clarity|(% class="success" %)≥70% clear(%%) |1-3 sentences are understandable and relevant
	1090	+|Overall Analysis|(% class="success" %)≥70% useful(%%) |Output helps user understand article claims
1149	1149
1150	1150	**Analogy:** "B student" quality (70-80%), not "A+" perfection yet
1151	1151
1152	1152	**Not expecting:**
1153		-
1154	1154	* 100% accuracy
1155	1155	* Perfect claim coverage
1156	1156	* Comprehensive evidence gathering
...	...	@@ -1158,7 +1158,6 @@
1158	1158	* Production polish
1159	1159
1160	1160	**Expecting:**
1161		-
1162	1162	* Reasonable claim extraction
1163	1163	* Defensible verdicts
1164	1164	* Understandable reasoning
...	...	@@ -1171,7 +1171,6 @@
1171	1171	**Input:** "Coffee reduces the risk of type 2 diabetes by 30%"
1172	1172
1173	1173	**Expected Output:**
1174		-
1175	1175	* Extract claim correctly
1176	1176	* Provide verdict: WELL-SUPPORTED or PARTIALLY SUPPORTED
1177	1177	* Confidence: 70-90%
...	...	@@ -1185,7 +1185,6 @@
1185	1185	**Input:** News article URL with multiple claims about politics/health/science
1186	1186
1187	1187	**Expected Output:**
1188		-
1189	1189	* Extract 3-5 key claims
1190	1190	* Verdict for each (may vary: some supported, some uncertain, some refuted)
1191	1191	* Coherent analysis summary
...	...	@@ -1199,7 +1199,6 @@
1199	1199	**Input:** Article on contested political or scientific topic
1200	1200
1201	1201	**Expected Output:**
1202		-
1203	1203	* Balanced analysis
1204	1204	* Acknowledges uncertainty where appropriate
1205	1205	* Doesn't overstate confidence
...	...	@@ -1212,7 +1212,6 @@
1212	1212	**Input:** Article with obviously false claim (e.g., "The Earth is flat")
1213	1213
1214	1214	**Expected Output:**
1215		-
1216	1216	* Extract claim
1217	1217	* Verdict: REFUTED
1218	1218	* High confidence (> 90%)
...	...	@@ -1226,7 +1226,6 @@
1226	1226	**Input:** Article with claim where evidence is genuinely mixed
1227	1227
1228	1228	**Expected Output:**
1229		-
1230	1230	* Extract claim
1231	1231	* Verdict: UNCERTAIN
1232	1232	* Moderate confidence (40-60%)
...	...	@@ -1239,7 +1239,6 @@
1239	1239	**Input:** Article making medical claims
1240	1240
1241	1241	**Expected Output:**
1242		-
1243	1243	* Extract claim
1244	1244	* Verdict: [appropriate based on evidence]
1245	1245	* Risk tier: A (High - medical)
...	...	@@ -1257,7 +1257,6 @@
1257	1257	**Option A: GO (Proceed to POC2)**
1258	1258
1259	1259	**Conditions:**
1260		-
1261	1261	* AI quality ≥70% without manual editing
1262	1262	* Basic claim → verdict pipeline validated
1263	1263	* Internal + advisor feedback positive
...	...	@@ -1266,7 +1266,6 @@
1266	1266	* Clear path to improving AI quality to ≥90%
1267	1267
1268	1268	**Next Steps:**
1269		-
1270	1270	* Plan POC2 development (add scenarios)
1271	1271	* Design scenario architecture
1272	1272	* Expand to Evidence Model structure
...	...	@@ -1275,7 +1275,6 @@
1275	1275	**Option B: NO-GO (Pivot or Stop)**
1276	1276
1277	1277	**Conditions:**
1278		-
1279	1279	* AI quality < 60%
1280	1280	* Requires manual editing for most analyses (> 50%)
1281	1281	* Feedback indicates fundamental flaws
...	...	@@ -1283,7 +1283,6 @@
1283	1283	* No clear path to improvement
1284	1284
1285	1285	**Next Steps:**
1286		-
1287	1287	* **Pivot:** Change to hybrid human-AI approach (accept manual review required)
1288	1288	* **Stop:** Conclude approach not viable, revisit later
1289	1289
...	...	@@ -1290,7 +1290,6 @@
1290	1290	**Option C: ITERATE (Improve POC)**
1291	1291
1292	1292	**Conditions:**
1293		-
1294	1294	* Concept has merit but execution needs work
1295	1295	* Specific improvements identified
1296	1296	* Addressable with better prompts/approach
...	...	@@ -1297,7 +1297,6 @@
1297	1297	* AI quality between 60-70%
1298	1298
1299	1299	**Next Steps:**
1300		-
1301	1301	* Improve AI prompts
1302	1302	* Test different approaches
1303	1303	* Re-run POC with improvements
...	...	@@ -1306,9 +1306,9 @@
1306	1306	=== 13.2 Decision Criteria Summary ===
1307	1307
1308	1308	{{code}}
1309		-AI Quality < 60% → NO-GO (approach doesn't work)
	1237	+AI Quality < 60% → NO-GO (approach doesn't work)
1310	1310	AI Quality 60-70% → ITERATE (improve and retry)
1311		-AI Quality ≥70% → GO (proceed to POC2)
	1239	+AI Quality ≥70% → GO (proceed to POC2)
1312	1312	{{/code}}
1313	1313
1314	1314	== 14. Key Risks & Mitigations ==
...	...	@@ -1315,11 +1315,10 @@
1315	1315
1316	1316	=== 14.1 Risk: AI Quality Not Good Enough ===
1317	1317
1318		-**Likelihood:** Medium-High
1319		-**Impact:** POC fails
	1246	+**Likelihood:** Medium-High
	1247	+**Impact:** POC fails
1320	1320
1321	1321	**Mitigation:**
1322		-
1323	1323	* Extensive prompt engineering and testing
1324	1324	* Use best available AI models (Sonnet 4.5)
1325	1325	* Test with diverse article types
...	...	@@ -1329,11 +1329,10 @@
1329	1329
1330	1330	=== 14.2 Risk: AI Consistency Issues ===
1331	1331
1332		-**Likelihood:** Medium
1333		-**Impact:** Works sometimes, fails other times
	1259	+**Likelihood:** Medium
	1260	+**Impact:** Works sometimes, fails other times
1334	1334
1335	1335	**Mitigation:**
1336		-
1337	1337	* Test with 10+ diverse articles
1338	1338	* Measure success rate honestly
1339	1339	* Improve prompts to increase consistency
...	...	@@ -1342,11 +1342,10 @@
1342	1342
1343	1343	=== 14.3 Risk: Output Incomprehensible ===
1344	1344
1345		-**Likelihood:** Low-Medium
1346		-**Impact:** Users can't understand analysis
	1271	+**Likelihood:** Low-Medium
	1272	+**Impact:** Users can't understand analysis
1347	1347
1348	1348	**Mitigation:**
1349		-
1350	1350	* Create clear explainer document
1351	1351	* Iterate on output format
1352	1352	* Test with non-technical reviewers
...	...	@@ -1356,11 +1356,10 @@
1356	1356
1357	1357	=== 14.4 Risk: API Rate Limits / Costs ===
1358	1358
1359		-**Likelihood:** Low
1360		-**Impact:** System slow or expensive
	1284	+**Likelihood:** Low
	1285	+**Impact:** System slow or expensive
1361	1361
1362	1362	**Mitigation:**
1363		-
1364	1364	* Monitor API usage
1365	1365	* Implement retry logic
1366	1366	* Estimate costs before scaling
...	...	@@ -1369,11 +1369,10 @@
1369	1369
1370	1370	=== 14.5 Risk: Scope Creep ===
1371	1371
1372		-**Likelihood:** Medium
1373		-**Impact:** POC becomes too complex
	1296	+**Likelihood:** Medium
	1297	+**Impact:** POC becomes too complex
1374	1374
1375	1375	**Mitigation:**
1376		-
1377	1377	* Strict scope discipline
1378	1378	* Say NO to feature additions
1379	1379	* Keep focus on core question
...	...	@@ -1384,15 +1384,12 @@
1384	1384
1385	1385	=== 15.1 Core Principles ===
1386	1386
1387		-*
1388		-**
1389		-**1. Build Less, Learn More
	1310	+**1. Build Less, Learn More**
1390	1390	* Minimum features to test hypothesis
1391	1391	* Don't build unvalidated features
1392	1392	* Focus on core question only
1393	1393
1394	1394	**2. Fail Fast**
1395		-
1396	1396	* Quick test of hardest part (AI capability)
1397	1397	* Accept that POC might fail
1398	1398	* Better to discover issues early
...	...	@@ -1399,19 +1399,16 @@
1399	1399	* Honest assessment over optimistic hope
1400	1400
1401	1401	**3. Test First, Build Second**
1402		-
1403	1403	* Validate AI can do this before building platform
1404	1404	* Don't assume it will work
1405	1405	* Let results guide decisions
1406	1406
1407	1407	**4. Automation First**
1408		-
1409	1409	* No manual editing allowed
1410	1410	* Tests scalability, not just feasibility
1411	1411	* Proves approach can work at scale
1412	1412
1413	1413	**5. Honest Assessment**
1414		-
1415	1415	* Don't cherry-pick examples
1416	1416	* Don't manually fix bad outputs
1417	1417	* Document failures openly
...	...	@@ -1419,25 +1419,22 @@
1419	1419
1420	1420	=== 15.2 What POC Is ===
1421	1421
1422		-✅ Testing AI capability without humans
1423		-✅ Proving core technical concept
1424		-✅ Fast validation of approach
1425		-✅ Honest assessment of feasibility
	1339	+✅ Testing AI capability without humans
	1340	+✅ Proving core technical concept
	1341	+✅ Fast validation of approach
	1342	+✅ Honest assessment of feasibility
1426	1426
1427	1427	=== 15.3 What POC Is NOT ===
1428	1428
1429		-❌ Building a product
1430		-❌ Production-ready system
1431		-❌ Feature-complete platform
1432		-❌ Perfectly accurate analysis
1433		-❌ Polished user experience
	1346	+❌ Building a product
	1347	+❌ Production-ready system
	1348	+❌ Feature-complete platform
	1349	+❌ Perfectly accurate analysis
	1350	+❌ Polished user experience
1434	1434
1435		-== 16. Success ==
	1352	+== 16. Success = Clear Path Forward ==
1436	1436
1437		- Clear Path Forward ==
1438		-
1439	1439	**If POC succeeds (≥70% AI quality):**
1440		-
1441	1441	* ✅ Approach validated
1442	1442	* ✅ Proceed to POC2 (add scenarios)
1443	1443	* ✅ Design full Evidence Model structure
...	...	@@ -1445,7 +1445,6 @@
1445	1445	* ✅ Focus on improving AI quality from 70% → 90%
1446	1446
1447	1447	**If POC fails (< 60% AI quality):**
1448		-
1449	1449	* ✅ Learn what doesn't work
1450	1450	* ✅ Pivot to different approach
1451	1451	* ✅ OR wait for better AI technology
...	...	@@ -1455,9 +1455,9 @@
1455	1455
1456	1456	== 17. Related Pages ==
1457	1457
1458		-* [[User Needs>>FactHarbor.Specification.Requirements.User Needs.WebHome]]
1459		-* [[Requirements>>FactHarbor.Specification.Requirements.WebHome]]
1460		-* [[Gap Analysis>>FactHarbor.Specification.Requirements.GapAnalysis]]
	1371	+* [[User Needs>>Test.FactHarbor.Specification.Requirements.User Needs.WebHome]]
	1372	+* [[Requirements>>Test.FactHarbor.Specification.Requirements.WebHome]]
	1373	+* [[Gap Analysis>>Test.FactHarbor.Specification.Requirements.GapAnalysis]]
1461	1461	* [[Architecture>>FactHarbor.Specification.Architecture.WebHome]]
1462	1462	* [[AKEL>>FactHarbor.Specification.AI Knowledge Extraction Layer (AKEL).WebHome]]
1463	1463	* [[Workflows>>FactHarbor.Specification.Workflows.WebHome]]
...	...	@@ -1464,51 +1464,3 @@
1464	1464
1465	1465	**Document Status:** ✅ Ready for POC Development (Version 2.0 - Updated with Spec Alignment)
1466	1466
1467		-
1468		-=== NFR-POC-11: LLM Provider Abstraction (POC1) ===
1469		-
1470		-**Requirement:** POC1 MUST implement LLM abstraction layer with support for multiple providers.
1471		-
1472		-**POC1 Implementation:**
1473		-
1474		-* **Primary Provider:** Anthropic Claude API
1475		-* Stage 1: Claude Haiku 4
1476		-* Stage 2: Claude Sonnet 3.5 (cached)
1477		-* Stage 3: Claude Sonnet 3.5
1478		-
1479		-* **Provider Interface:** Abstract LLMProvider interface implemented
1480		-
1481		-* **Configuration:** Environment variables for provider selection
1482		-* {{code}}LLM_PRIMARY_PROVIDER=anthropic{{/code}}
1483		-* {{code}}LLM_STAGE1_MODEL=claude-haiku-4{{/code}}
1484		-* {{code}}LLM_STAGE2_MODEL=claude-sonnet-3-5{{/code}}
1485		-
1486		-* **Failover:** Basic error handling with cache fallback for Stage 2
1487		-
1488		-* **Cost Tracking:** Log provider name and cost per request
1489		-
1490		-**Future (POC2/Beta):**
1491		-
1492		-* Secondary provider (OpenAI) with automatic failover
1493		-* Admin API for runtime provider switching
1494		-* Cost comparison dashboard
1495		-* Cross-provider output verification
1496		-
1497		-**Success Criteria:**
1498		-
1499		-* All LLM calls go through abstraction layer (no direct API calls)
1500		-* Provider can be changed via environment variable without code changes
1501		-* Cost tracking includes provider name in logs
1502		-* Stage 2 falls back to cache on provider failure
1503		-
1504		-**Implementation:** See [[POC1 API & Schemas Specification>>Test.FactHarbor V0\.9\.103.Specification.POC.API-and-Schemas.WebHome]] Section 6
1505		-
1506		-**Dependencies:**
1507		-
1508		-* NFR-14 (Main Requirements)
1509		-* Design Decision 9
1510		-* Architecture Section 2.2
1511		-
1512		-**Priority:** HIGH (P1)
1513		-
1514		-**Rationale:** Even though POC1 uses single provider, abstraction must be in place from start to avoid costly refactoring later.