Public evidence policy
Claims must never outrun evidence
GridNinja public claims should never outrun their evidence. Every quantitative, comparative, capability, or outcome claim is scoped to an environment, measurement window, sample, baseline, maturity, evidence URL, owner, caveat, approved surface, and review expiry. Synthetic and illustrative values stay visibly labeled, while expired or retracted claims are removed from eligible copy and retained in correction history.
Definition
What it is
Claim governance is the fail-closed publishing contract that connects exact public wording to active evidence and a named approval boundary.
Category boundary
What it is not
It is not a disclaimer added after publication, a marketing confidence score, or permission to generalize a replay, shadow, pilot, or synthetic result into production performance.
Operational significance
Why operators care
Readers can distinguish design targets, implemented capability, replay evidence, Shadow Mode observations, operator acceptance, and independent validation. Internal teams can stop unsupported copy before release.
Mechanism
How the decision path works
- Step 01
Register the exact claim and classify its type, maturity, environment, and scope.
- Step 02
Link evidence, sources, caveat, owner, approved surfaces, and expiry.
- Step 03
Validate visible wording and structured data before publishing.
- Step 04
Append corrections or retractions without silently rewriting history.
Textual diagram equivalent
Decision flow
Draft wording → claim registry → evidence and maturity check → surface approval → publication → expiry review → active, corrected, or retracted history.
Governed illustrative claim
Visibly scoped example
Synthetic illustrative scenario—not a customer or production result. The value appears beside this notice, is excluded from snippets when unsupported, and is not emitted as a structured-data fact.
Failure and no-proof cases
- A number appears publicly without an active claim record.
- Visible copy implies a higher maturity than its evidence supports.
- An expired competitor source continues to support a broad comparison.
Limitations
- Governance improves traceability but does not substitute for independent testing.
- Public evidence may be narrower than internal evidence because sensitive data must be excluded.
- Named editorial and technical ownership are required before this method becomes indexable.
Evidence and sources
Inspect the basis, not just the answer
Local evidence objects show the GridNinja proof contract. Primary sources provide external standards and risk-management context; they do not validate GridNinja performance.
Related operator resources
Continue the proof path
- Corrections remain visible and attributableThe publication-gated GridNinja method for permanent correction, expiry, and retraction records for public technical claims.
- A scoped, source-backed comparison policyHow GridNinja scopes public comparisons to reviewed primary materials, defined categories, stable citations, and explicit limitations.
- Trust starts with boundariesSee how Shadow Mode, replay, allow / repair / reject decisions, audit logs, and proof packs establish evidence before bounded autonomy.
Proof before autonomy
Test the evidence boundary against your capacity question
Start with a Capacity Audit or read-only Shadow Mode discussion. GridNinja does not require control authority to identify where a capacity claim remains unproven.