iCIDM COLLEAGUE BETA · SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY
How to read claims on this site
The site deliberately separates what the corpus shows from what the institution may conclude.
Relationship / claim states
OBSERVEDA source or corpus pattern is directly present in the working data.
CANDIDATEA possible relationship, gap, question or interpretation generated from observations.
AI_PREREVIEWEDAI has checked structure/metadata or proposed a conservative interpretation; no human validation implied.
HI_REVIEWEDA human reviewer has inspected the object/road under a stated scope and evidence record.
VALIDATEDA defined review/evidence threshold has been met for the stated claim and scope.
PROPOSEDForward-looking architecture, hypothesis, action or future direction; not observed history.
Five mandatory boundaries
Corpus Boundary2,231 is a working 1995–2026 publication portrait; institutional attribution still needs status-aware curation where required.
Relationship BoundaryCo-occurrence/classification in the database is not automatically causal, important or an institutional capability.
Future BoundaryiCIDM, Hybrid Intelligence and 2055 directions are proposals to test, not inevitable outcomes.
AI BoundaryAI may discover, compare and prereview; human/domain review remains visible where scientific promotion is required.
Institutional AttributionThe prototype must not silently turn author-search matches, project roles or inferred relationships into official institutional statements.
Reading rule: publication absence ≠ Reality absence; high score ≠ scientific importance; candidate gap ≠ true unknown; operational observer ≠ consciousness.