Not invented for a product.
Source evaluation has a standard: the Admiralty Code, formalised as NATO AJP-2.1. It rates evidence on two independent axes — how reliable the source has been historically, and how well the specific information is corroborated — originally built for military and intelligence assessment, and still the working standard in OSINT and structured fact-checking today.
ASURIQ’s six axes extend that lineage rather than replace it. When a scored party disputes a verdict, the answer isn’t “trust us” — it’s this page: here is the standard, here are the axes, here is the record behind this specific score.
W · S · C · B · E · T
Adopted from Tranche’s six-axis composite. Every certificate shows these six scores; this is what each one measures.
Five sources, one confirmation.
Powered by Tranche. Corroboration only counts sources that arrived at a claim separately. Five outlets citing the same wire report, the same press release, or the same funder are one confirmation, echoed five times — not five confirmations.
Source-side, always. Claim-side, never.
“This claim’s four corroborating sources sit under two ownership groups” is a fact nobody can contest. “This source has high capture potential” is a judgment that can be argued with. ASURIQ ships the first kind and never the second — the vocabulary is the boundary, not a courtesy.
What we reach. What we don’t.
Free verification checks against 18 databases on every request. Detail cards add 3 commercial sources for a fuller ownership and sanctions picture.
Where no adequate source exists for a domain, ASURIQ says so rather than guessing. “We cannot verify this from public sources” is not the same statement as “this is unverifiable,” and neither is the same statement as “this is false.” Absence of evidence is reported as a coverage gap, never treated as evidence of absence.
Who verifies the verifier.
The same independence question we ask of every claim, asked of ASURIQ’s own evidence base. Most of the databases above aren’t owned by any single commercial interest: SEC EDGAR, FDA, WHO, BLS, Congress.gov, and World Bank are government or intergovernmental bodies; PubMed, Wikipedia, Wikidata, CrossRef, arXiv, Europe PMC, and OpenAlex are run by public agencies, nonprofits, or academic institutions. That structure is published here, not asserted — it’s the same ownership-transparency standard applied to ourselves first.
Patterns detected. Never conclusions.
ASURIQ reports evidence state with sources exposed. It never asserts that a claim is true or false in some sense beyond what the cited evidence shows, and it never characterises a source’s honesty or intent. What ships is corroboration density, ownership structure, and origin-chain depth — measurable facts about public record, not a verdict on anyone’s character.
This is why the correction mechanism has no appeals process to argue with (see Corrections, coming soon): there is no editorial judgment behind a score to contest. Submit public data supporting the alternative, the arithmetic re-runs, and the score moves if the evidence does.
This page is a version, not a live document.
Methodology changes are versioned, not silently edited. This page states which version was in effect for any certificate that cites it.
https://asuriq.dev/methodology