OpenSensationEvidence and provenance
Evidence belongs to an individual claim. A record may contain both an editorial definition and a narrowly supported claim. Citing one source does not certify every relationship, capability or statement in that record.
Status vocabulary
| Status | Meaning in this project |
|---|---|
| unreviewed | Recorded without substantive review |
| community_proposed | Proposed by a contributor |
| editorial_seed | Initial editorial material, not established consensus |
| expert_reviewed | A scoped affirmative review by a verified contributor is recorded |
| research_supported | Appropriate research, academic or textbook source attached |
| systematic_review_supported | A systematic-review source attached |
| technical_specification_supported | Manufacturer specification attached |
| standards_supported | Technical standard attached |
| disputed | Relevant disagreement remains unresolved |
| deprecated | Retained for provenance but no longer recommended |
These are descriptive categories, not a numerical ranking. Source compatibility validation prevents a community submission from satisfying a standards-supported claim. It does not establish that a paper is correct or that a reviewer is impartial.
First release
The dataset is primarily editorial seed content. One narrowly scoped anatomical claim about olfactory receptor neurons links to the NCBI-hosted Neuroscience textbook chapter. The remaining definitions and associations await source expansion and specialist review. No experts, partnerships, endorsements or review counts are fabricated.
Source records store actual title, bibliographic details, URL, type, citation and access date. DOI syntax is checked when present; no DOI is invented. Validation checks local referential integrity and source types, not remote availability or publication validity. Maintainers must inspect the referenced material.
Reviews and disagreements
A review identifies reviewer, entity, claim, dataset version, date, decision, comments, supporting and contradictory sources, expertise and conflicts. Credential states range from unverified/self-declared to verified, expired or revoked. Verification is a maintainer workflow, not an automated identity service.
Disagreeing reviews remain visible. Do not collapse review counts into scientific truth scores. When evidence changes, record the new status and retain the historical discussion in version control. See contribution instructions.