Conflict is information.
Mīzān should not average competing accounts into a neat answer. It should show where they diverge, which claims each supports and what would help resolve the disagreement.
03 / Methodology & trust
How Mīzān reasons
See the reasoning path, not just the answer.
Mīzān is designed to expose the structure behind a reading: what the claim is, what evidence bears on it, how the conclusion is inferred, what remains uncertain and what could change the judgment.
Reasoning flow
From claim to supported judgment.
- 01Claim
- 02Content type
- 03Context
- 04Evidence retrieval
- 05Source quality
- 06Conflict / corroboration
- 07Logical bridge
- 08Uncertainty
- 09Judgment support
- 10User decides
Sources & evidence
A source is not evidence for every claim it contains.
Mīzān asks what a source can directly establish, what it only reports second-hand, and whether independent evidence corroborates the same point.
Direct recordDocuments, measurements, official records, original media.
TestimonyUseful for what the witness observed; limited for what they could not know directly.
Statistical evidencePopulation, sample, measure, uncertainty and comparison matter.
Expert interpretationInterpretation is kept distinct from the underlying record.
Unverifiable is a legitimate state.
In war, closed institutions, deleted records or rapidly changing events, reliable verification may be impossible. Mīzān should state the constraint rather than manufacture certainty.
Opinion is not a statistic.
Testimony, statistical claims, predictions, causal claims, moral judgments and interpretations require different questions. Mīzān should not pretend one checklist fits all.
A reading can be challenged.
The useful standard is not “Mīzān said it.” The useful standard is whether the sources, reasoning bridge and uncertainty are visible enough to inspect and contest.
AI use
AI is a component, not the authority.
Mīzān may use AI models to structure text, retrieve or organize relevant material, generate candidate interpretations and explain reasoning. The product value lies in the surrounding workflow: evidence handling, verification, context, policy, evaluation and presentation of uncertainty.
A fluent model answer is never treated as evidence merely because it sounds confident.
Privacy promises must match what Mīzān actually does.
Mīzān does not claim guarantees about deletion, retention, training or account data unless the product can actually enforce them. Trust comes from verifiable behavior, not reassuring language.
Method beats mystique.
Where possible, Mīzān should show the source path, reasoning roles, uncertainty and limitations that shaped the output.
It does not own the conclusion.
Mīzān does not need to publish autonomously, reduce every question to true/false, hide uncertainty, or ask you to surrender judgment to a score.
Mīzān can inspect, explain and suggest. You decide what to believe, say or do.
Continue
One reasoning system. Move to the surface that matches what you need next.