GCRI · Registry
エビデンスの区分
Not all evidence carries the same weight. A peer-reviewed trial, a published statistic, a model output, a press statement and an owner’s own declaration can all support the same sentence, yet each warrants a different degree of reliance. Evidence classes make that difference visible. This page sets out how records are classed by evidence type, how confidence is stated, how reliance limits are set, and why claims drift beyond what their evidence supports.
Evidence classes on the record.
Evidence classes: how the risk develops.
Evidence type, reliance limits and confidence. The dossier below sets out how the risk develops, what is measured, where the data come from, how it is modelled and who decides.
Class collapse
When observed, modelled, reported and declared evidence share one field with no label, a reader cannot tell a measurement from a projection or a self-assessment. The weakest source then borrows the authority of the strongest.
Claim creep
A finding moves from a cautious report to an abstract, a summary and a headline, losing qualifiers at each step. The claim widens while its evidence stays the same, until it exceeds what any source supports.
Single-source dependence
Many records rest on one upstream source cited by several intermediaries. Counting the intermediaries makes the evidence look plural and independent when it is one source repeated.
Confidence without basis
A confidence word such as likely or high is attached without saying what it rests on. Readers in different fields interpret the word differently, so one label carries different meanings to an editor, a funder and a court.
記録台帳。
このテーマを追跡するためにチームが使う画面：その指標、状態、決定。名前は例であり、値はイメージです。
記録台帳
Evidence classes · Registry · Ledger head 3142470
- 登録済みの記録5701
- 来歴が完全な記録の割合、%92平常
- 未解決の訂正10注視
- 権利の保留4情報
最新の記録
| NX-R-12221 | プログラムの状況 | v2 | 4472615 | 登録済み |
| NX-P-88287 | 公開 | v3 | 1324692 | 登録済み |
| NX-E-72567 | エビデンス記録 | v4 | 4410118 | 訂正受付中 |
| NX-C-27773 | 参加 | v1 | 7438493 | 権利による保留 |
版の履歴
- v1NEW情報源とともに登録済み
- v2FIX単位を訂正、理由を記録
- v3OPEN訂正を請求済み
Evidence classes mean the same thing in every domain.
Labels follow the IPCC uncertainty guidance (2010) in spirit and apply to every series in 報告書. The proposed Nexus Standards would carry the label in each record’s metadata.
- Cases where a label was misapplied.
- Proposals to refine a class.
How evidence classes is modelled, measured and tested.
モデル、その仮定、データ、不確実性を、科学者やエンジニアが確認する形で示します。構造は公表された手法に従っています。描かれた値は例示であり、知見ではありません。
データセットと来歴
The data classes behind evidence classes and what is recorded about each before it is used.
| データ区分 | 来歴を記録済み | 解像度を明示 | ライセンス確認済み |
|---|---|---|---|
| 衛星画像、光学とレーダー | センサー、処理レベル、取得日 | 画素サイズと再訪周期 | シーンごと |
| 再解析と気候モデルの出力 | モデル、実験、メンバー、バージョン | グリッドと時間ステップ | リリースごと |
| 現地センサーと計測器 | 観測所、機器、校正記録 | 地点とサンプリング・レート | ネットワークごと |
| 人口と資産のエクスポージャー | 手法、作成年、入力ソース | セルの大きさと単位 | リリースごと |
| 境界と参照地理 | 作成者、版、日付 | 縮尺 | 版ごと |
- 系譜
- 情報源から図までの W3C PROV 記録
- 原則
- FAIR：見つけやすく、アクセス可能で、相互運用でき、再利用できる
- ギャップ
- 欠損として表示し、黙って埋めることはしない
何を、どの程度うまく測定しているか。
各指標には、その単位、更新頻度、背後にある出典の種類、値が持つことになるエビデンスのラベルが付いています。値は表示しません：プログラムが自らの権限のもとで値を提供します。
| 指標 | 単位 | 周期 | 出典の種類 | ラベル |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assertions with an evidence class | share of assertions | 月次 | Schema validation | 観測 |
| Assertions by evidence class | count by class | 四半期ごと | Registry records | 観測 |
| Assertions resting on a single source | share of assertions | 四半期ごと | Provenance graph | 観測 |
| Confidence statements with a stated basis | share of confidence statements | 四半期ごと | Curation review | 観測 |
| Class reassignments after review | 件数 | 四半期ごと | Review records | 観測 |
| Agreement between independent classifiers | agreement coefficient | per audit | Double-coding audit | 推定 |
| Claims exceeding their evidence class | 件数 | 月次 | Claim-to-evidence audit | 観測 |
エビデンスの出所。
名前の明示された公開データセットと機関の記録。それぞれにライセンス区分があります。合意に基づく出典は、その条件のもとでのみ使用し、再公開することはありません。
| 出典 | 提供するもの | ライセンス区分 |
|---|---|---|
| GRADE handbook | A method for rating the certainty of evidence and the strength of recommendations | Free to read, GRADE Working Group terms |
| Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions | Methods for assessing risk of bias and synthesising evidence | Free to read online, Cochrane copyright |
| 不確実性の一貫した扱いに関する IPCC ガイダンス・ノート | 評価における確信度と可能性を表す較正された表現 | Free to read, IPCC terms |
| Evidence and Conclusion Ontology (ECO) | A controlled vocabulary of evidence types used in scientific curation | Open ontology, free to reuse |
| Oxford CEBM levels of evidence | A hierarchy of evidence types for clinical questions | Free to read, attribution |
| Campbell Collaboration methods guidance | Methods for evidence synthesis in social and economic policy | Free to read, Campbell terms |
誰が決め、エビデンスが何に役立つか。
Registry prepares evidence. The decisions below are taken by the authorities named, under their own rules, and never by the platform.
| 誰が決定するか | 質問 | このページが提供するエビデンス |
|---|---|---|
| Guideline panels and systematic reviewers | How much weight an assertion can bear in a recommendation | Evidence class, certainty rating and independence of the sources behind it |
| Funders and assessment panels | Whether reported outcomes are evidenced or only declared | Class labels separating observed outcomes from self-reported and planned ones |
| Journal editors | Whether a manuscript’s claims match the class of evidence it cites | Evidence class of each cited record and any single-source dependence |
| Regulators and public bodies | Whether evidence is strong enough to justify a rule or an intervention | Class, confidence basis and reliance limits for each supporting record |
このトピックが生み出す成果物
- An evidence class assigned to each assertion and carried into every view and export
- A glossary of classes stating what each supports and what it does not
- Reliance notes marking assertions that rest on a single source
- Confidence statements with their stated basis and the reviewer who set them
What experts ask about evidence types.
- How should a classification separate the source of a claim from its reliability?
- How can a label survive aggregation, when estimates are mixed with observations?
- How should confidence be communicated to non-specialists without misleading them?
- When is a scenario mistaken for a forecast, and how is that prevented?
- What should a record say when the evidence type is unknown?
How evidence loses its label.
Evidence is most often misused not because it is wrong but because it is read as something it is not. A modelled estimate printed in a table beside published statistics acquires their apparent authority. A scenario designed to explore a possibility is quoted as a prediction. Assessment bodies in climate science, public health and statistics have each developed calibrated language for confidence and likelihood for this reason.
The Registry uses the evidence labels shared across the programme: Observed, Published statistics, Institution-reported, Estimated, Modelled, Forecast, Scenario, Expert judgement and Unknown. A label names a source type. “Published statistics” means published by the responsible agency; it is not a claim of endorsement. Estimates stay labelled as estimates and never replace published figures.
Classifying and qualifying evidence.
- 01
出典の種類
The label records how the evidence was produced, separately from any judgement of quality.
- 02
Reliance limits
Each record states the uses it can and cannot support, such as the geographic scale or period for which it holds.
- 03
Confidence
Where a method yields uncertainty, the record carries it, drawing on statistical practice from the STEM Commons. See データ・エンジニアリング、相互運用性、スチュワードシップ for the data side.
- 04
限界
Any classification simplifies. Mixed evidence needs the most cautious label of its parts, which can understate strong findings, and labels depend on honest declaration by issuers.
Where this page’s references lead.
このページの読解の基準となる機関と文書。状態と版は変わります。各リンクは発行機関へ移動します。
質問と回答。
Is a declared assertion worthless?
Why can confidence words mislead?
Can an assertion’s class change?
Why are many citations not many sources?
Is “published statistics” a stronger label than Modelled?
Why keep an Unknown label?
Can a record carry more than one label?
このページからエビデンスを提供する。
報告書 is the Consortium’s quarterly publication. What you know about this subject can become evidence, a case or a correction in the next edition, credited to you and published under CC BY 4.0 where it is your own work.
- メールゲートウェイ GW-GCRIこのページから送信するエビデンス、訂正、事例、手法、レビュー、翻訳、プロファイルへの入力。このページのタグが付いて届くため、担当の編集者が受け取ります。
- Zenodoオープンな寄託寄託してコミュニティに提出するORCID iD を使って Zenodo に自分の記録を公開し、そこから Reports コミュニティに提出してください。キュレーターが審査し、DOI は引き続きあなたのものです。
- 報告書GCRI貢献のすべての方法を見る貢献の種類、それぞれの審査方法、受け取るクレジット、ライセンス、決して受け付けないもの。
個人データ、重要インフラの機微な詳細、共有する権利のないものは決して送らないでください。寄稿は利用前にレビューされます。送付によって著作者としての権利や編集上の権利が生じることはなく、スポンサーシップで調査結果を買うことは決してできません。
手法、データセット、または問いを持ち込んでください。
情報提供と問い合わせは本日から受け付けています。問い合わせには参照番号が付き、次の手順が示されます。申請、支払い、計算資源の割り当て、登録は、担当チーム、規約、審査体制が整ってから開始します。
法的文書。
このサイトの地図、データ、図表は、背景と一般的な情報として示すものです。助言、予報、警報ではありません。情報の限界は免責事項とデータに関する注意事項に記載しています。