GCRI · 登记册
证据类别
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: 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.
记录账本。
团队跟踪该主题时会使用的界面：其指标、状态与决策。名称为示例，数值仅作示意。
记录账本
Evidence classes · Registry · Ledger head 3142470
- 已登记记录5701
- 来源追溯完整的记录占比，%92正常
- 未结更正10关注
- 权利保留4信息
最新记录
| NX-R-12221 | 计划状态 | v2 | 4472615 | 已登记 |
| NX-P-88287 | 发布 | v3 | 1324692 | 已登记 |
| NX-E-72567 | 证据记录 | v4 | 4410118 | 更正进行中 |
| NX-C-27773 | 参与 | v1 | 7438493 | 权利暂停 |
版本历史
- v1NEW已登记并附来源
- v2FIX单位已更正，原因已记录
- v3OPEN已请求更正
Evidence classes mean the same thing in every domain.
Labels follow the IPCC uncertainty guidance (2010) in spirit and apply to every series in 报告. 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.
模型、其假设、数据和不确定性，以科学家或工程师会核查的形式呈现。结构遵循已发表的方法。所取数值仅为示意，不是研究发现。
数据集与来源追溯
The data classes behind evidence classes and what is recorded about each before it is used.
| 数据类别 | 已记录溯源 | 已说明分辨率 | 许可已核查 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 卫星影像，光学与雷达 | 传感器、处理级别、获取日期 | 像元大小和重访周期 | 每景 |
| 再分析与气候模式输出 | 模型、实验、成员、版本 | 格网与时间步长 | 每次发布 |
| 原位传感器和测量站 | 测站、仪器、校准记录 | 点位与采样率 | 每个网络 |
| 人口与资产暴露 | 方法、版本年份、输入来源 | 单元大小和单位 | 每次发布 |
| 边界与参考地理 | 制作者、版本、日期 | 比例尺 | 每个版本 |
- 沿袭
- 从来源到图表的 W3C PROV 记录
- 原则
- FAIR：可查找、可访问、可互操作、可复用
- 缺口
- 显示为缺失，绝不悄然填充
衡量什么，以及衡量得如何。
每个指标都注明其单位、频率、背后的来源类型以及数值将附带的证据标签。此处不显示数值：数值由计划依据其自身权限提供。
| 指标 | 单位 | 节奏 | 来源类型 | 标签 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assertions with an evidence class | share of assertions | 每月 | Schema validation | 观测 |
| Assertions by evidence class | count by class | 每季度 | Registry records | 观测 |
| Assertions resting on a single source | share of assertions | 每季度 | Provenance graph | 观测 |
| Confidence statements with a stated basis | share of confidence statements | 每季度 | Curation review | 观测 |
| Class reassignments after review | 计数 | 每季度 | Review records | 观测 |
| Agreement between independent classifiers | agreement coefficient | per audit | Double-coding audit | 估算 |
| Claims exceeding their evidence class | 计数 | 每月 | Claim-to-evidence audit | 观测 |
证据来自何处。
具名公共数据集与机构记录，各自注明许可类别。依协议获得的来源仅按其条款使用，绝不再次发布。
| 来源 | 它提供什么 | 许可类别 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| IPCC 关于一致处理不确定性的指导说明 | 评估中表述置信度和可能性的校准用语 | 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 |
由谁决定，以及证据服务于什么。
Registry prepares evidence. The decisions below are taken by the authorities named, under their own rules, and never by the platform.
| 谁来决定 | 问题 | 本页面服务的证据 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 |
该主题产生的产出
- 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
来源类型
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 数据工程、互操作性与管理 for the data side.
- 04
局限
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.
阅读本页时所对照的机构和文件。状态和版本会变化；每个链接都指向发布机构。
问题与解答。
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?
从本页贡献证据。
报告 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.
- 电子邮件网关 GW-GCRI从本页发送证据、更正、案例、方法、审查、翻译或概况投稿。它会带上本页标签送达，由负责的编辑接收。
- Zenodo开放存缴存缴并提交到社区用您的 ORCID iD 在 Zenodo 上发布您自己的记录，然后提交到那里的 Reports 社区。由策展人审核；DOI 仍归您所有。
- 报告GCRI查看所有贡献方式贡献类型、各自的评审方式、您获得的署名、许可协议，以及绝不接受的内容。
切勿发送个人数据、敏感基础设施细节或您无权分享的任何内容。贡献在使用前会经过审查；发送贡献不赋予署名权或编辑权，赞助也绝不能换取研究结论。
法律文件。
本网站上的地图、数据和图表仅作为背景和一般信息展示。它们不是建议、预测或预警；信息的局限见免责声明和数据说明。