Public methodology · Version 1.1

How a claim becomes an RCI record.

The method is designed for auditability: stable identities, original values, explicit transformations, claim-level evidence and a separate declaration of what RCI actually did.

Effective 2026-08-11Review every 90 daysMethod changes logged

1 · Define the decision and comparison boundary

Each dataset begins with a fixed user question, included component class, excluded variants and minimum evidence fields. RCI does not expand the boundary mid-comparison to accommodate whichever products have cleaner marketing data.

2 · Establish a stable component identity

A record requires a manufacturer, model or orderable identifier, variant boundary and a traceable first-party source. Family-level claims are not silently assigned to every variant. Revisions, regions and discontinued models remain distinguishable.

3 · Preserve the source claim

RCI stores the reported value, original unit, wording, test condition, source URL, document title or revision, source location and last-verified date before any normalization. A screenshot or cached document may support an audit, but the public citation points to the lawful upstream source whenever possible.

4 · Normalize without deleting context

Units may be converted only through a documented, reversible transformation. Values with materially different test conditions remain separate. When a definition is unclear, the value stays unnormalized and the missing condition is published.

No-condition, no-comparison rule

Peak and continuous ratings, precision-specific compute, range under different reflectivity, and cycle life under different depth-of-discharge assumptions are not collapsed into one field.

5 · Assign evidence at claim level

CodeStateOperational meaning
VIndependently verifiedSupported by a qualified external record independent of the manufacturer claim. This claim state does not by itself mean RCI physically tested the product; the separate EV0–EV6 work level states what was actually done.
MManufacturer claimedDirectly stated by the manufacturer; useful primary evidence, but not independent verification.
DRCI derivedCalculated or normalized by RCI with the source values, units and method preserved.
CConflictingCredible sources disagree. The conflict remains visible until evidence resolves it.
UUnknownNo adequate public evidence. Unknown is a valid result, not a blank to fill with inference.

The state describes the claim, not the prestige of the source. A value can change state as stronger evidence appears. Prior evidence remains in the change history.

6 · Declare what work was actually performed

Claim state and work level answer different questions. M/V/D/C/U describes the status of a claim. EV0–EV6 describes whether RCI only read a source, checked files, recomputed public data, handled a physical specimen or obtained an external test.

LevelWork performedWhat it supportsWhat it does not support
EV0Source-reported only
Upstream author or manufacturer
What the responsible source states at a fixed location and date.That RCI checked the artifact, recomputed the result or tested hardware.
EV1RCI source verification
RCI Editorial Team
Identity, revision, source location, stated condition and rights boundary were checked.File integrity, numerical reproduction or device performance.
EV2RCI artifact-integrity audit
RCI Editorial Team
Downloaded files, hashes, manifests, source trees or release inventories match stated public artifacts.That software works on a device or that hardware meets a performance claim.
EV3RCI public-data recomputation
RCI Editorial Team
Specified aggregates or structural results can be recomputed from an identified public dataset.Unreleased experiments, model training, hardware behavior or generalization beyond the dataset.
EV4RCI physical bench test
RCI Editorial Team
The identified specimen produced the published result under RCI’s disclosed apparatus, protocol and conditions.Population-wide performance, certification, safety or replication by another organization.
EV5External independent replication
Named organization independent of RCI and the vendor conclusion
A second organization reproduced a defined result with disclosed deviations and raw records.Accredited conformity or universal performance outside the replicated protocol.
EV6Accredited laboratory test
Named laboratory with applicable accreditation and scope
A specified test or conformity conclusion was produced under the named standard, scope and accreditation.Claims outside that test method, specimen, standard or accreditation scope.
Artifact audit is not a hardware test

EV1 source verification, EV2 release-integrity work and EV3 public-data recomputation are desktop evidence work. They may be independent of vendor influence, but they do not mean RCI handled or measured a device. Only EV4 and above require a physical specimen; EV5 requires a named external replication, and EV6 requires an applicable accredited-laboratory scope.

Machine-readable definitions are published at /data/methodology-evidence-work-levels.json. Organizations interested in hosted testing, external replication or applicable accredited work can review the EV4–EV6 testing partner program.

7 · Pass a publication gate

Reference records require stable identity, upstream citation, last-verified date and visible evidence state. Comparative outputs additionally require compatible definitions and conditions. Research articles distinguish reported facts, RCI analysis and inference.

Every new research audit must disclose its highest completed EV level. Titles and summaries must not use “independent audit” as shorthand for physical testing. When no specimen was handled, the visible page must say so.

8 · Recheck, supersede and correct

High-volatility product pages and software support records are checked more often than stable standards metadata. Material corrections identify what changed, why, when and which downstream pages or files were affected. See the corrections process and public change log.