About & Methodology
How we separate what we know from what we think
The hub is a working research register, not a publication archive. Records are visible while they are still uncertain — which only works if the difference between a source, an observation, an analysis, a hypothesis and a finding is impossible to miss.
The chain
Source → observation → analysis → hypothesis → finding
Source
An external artefact: a paper, standard, dataset, regulation, report or interview. A source is cited, never paraphrased into a claim of our own. It carries a type, a URL or reference, a publication date and an ingestion date.
Observation
Something recorded directly — a field measurement, a document change, a market movement. An observation states what was seen, when, where and by which method. It is not yet an explanation.
Analysis
Structured reasoning over sources and observations. Analysis is interpretive by definition and is labelled as such throughout the platform. It can be wrong while every input beneath it is correct.
Hypothesis
A proposition we consider plausible and intend to test. Hypotheses are never displayed as findings. Records of this type carry an explicit interpretive warning on their page.
Finding
A conclusion we are willing to stand behind, with its sources attached, an evidence level assigned and a verification date. A finding can still be revised — and its revision history stays visible when it is.
Evidence
Evidence levels
Evidence level describes the strength of the underlying material. It is independent of how far a record has travelled through our workflow.
A single uncorroborated account or isolated report. Useful as a lead; never sufficient on its own.
Early data or a first result, not yet replicated or independently checked.
Multiple independent sources point the same way, or a result has been reproduced.
Published in a peer-reviewed venue, or reviewed to an equivalent external standard.
Issued by the body that defines the matter — a standards organisation, regulator or official statistics provider.
Workflow
Verification statuses
Status says where a record is in our process. A verified status means we have checked our own chain of reasoning and sources — it is not a guarantee about the external world.
| Status | What it means |
|---|---|
| Workflow status: Draft | Being written. Incomplete and not reviewed. Visible for transparency, not for citation. |
| Workflow status: Monitoring | We are watching this and collecting material. No conclusion is claimed. |
| Workflow status: Active research | Under active investigation with allocated effort and a defined question. |
| Workflow status: Peer review | Complete and under internal or external review before promotion. |
| Workflow status: Verified | Sources checked, reasoning reviewed, verification date recorded. Still revisable. |
| Workflow status: Archived | Retained for the record but no longer maintained or re-verified. |
| Workflow status: Retracted | Withdrawn. Kept visible so the correction is part of the public record. |
Principles
Editorial and research principles
Traceability
Every analytical record links to the sources and observations it rests on. If a claim has no traceable input, it does not get published.
Corrections in the open
Errors are corrected visibly. We amend the record and note that it was amended, rather than silently replacing text.
Versioning
Publications and research records carry revision numbers. A citation points at a specific revision, not a moving target.
Source transparency
Source type, publisher, jurisdiction and access date are shown. Where a source is preliminary, a preprint or an internal note, that is stated.
Uncertainty is stated
Confidence levels and evidence levels are part of the record, not a footnote. Low confidence is published as low confidence.
No hypothesis presented as fact
Workflow status describes where a record sits in our process. It is not a truth claim about the world. Nothing marked hypothesis, analysis, scenario or risk brief should be read as an established result.
Provenance
On the records currently in this platform
Most records visible here are prototype data, and each one carries a Prototype marker. They exist to demonstrate the data model — statuses, evidence levels, source links, revisions, topic aggregation — and to show how the platform behaves with content in it. They are illustrative examples, not verified Jarlhalla research, and at least one reference was a placeholder rather than a real identifier.
Records without that marker are real Jarlhalla records. Real does not mean proven: a record only carries factual claims once sources and evidence are attached to it, and a workflow status describes editorial progress rather than the truth of a claim.
Nothing marked as prototype should be cited, quoted or treated as a factual claim about the world. When verified records replace them, the prototype notice across the platform will be removed.
Ecosystem
Part of Jarlhalla
The Research Hub is an independent daughter platform of Jarlhalla. It runs on its own data model, its own editorial process and its own hosting, so that it can be moved to a dedicated address such as research.jarlhalla.no without touching the parent site. Its findings inform Jarlhalla's work; Jarlhalla's commercial activity does not set its conclusions.