Mian Zhang

Public Release - 2026-06-15

Openness is structured evidence, not total disclosure.

Artifact: Public Evidence Route Boundary v0. A public evidence layer should let readers inspect claims without forcing them into sensitive material, private logs, accounts, correspondence, or execution chains.

citable_evidence boundary_note excluded_material reader_route challenge_path
Papers Evidence Map Concepts Counterexamples Registries
Public evidence boundary showing citable evidence separated from sensitive and non-public material.

Artifact

A clean public layer makes criticism more precise.

This update separates public evidence, boundary explanations, and material that should not enter the public layer. The goal is not to expose more files; the goal is to make public claims easier to inspect.

This page does not publish customer data, private logs, sensitive correspondence, account material, non-public records, or private execution chains.

1

Public evidence

Citable records, DOI pages, registries, manifests, pages, and challenge routes.

2

Boundary explanation

What a record can support, what it cannot support, and what remains missing.

3

Excluded material

Sensitive, private, account-level, operational, or non-public material.

4

Reader route

Where a reader should go to inspect the claim without guessing.

5

Challenge path

Where a reader can point to a missing record, unclear boundary, or over-broad sentence.

6

Review state

What should stay pending until the public record is sufficient.

Public Layer

A public archive should not make the reader sort private material.

A large folder can look transparent while making the evidence harder to inspect. If public, boundary, and sensitive materials are mixed together, readers must guess what can be cited and what should be ignored.

The cleaner route is a smaller public layer with citable records, explicit exclusions, and a clear path for criticism.

Sensitive material isolation visual separating public evidence from non-public records.

Isolation

Deleting from the public layer can improve transparency.

Removing sensitive or non-public material is not hiding evidence when the public claim can still be checked through DOI records, registries, manifests, and boundary notes.

Good openness asks whether the public claim is inspectable without exposing material that should never become part of a public archive.

Challenge Surface

Find the sentence whose audience is unclear.

A useful challenge identifies wording whose public evidence route is unclear, hides the evidence route, or leaves readers unsure whether a record is citable.

The repair is to rewrite the sentence for public inspection: claim, evidence route, boundary, and excluded material.

Matrix

Public-material boundary fields.

FieldRequired valueFailure modeRepair route
public_claimThe exact claim a reader should inspect.Claim is mixed with process notes.Rewrite as public claim.
evidence_routeThe public record, DOI, registry, or page.No stable route.Add citable anchor.
boundary_noteWhat the record does and does not support.Boundary is implicit.Add visible limit.
excluded_materialMaterial that does not enter the public layer.Sensitive material is implied.State exclusion.
challenge_routeWhere objections should land.Critique path is vague.Add issue or registry route.
review_statePending, reviewed, or not public.Everything looks equally public.Add state.

Challenge

Challenge one public-material boundary.

Point to any public sentence whose evidence route is unclear, lacks a citable anchor, or blurs sensitive material with public records.

The strongest challenge names the sentence, the missing public route, and the boundary that should be added.