SCC Nexus Research Standards

Purpose

SCC Nexus aims to produce outputs that are inspectable, reproducible and appropriately cautious. The standard is inspired by established academic and scientific norms: transparent methods, primary-source preference, explicit uncertainty, reproducibility, provenance and independent review where feasible.

Evidence hierarchy

Source strength is assessed contextually, but the default preference order is:

1. Primary datasets, official registers and original research records.
2. Peer-reviewed primary research and systematic reviews.
3. Authoritative institutional reports, standards and technical guidance.
4. Reputable secondary synthesis.
5. News, commentary and discovery-only material.

Lower-tier sources may identify leads but must not silently substitute for stronger evidence when stronger evidence is available.

Claim discipline

Every substantive claim should be classified as one of:

• Observed — directly represented in a cited source or dataset.
• Derived — calculated reproducibly from cited inputs.
• Inferred — interpretation supported by evidence but not directly observed.
• Hypothesis — plausible proposition requiring further testing.
• Unverified — discovered but not sufficiently corroborated.

Public presentation must not blur these categories.

Reproducibility requirements

A research output is reproducible only when a competent third party can identify:

• source identifiers and retrieval dates;
• inclusion and exclusion criteria;
• transformations and calculations;
• software and dependency versions where material;
• validation checks;
• known missingness and bias;
• output version and build identifier.

Statistical and scientific integrity

• Report denominators, not percentages alone.
• Distinguish exploratory from confirmatory analysis.
• Avoid causal language from observational associations unless justified by design and analysis.
• Preserve missingness and uncertainty.
• Document multiple-testing or model-selection risks where relevant.
• Do not treat statistical significance as practical or clinical importance.
• Pre-specify thresholds where feasible and disclose post-hoc choices.

AI and automation

AI may assist discovery, extraction, classification, summarisation or drafting, but it cannot itself establish scientific truth. Material AI-assisted steps should be documented. High-impact claims require source-grounded verification independent of model output.

Corrections

Material errors should be corrected transparently with a dated changelog. Historical versions should remain identifiable where practicable.

Independence

Funding, commercial interests, sponsorship, personal interests or advocacy positions that could reasonably affect interpretation should be disclosed alongside relevant outputs.

Source version: RESEARCH_STANDARDS.md. Public HTML is the canonical presentation page.