How SWI evaluates evidence

A bounded first collection

This release connects four records: ant, stigmergy, ant colony optimization, and artificial-agent coordination through three reviewed relationships. It is an initial research chain, not a complete atlas. The connection from ACO to artificial-agent coordination is labeled editorial synthesis; it does not establish a performance benefit for modern AI agents. No reproducible experiments or measured benchmarks are published in this collection.

The research loop

Discover → Collect → Verify → Structure → Connect → Explain → Experiment → Measure → Publish → Revisit.

The first six steps govern knowledge records. Experiments and measurements require a defined, reproducible setup. We enter sources first, then evidence records, claims, and entity or relationship references. We verify titles, authors, venue, publication dates, identifiers, links, access dates, and what each source actually establishes. Turkish and English preserve the same scope and limitations.

Source priority

Source type and reliability are separate judgments. An official repository may establish implementation behavior without supporting a biological claim. Reporting supplies context and cannot replace primary evidence.

1. Peer-reviewed papers and authoritative scholarly books
2. Original research-group or institutional publications
3. Conference proceedings and standards
4. Official project repositories and technical documentation
5. Reputable technical reporting for context

Claims, evidence, and uncertainty

A source is the original publication. An evidence record ties that source to a claim through a locator, a copyright-safe excerpt when useful, and an editorial relevance note. Evidence can support, challenge, or contextualize a claim; contradictions stay visible.

Evidence is a bounded statement directly supported by cited material. Synthesis is an editorial interpretation derived from explicit sources. A hypothesis is testable but unestablished. An open question remains unresolved. Confidence is an editorial assessment, not a mathematical probability; contested and not-assessed avoid invented certainty. Missing support is shown as Not established. Biological inspiration does not imply biological identity.

Review and freshness policy

Publication date describes the source; access date records retrieval; review date records an evidence check; update date records an edit. An edit or page build does not renew a review.

Policy v1: stable foundational biology, mechanisms, and established algorithms use 90 elapsed UTC calendar days; fast-moving AI and project records use 30. The final day is included. A stable record reviewed on 6 September 2026 remains current through 5 December and becomes review-due on 6 December. A fast-moving record with the same review date becomes due on 7 October.

Current requires a valid review within its interval and all cited source access states available. A missing or future review date, absent evidence, unavailable or unknown source access, a changed watched dependency, or an explicitly recorded review-due state requires review. Historical and superseded are explicit record overrides; they preserve provenance and do not assert present source availability. The caller supplies the evaluation date; static pages show their evaluation date and refresh on rebuild, not continuously.

AI assistance and publication

AI may assist discovery, deduplication, classification, translation, and draft synthesis. A human-reviewable source record remains authoritative. AI output cannot establish bibliographic facts or serve as evidence without independent verification. Unsupported statements are removed or labeled hypotheses or open questions.

Publication requires resolving references, valid schemas, evidence for substantive claims, checked source metadata, bilingual scope parity, clear synthesis labels, correct relationship directions, consistent review dates, source-backed timeline dates, and usable desktop and mobile disclosures.

Corrections and maintenance

Corrections preserve the earlier public state through a correction note or version history. If a source disappears, its access state changes and an authoritative alternate location may be added while retaining provenance. Changed evidence triggers review of both the claim and its relationships. Superseded material remains attributable.

Automated review-candidate discovery is future work; it must not publish unreviewed claims. This release has no public correction-submission form. Corrections currently follow the repository review and version-history process.