Public record / corrections
Change the record, not the standard.
This log records material factual, source, limitation, conflict, and primary-workflow classification changes. It separates a correction from an endorsement or a validation result.
2026-07-21 / Registry expansion v0.2
Added Evidenza, Electric Twin, Epistemix, PersonaPanels, and Vurvey Labs from public first-party sources. Each record received a primary workflow lane and source-review status; no new independent-validation, reproduction, or human-reference evidence checks were marked.
These are new source records, not endorsements, corrections, or comparative results. The Index will give every listed organization the same correction route and will keep material source or classification changes visible here.
A changed source, a changed description of a tool’s primary workflow, a corrected limitation or conflict, or an evidence-check update requires a dated record. Minor copy edits that do not alter factual meaning may be made without a separate entry.
Correction rights without editorial control.
- 01
Scope
Anyone may submit a factual correction, a primary source, an accessible research artifact, or a disclosure of a conflict or limitation.
- 02
Review
Editors assess the supplied evidence against the published methodology. A vendor response is evidence to review, not a reason to accept a claim.
- 03
Notice
When practical, an affected organization receives a correction window before a material factual change. Silence is never treated as agreement or validation.
- 04
Record
Accepted material changes receive a dated entry describing the affected record, what changed, why, and the source. Editorial rationale is preserved.
- 05
Boundary
Submitting a correction does not grant editorial control, improve an evidence check, create an endorsement, or change the funding disclosure.
Landscape changes remain auditable.
A primary workflow lane is a navigational classification based on public descriptions. A system can have many methods, but receives one lane so the landscape does not imply that human-participant tools, synthetic respondents, population simulations, and benchmarks are interchangeable.
See the Synthetic Research & Simulation Landscape and the full classification protocol .
Submit a correction
Bring the source.
Provide the affected URL, the exact factual issue, the proposed wording, and a primary or persistent scholarly source. We will not treat submissions as publication requests or endorsement requests.