Verification, sources, and calibrated confidence
Check important statements against the source.
In this lesson · F4 of 8
All lessons in this track →Progress for this track is saved in this browser only. No completion badge is issued. View your learning.
Start with the idea
Check important statements against the source.
A statement can sound right and still change what the source means. Check the wording, date and approval separately. A correct date does not make the rest of a sentence correct.
Claim: A statement that you can check against evidence.
See the example and check your understanding
A made-up teaching example
The source says teams may seek approval for a draft-only trial. Publication review is scheduled for 20 October. A draft changes this to “All teams must publish by 20 October.” That changes both the rule and the date’s meaning.
Ask yourself
Is a review date the same as a publication deadline?
Show the explanation
No. Keep the review date, but remove the invented deadline and requirement. The sources also do not show completed approval.
Start with these checks
- Match each important claim to a source passage.
- Keep permission different from obligation.
- Remove invented results and quotations.
Use the different practice case below and check every requirement in its full instructions.
The video explains the main idea. Use the sources, instructions and checks below to complete the practice.
Captions appear here during playback.
Verification, sources, and calibrated confidence
Check important statements against the source.
Video playback is unavailable. Read the descriptive transcript below, go directly to practice, or open the video file.
Source-based teaching example · Fictional data · Reviewed 2026-10-03. Microsoft Mark · locally synthesized. On a small screen, use fullscreen for diagram details or read the transcript.
Read the descriptive transcript
0:00 · What you will learn
Check important statements against the source.
What appears on screen
Check important statements against the source.
0:05 · The idea
A statement can sound right and still change what the source means. Check the wording, date and approval separately. A correct date does not make the rest of a sentence correct.
What appears on screen
A statement can sound right and still change what the source means. Check the wording, date and approval separately. A correct date does not make the rest of a sentence correct.
0:19 · One useful term
Claim. A statement that you can check against evidence.
What appears on screen
A statement that you can check against evidence.
0:26 · A worked example · 1
The source says teams may seek approval for a draft-only trial. Publication review is scheduled for 20 October. A draft changes this to “All teams must publish by 20 October.”
What appears on screen
The source says teams may seek approval for a draft-only trial. Publication review is scheduled for 20 October. A draft changes this to “All teams must publish by 20 October.”
0:41 · A worked example · 2
That changes both the rule and the date’s meaning.
What appears on screen
That changes both the rule and the date’s meaning.
0:47 · Your turn to think
Is a review date the same as a publication deadline? Pause and decide before continuing.
What appears on screen
Is a review date the same as a publication deadline? Pause the video if you need more time.
1:03 · Why this answer works
No. Keep the review date, but remove the invented deadline and requirement. The sources also do not show completed approval.
What appears on screen
No. Keep the review date, but remove the invented deadline and requirement. The sources also do not show completed approval.
1:15 · Check 1
Match each important claim to a source passage.
What appears on screen
Match each important claim to a source passage.
1:21 · Check 2
Keep permission different from obligation.
What appears on screen
Keep permission different from obligation.
1:26 · Check 3
Remove invented results and quotations.
What appears on screen
Remove invented results and quotations.
1:32 · Now try a different case
Open the lesson and try its different practice case. Use every check in the full task. Watching alone does not mark the lesson complete.
What appears on screen
Open the lesson Try the new case Check and revise The full task and its requirements are in the linked lesson.
Watching explains the example. Complete the lesson practice to check what you can do. Explore all visual lessons →
Before you start
Prerequisite: F3 CTSE and source IDs. Offline/no-cost route: paper, a notes editor and the synthetic packet below. Optional tools must already be authorized. No accounts, paid calls, workplace records or external actions are required.
What you will be able to do
- Type factual, interpretive, and generative claims.
- Verify exact source support.
- Scale review to consequence, reversibility, and uncertainty.
Part 1 Verify support at the claim level
Break a brief into externally checkable facts, interpretations, assumptions and proposals. For each material fact, open the exact source passage and check whether it supports the stated verb, scope, date and subject. Search snippets and generated citations are candidates until verified. A valid source can still be misquoted or applied to the wrong population. Calibrated language identifies what the evidence establishes and what remains unknown; the model saying high confidence is not a check. Increase verification with consequence, and use qualified review where applicable.
Part 2 Worked synthetic example
Synthetic P1: teams may conduct a draft-only trial after Lee approves; publication requires separate review. P2: publication review is scheduled for 20 October. A brief says all teams must publish by 20 October. This turns permission into obligation and a review date into a deadline. Correction: teams may seek approval for a draft-only trial; separate publication review is scheduled for 20 October. No completed approval is established.
Part 3 Guided practice and feedback
Audit “Lee has approved every trial”; “publication review is scheduled 20 October”; “a trial may help.” Feedback: unsupported completed approval; supported date from P2; interpretation that needs criteria. Label each claim supported, inferred, assumed, contradicted or unresolved and choose a disposition, rather than relying on a confidence percentage alone.
Review and next step
Self-review demonstrates practice, not independent certification or operational approval. F5 applies verification to extraction, synthesis and rewriting.
Substantive review: 2026-10-02. See the configuration guide. OWASP excessive-agency guidance discusses the risks of unnecessary capabilities, permissions and autonomy.