claim-evidence-ledger

name	claim-evidence-ledger
description	Use when auditing mathematical paper drafts for supported claims, missing citations, overclaims, proof status, experiment support, or source-to-text traceability.

Claim Evidence Ledger

Build a claim ledger before polishing prose. The goal is to make every substantive statement traceable to a proof, experiment, citation, or explicit uncertainty.

Inputs

• Paper draft or target section.
• Source packet: theorem statements, proof notes, experiment logs, figures, bibliography, related-work notes, reviewer comments, or prior drafts.
• Optional venue/audience constraints and citation policy.

If sources are missing, request the source packet or produce only an evidence request.

Output Contract

Return a table with:

Field	Meaning
claim	The exact or paraphrased paper claim
location	Section, paragraph, theorem, figure, or equation
type	theorem, proof, experiment, citation, positioning, limitation, future-work
support	Source file, theorem, log, citation key, or reviewer comment
status	supported, citation-needed, needs-proof, needs-experiment, overclaimed, unsupported, uncertain
action	Keep, cite, soften, remove, verify, or ask human

Workflow

1. Extract claims from the target text.
2. Classify each claim by mathematical, empirical, literature, or contribution role.
3. Match claims to source evidence.
4. For mathematical claims, distinguish "has a proof sketch" from "assumptions, dependencies, and proof obligations have been audited"; route the latter to proof-obligation-and-assumption-audit when needed.
5. Mark unsupported claims instead of rewriting them as if they were true.
6. Suggest edits that preserve the strongest source-backed version.

Review Rules

• Do not invent citation keys, theorem numbers, experiments, or author claims.
• Keep theorem/proof status distinct from conjecture, heuristic, or empirical evidence.
• Do not mark a theorem claim fully supported when assumptions, dependency fit, or edge cases are still unaudited.
• Treat abstract, introduction, and conclusion claims as high risk because they compress and often overstate results.