Service
Applied Verification
Applied Verification tests claims about AI systems against evidence. A review does not advocate for or against any vendor. It asks a bounded question, gathers evidence, and reports what the evidence supports — with a severity rating and a stated confidence level.
Findings, not advocacy.
Four dimensions
Every review examines the claim through four dimensions:
Evidence integrity
Can the claim be traced to its sources, checked, and corrected?
Authority boundaries
What may the system decide, and who remains responsible?
Human agency
Does automation preserve meaningful choice and intervention?
Relational and system health
Does the system strengthen or weaken people's capacity to bear disagreement, uncertainty, and silence?
How a review works
Every finding states the claim examined, the evidence, a severity rating (protective / neutral / concerning / severe), a confidence level (confirmed / probable / insufficient), and what would change the assessment. Reviews are followable: another reviewer working from the same evidence can reproduce the finding or explain the difference.
The engagement
Applied Verification is an independent, evidence-based review of AI systems, claims, and workflows. The scope is fixed before work begins.
$2,500
Fixed fee · one review
Bounded scope. One claim, system, or workflow — agreed in advance.
Deliverables.
- Written findings, each with a severity rating and a confidence level
- A reproducible evidence trail — another reviewer can follow the same steps
- One review call to walk through the findings
This review does not include remediation or implementation work.
If budget is a constraint, scope is reduced — not rigor.
Proof of method
Two completed reviews show how the method behaves in both directions.
Anthropic Claude Citations
The tested citation claim held on the scoped suite.
Meta Content Moderation Appeals
Documented safeguards exist, but human oversight is uneven across the appeals pathway.
The same method confirmed one third-party claim and found a concerning limitation in another, without changing standards.
Request a review
Have a claim worth testing?
Name the claim, the system, or the workflow. The first conversation is about scope — what question the review will answer, and what it will not.