Peer-Review Validation Flag

The flag is not always a simple yes/no. Sophisticated implementations use categorical states to indicate the type of review.

• Binary Flag: TRUE (peer-reviewed) or FALSE (not peer-reviewed).
• Categorical Flag: GOLD (double-blind journal), GREEN (open peer review), BRONZE (editorial review only).
• Heuristic Weight: A GOLD flag provides a stronger Source Credibility Score boost than a BRONZE flag.
• Example: An AI citing a paper from Nature would receive a GOLD flag, while a technical report from ArXiv with post-publication commentary might receive a GREEN flag.

The validation flag must be cross-referenced with a Predatory Journal Filter to prevent laundering credibility. A positive flag from a known predatory publisher is algorithmically toxic.

• False Positive Prevention: The system checks the source's ISSN or publisher against a dynamic Retracted Source Blacklist and known predatory lists.
• Signal Inversion: If a source is flagged as predatory, the Peer-Review Validation Flag is forcibly set to FALSE or COMPROMISED, regardless of the journal's self-reported status.
• Outcome: This prevents the Authoritative Domain Boost from being applied to fraudulent sources masquerading as legitimate academic venues.

Peer-review status is not a permanent property. The flag must be sensitive to temporal changes in the source's lifecycle.

• Preprint State: An initial flag of PENDING_REVIEW is applied to preprints.
• Post-Publication Update: If a paper is retracted, the flag transitions to RETRACTED, immediately triggering a Citation Drift Detection alert.
• Versioning: The flag is tied to a specific version of the document via its Reference Provenance Hash. A new version requires a new validation check.
• Recency Weight: The flag's influence on the Source Recency Weight can decay if the review occurred decades ago in a rapidly evolving field like computer science.

The flag can apply to different levels of the source material, affecting the Attribution Granularity Level.

• Journal-Level Flag: The simplest form, applied if the journal is listed in a verified index like DOAJ or MEDLINE.
• Article-Level Flag: A more precise flag confirming that the specific article, not just the journal, underwent review. This is critical for hybrid journals that publish both peer-reviewed and non-reviewed content.
• Data-Level Flag: An emerging standard where the underlying datasets and code are also flagged as PEER_REVIEWED_DATA to ensure computational reproducibility.
• Example: Citing a letter to the editor from a prestigious journal should not inherit the journal's peer-review flag; it requires an article-level check.

The flag serves as a high-confidence multiplier in composite Trust Scoring Algorithms, but it is not absolute.

• Baseline Multiplier: A positive flag might apply a 1.5x multiplier to the Source Credibility Score.
• Corroboration Requirement: The Cross-Reference Consensus protocol can override the flag. If multiple non-peer-reviewed primary sources (e.g., official government sensor data) contradict a peer-reviewed claim, the consensus can down-weight the reviewed source.
• H-Index Weighting: The flag's weight is often combined with the author's H-Index Weighting. A peer-reviewed paper by an author with a high H-index receives a compounded authority boost.
• Output: The flag is a critical input feature for the Hallucination Risk Index, where its absence on a factual claim significantly raises the predicted risk of hallucination.

A critical function of the flag is to strictly differentiate genuine peer review from basic editorial gatekeeping to prevent authority inflation.

• Peer Review: Involves a critical assessment by independent experts with domain-specific knowledge who evaluate methodology, logic, and novelty. The flag is VALIDATED.
• Editorial Review: Involves an internal editor checking for scope, grammar, and basic plausibility. The flag is NOT_VALIDATED or EDITORIAL_ONLY.
• Source Tier Classification: This distinction directly feeds into Source Tier Classification, placing genuinely peer-reviewed articles in Tier 1 and editorially reviewed trade magazines in Tier 2.
• Example: A well-written article in Forbes undergoes editorial review but receives a FALSE peer-review flag, giving it a lower Factual Entailment Ratio weighting than a peer-reviewed paper on the same topic.