What you will make

A corrected draft and a claim table showing source support, corrections, and unresolved questions.

A fluent draft can make unsupported dates, numbers, or citations appear settled. Verification gives you a usable editorial record. It also helps you recognize when a task needs better evidence or a person's judgment instead of another generated answer.

• Separate factual claims, inferences, and suggestions in a draft.
• Verify citations and inspect calculation inputs and units.
• Correct or remove unsupported claims while recording unresolved evidence.

Work through the method

1. Inventory the claims

   Identify checkable dates, counts, names, units, and status claims in a small draft. Assign IDs and define the authorized public source set.

   Check your work: The inventory covers the selected draft.

2. Locate source evidence

   Open each public source and locate its passage or table. Check title, date, organization, geography, and page. A working link alone does not support a claim.

   Check your work: Supporting evidence has a precise location.

3. Check the wording

   Compare each statement with source context, qualifications, and exceptions. Mark supported, contradicted, or unresolved. A second model answer does not replace reading the evidence.

   Check your work: Inferences are distinguished from source statements.

4. Audit any arithmetic

   Check original structured inputs, units, exclusions, and denominators. Recalculate a small example in a spreadsheet. Review generated code and methods where relevant; keep missing distinct from zero.

   Check your work: Checked arithmetic is reproducible from documented inputs.

5. Make the correction

   Correct supported statements and remove or flag unresolved ones. Keep proposals labeled. Identify questions requiring human review; do not automate grading, eligibility, or professional judgment.

   Check your work: The corrected draft keeps uncertainty visible.

6. Save the evidence trail

   Save the draft and evidence table with review date, scope, calculation checks, and AI-assistance disclosure. Trace one corrected sentence to its evidence.

   Check your work: Another reader can repeat the selected checks.

Prompts to adapt

Replace the bracketed details with your own question and authorized source material. Check the output rather than treating it as evidence.

Using only [authorized public draft] and [named source documents or data], list checkable claims with IDs. For each, provide the draft wording, exact source page/section or table location, supporting evidence, and a status of supported, contradicted, or unresolved. Keep inference and proposal separate from source statements. Identify missing inputs, units, and denominators for numeric claims. Do not invent citations or certify professional conclusions. Draft corrections only where the provided evidence supports them.

Audit a short planning draft

1. Select a short draft based on authorized public evidence and identify its claims.
2. Check every selected claim and source location; label unresolved evidence.
3. Recalculate any small numeric example with explicit units and inputs.
4. Save the corrected draft with the evidence table and review scope.

Bring the method into a product

• Corrected draft with unresolved claims visibly marked
• CSV or text claim-verification table

Suggested formats: PDF, TXT, CSV.

Reflect: Which unresolved claim would change the reader's decision most if it turned out to be wrong?

Avoid these mistakes

• A valid URL can still be irrelevant to the sentence citing it.
• Missing data and a measured zero have different meanings.
• A model's agreement or confidence is not independent source verification.