Why We Show the Evidence, Even When It's Weak

Fluency is not evidence

A language model will describe a market of millions with the same assurance whether the underlying data is forty independent complaints or one ambiguous forum post. Nothing in the prose distinguishes the two.

The only fix is to show the underlying data and let the reader judge. That is why every opportunity lists its complaints with links, and why evidence strength is computed rather than written.

What we do when evidence is thin

• The evidence strength dimension drops, dragging the composite down
• The synthesis prompt is instructed to say so plainly and scope the idea narrowly
• The competitors list stays empty rather than being filled with plausible-sounding names
• The opportunity still appears — hiding weak signals would be its own distortion

The trade we are making

Showing our working means you will sometimes disagree with a score, and occasionally catch us being wrong. That is the intended outcome. A tool you can check is worth more than one you have to trust.