Our articles are built around inspectable experiments. Here is the standard we apply.
State the question before the result
Define the task, starting inputs, and what would count as success. Label synthetic examples clearly. Say when the agent that prepared a sample also conducted the experiment; a controlled demonstration is not an independent benchmark.
Show the evidence
Preserve relevant inputs, outputs, and checks. Where feasible, provide downloadable examples. Build diagrams from recorded evidence and label them as diagrams. Screenshots must show the actual output they describe.
Check the claim we actually make
A content comparison can establish that file bytes were preserved; it cannot establish that the new folder layout is intuitive. A valid calendar file can still contain an incorrectly interpreted date. Describe each check and avoid extending it beyond what it tests.
Keep uncertainty visible
Identify incomplete tests, ambiguous inputs, product requirements, and important limits. Do not invent human observations, expertise, quotes, measured costs, or time savings. Distinguish a working example from a broadly reliable procedure.
Update and correct
Articles carry a test or verification date. When a material error is found, correct the article and describe the correction. Recheck affected instructions when tools change. A publication date alone does not establish that instructions remain current.
Disclose commercial relationships
Identify sponsorships or affiliate relationships in the relevant article if they are introduced. They do not change the obligation to report the experiment’s actual results.