Page signals and identity
The technical fixture supplies HTTP 200, a canonical, JSON-LD, robots and a sitemap. The profile review finds two mismatched fields and three missing fields.
Technical report →FICTIONAL SCENARIO · REAL TOOL OUTPUT
Explore the evidence.
Keep the context.
A hands-on introduction to the Authority Architecture System. Follow the observations, inspect the reports and learn which decision comes next.
Fictional teaching scenario
Alex Rowan, Cedar Notes, page responses, source reviews, engines and answers are invented. Reports are actual code output. The separate Sources tab contains real public entry points with dated verification notes.
4supplied profilesNot four verified identities
3claims to reviewSupport, conflicts and gaps
6simulated answersNo AI engine was queried
16public source entriesSeparate real-source catalogue
THE WORKING VIEW
Audit → Structure → Measure
Five tools. One traceable review.
This explorer displays already published reports. It does not run Python, crawl pages, upload data or collect new answers. Use the tutorials to reproduce the exact examples locally.
Claims and relationships
A conflict remains visible; an international-office claim lacks evidence. The educational JSON-LD subset lint reports zero errors and warnings.
Structural lint →Explicit citations
English/UK and French/France groups have different denominators. Both invented fractions equal 50%, without establishing market performance.
Inspect the groups →A successful request, consistent name, reviewed input label or clean structural report alone establishes neither factual truth nor search/AI visibility.
FICTIONAL / FIELD-LEVEL REVIEW
Identity consistency
Compare supplied observations with an approved reference. Aliases are explicit inputs; nonempty descriptions require manual review.
| Market / language | Field | Reference | Observation | Status |
|---|
FICTIONAL / SUPPLIED HUMAN REVIEWS
Evidence behind the claims
Relationship and support labels are reviewer declarations. The software does not read these URLs or decide which assertion is true.
FICTIONAL / EXPLICIT CITATIONS ONLY
Keep the denominators visible
These simulated groups are teaching examples, not live engine results, a market benchmark or an improvement claim. Filter observations without pooling incompatible contexts.
| Answer | Context | Simulated text | Explicit URLs |
|---|
A normalized URL repeated inside one answer counts once; it still counts in another answer. Uncited answers remain in the denominator. Read each real cited page separately before assessing support.
REAL PUBLIC ENTRY POINTS / SEPARATE CATALOGUE
Find a claim-specific starting source
These 16 curated entries are not evidence for Alex Rowan or Cedar Notes. Labels distinguish an official page read, an official link confirmed and an indexed official description. Some services were blocked or not exercised.
Catalogue snapshot: 1 November 2026, pinned to the source-map v1.0.0 dataset. Verify the particular record, identity, access conditions and current scope before using it. No backlink, endorsement or ranking outcome is promised.
FROM A TOOL TO A BUSINESS DECISION
Choose your starting question.
Which profile differences need a review?
Reference records, approved translations, missing fields and correction ownership.
Follow the tutorial →Which claims can the record support?
Owned material, unreviewed inventory, contradictions and unsupported reach claims.
Follow the tutorial →What do these citation fractions mean?
Explicit URLs, denominator choices and the limits of language/market comparisons.
Follow the tutorial →BUILD IN THE OPEN
Ask. Reproduce. Improve.
Read the maintainer FAQ, propose a scoped change or follow the next iteration. The public roadmap distinguishes delivered work from proposals.