How we research, review, update, and correct our guides

Each guide follows a consistent research process, though not every step draws on every source type — a guide cites standards or regulatory documentation only when the topic actually involves them.

The process typically includes:

• Keyword and search-intent review, to understand what a reader is actually trying to find out.
• Current SERP analysis, to see how the topic is already being explained and where gaps or errors remain.
• Review of primary research, technical documentation, relevant standards, and other authoritative sources, where applicable.
• An evidence dossier compiling the sources a guide draws from before drafting begins.
• Claim-level citation checking, so factual statements can be traced back to a specific source.
• Editorial revision for clarity, accuracy, and structure.
• SEO and cannibalization review, to keep guides distinct from one another and clearly scoped.
• Visual planning, for diagrams and figures that support the text.

AI-assisted tools may be used at multiple stages of producing a guide, including organizing research, comparing sources, outlining, drafting, editing, code implementation, and visual planning.

AI assistance does not replace source verification, editorial judgment, or any technical review explicitly recorded on an article. Not every factual claim on this site has been independently re-verified by a human beyond that process.

Technical review is not automatic for every guide. A guide names a technical reviewer only when a qualified person actually reviewed its relevant final or near-final version. When a review is recorded, the reviewer's identity — and the review date, when recorded — is shown directly on that article.

Editorial review and technical review are not the same thing. Every published guide goes through editorial revision for clarity, structure, and citation accuracy; that is not the same as a subject-matter expert verifying its technical claims. When a guide does not show a named reviewer, no technical review beyond editorial revision should be assumed.

No named technical reviewer is currently recorded for the five Knowledge Center guides.

If you believe a guide contains an error, you can report it by emailing hello@ziqqur.ai.

No public corrections are currently recorded.

A guide's displayed update date changes only for substantive revisions — for example, a corrected factual claim, a changed conclusion, new primary evidence, a major section rewrite, a change in a described system's technical behavior, or an update to a referenced standard or regulation.

Spelling fixes, formatting changes, minor wording adjustments, and republishing simply to appear current do not change a guide's update date.

Ziqqur's Knowledge Center covers topics related to Ziqqur's own product and market, including deterministic AI, provenance, knowledge graphs, and hallucinations. Where a guide discusses Ziqqur specifically, that discussion is clearly distinguished from general technical claims about the broader field.

General factual claims about technologies, research, or industry practice are supported by external evidence, not by Ziqqur's own commercial interest. Comparisons involving competitors or alternative architectures are evidence-based rather than promotional. Ziqqur's commercial interest in a topic is never presented as independent proof of a claim.

Ziqqur's guides do not currently include sponsored or paid content. If that changes, any sponsored or paid content will be clearly disclosed as such.