Conceptual Policy – Treatment of Uncertainty

This page defines how uncertainty is handled in the data model.

It clarifies why the system does NOT implement a formal "Certainty" entity or certainty levels.

This decision is intentional and part of the conceptual design.

Principle

Historical research rarely produces absolute facts.

Most statements involve:

approximation
interpretation
incomplete sources
conflicting evidence

Uncertainty is therefore normal and expected.

The model must support nuance, not force artificial precision.

Decision

The data model does NOT implement:

Certainty entities
Certainty levels
Confidence scores
Probability flags
"High / Medium / Low" classifications

Uncertainty is not stored structurally.

It is expressed descriptively.

Rationale

1. Avoid false precision

Labels such as:

High
Medium
Low

suggest scientific measurement.

Historical interpretation is rarely measurable in this way.

Such labels create a false sense of objectivity.

2. Reduce editorial burden

Formal certainty fields would require editors to:

choose levels constantly
interpret ambiguous categories
make arbitrary decisions

This slows work and produces inconsistent data.

3. Preserve nuance

A short note such as:

"Only mentioned once in a newspaper article"

contains far more information than:

"certainty = low".

Free text preserves context and reasoning.

4. Simpler model

Removing certainty:

reduces schema complexity
simplifies forms
lowers cognitive load for contributors
improves usability

How uncertainty is expressed instead

Uncertainty is handled through:

precise wording
descriptive notes
date ranges
approximate values
explicit explanations
source citations (DigitalAssets)

Examples:

date: 1952
date: between 1950 and 1955
notes: probably owned by Company X
notes: attribution disputed in literature
citation to source DigitalAsset

Future reconsideration

If future requirements demonstrate a real need for structured certainty (e.g. automated reasoning or statistical analysis), this decision may be revisited.

Until such need appears, descriptive practice is preferred.

Status

This policy is part of the conceptual model – Version 3.2.

All schemas and implementations must follow this principle.