A more focused path from analysis to evidence
Veritas Shield now brings Evidence Atlas, clearer article comparison, and focused Summary and Claims views into the completed-analysis workflow. These capabilities are available in the current product experience and are designed to make it easier to move from a finished score to the specific claims, passages, sources, and reporting differences that deserve review.
What changes after analysis
A completed article analysis now begins with the result. From there, the report separates different review tasks into focused views.
Summary provides the fast reading layer. It leads with the report score, key evidence counts, weighted areas that deserve attention, and claims that may be useful to inspect next.
Claims provides a claim-focused review layer. Claims are arranged for scanning their relationship with supporting passage, relationship, source, evidence quality, and related detail.
Evidence Atlas provides the evidence-navigation layer. Rather than requiring readers to interpret a large graph all at once, Atlas can focus on a claim-to-source-to-evidence path. Expert views retain deeper graph inspection, filtering, layout, and related tools when more detail is needed.
These views do not change what the Veritas Shield score means. The engine still evaluates observable reporting practice under the published methodology and does not claim to determine whether every statement in an article is true.
A clearer comparison workflow
Compare Mode continues to analyze two complete article reports under the same framework, but the comparison experience now keeps the identity of both articles clearer throughout review.
Article 1, Article 2, and Compare are named directly in the current interface. Comparison can surface the score gap, changes between claims, provenance information, and important score drivers before a reader opens the complete reports. Paired Atlas views can then follow one comparison path at a time instead of presenting every relationship with equal visual weight.
The comparison model also distinguishes different situations more carefully. A claim that appears in only one article is treated as absent from the other article rather than automatically being labeled an evidence gap. When a claim is present but lacks adequate attached evidence, that evidence limitation can be shown separately. Evidence proximity is also kept distinct from the typed relationship between a passage and claim, such as support, contradiction, context, attribution, ambiguity, or insufficiency.
This is intended to help readers inspect differences without turning comparison into a declaration that one article is the truth winner.
What this means for users
The practical change is a shorter path from analysis to the question a reader actually wants to investigate. Use Summary for the result and major signals, Claims when reviewing individual assertions, Evidence Atlas when tracing how a claim connects to visible evidence and sources, and Compare when examining two reports together.
Full report depth remains available. The dedicated views organize access to the existing evidence and scoring explanation rather than replacing the complete report, Reader, dimensions, or methodology.
For the current release history and version details, see changelog. For how scoring, evidence relationships, and limitations are interpreted, see methodology.
