The record's honesty scale
Verification is a ladder, and the rung is printed on the claim.
Every review on Pith carries a tier mark, T0 through T4, stating exactly how much of the paper was mechanically checked. The marks describe the review method, never the authors or their standing. Most of the record sits at T0, and says so; that honesty is what makes the higher rungs mean something.
01The five rungs
A machine referee reads the full paper and produces a structured report: core claim, load-bearing premise, what would settle it, and referee-style assessment against a public rubric. This is the default tier for every paper on the record.
How it happens — automatic for every reviewed paper. The rubric and passes are public at /methodology.
Reference resolution, citation-quote validity, artifact checks: detectors that run reproducibly on the raw files with no model judgment in the loop. Anyone can re-run them and get the same answer.
How it happens — the integrity layer runs continuously; see /integrity and the protocol. A free standalone audit for any bibliography is at /tools/reference-audit.
The paper's own computational artifacts, code, data, notebooks, are re-executed and the stated outputs reproduced. The honest ceiling for most empirical science.
How to earn it — supply runnable artifacts with your submission (Pith Review accepts source archives). Reviews that reproduce data or code print grade V4 on the ticket.
The paper's central claims are stated in Lean 4, a proof assistant whose kernel mechanically checks every inference. A formal statement is citable and precise even before it is proved: it pins down exactly what is being claimed.
How to earn it — link Lean theorem statements for your central claims in the submission (ticket grades V1–V2). Statements must compile against a pinned toolchain.
The top of the ladder: the claim is proved in Lean and the kernel accepts the proof, with the axiom closure printed, so you can see precisely which foundations the result rests on. Nothing about the authors, their institution, or their history enters into it; the kernel does not care about reputation.
How to earn it — submit the paper together with its Lean sources through Pith Review. The review reproduces your build from a pinned toolchain, checks zero-sorry status, and audits the axiom set (ticket grades V3–V5). If the build reproduces, the record says so permanently. We want external kernel-checked work on this record; if you have a Lean-proofed result and the pipeline fights you, email review@pith.science and a human will walk it through.
02What the marks never say
A tier describes the review, not the truth of the paper and not the people behind it. T0 does not mean weak work; most correct science has no formal surface to check, and T0 is its honest label. T4 does not mean important; it means the stated theorem is machine-verified, no more and no less.