A1AYN Intelligence

Methodology

How A1AYN structures analysis, labels confidence, and grounds outputs in traceable sources. Scoring rubrics and data source citations are documented in each domain's own methodology page.

On this page

Analytical philosophy
What we don't do
Confidence labeling
Domain methodologies
Limitations

Principles

Analytical Philosophy

Evidence first: Claims are separated from indicators. Every output distinguishes what a source directly states from what has been inferred from consistent signals.
Traceable sources: All analytical inputs are cited. Where a source is not publicly accessible, this is noted explicitly.
Explicit assumptions: Assumptions are stated, not buried. Where data is incomplete, the gap is named rather than papered over.
Reproducible outputs: Versioned data and documented processing steps mean outputs can be re-run and audited.
Confidence labeling: Every output is written to make uncertainty visible. See the Confidence labeling section below.

Scope

What We Don't Do

Understanding the boundaries of this service is as important as understanding its capabilities.

No automated alerts: Outputs are analytical products, not live monitoring systems. Nothing here triggers automatically.
No real-time feeds: Data is updated on documented schedules. Nothing on this site claims to reflect conditions at the moment of viewing.
No legal advice: Analyses are indicative intelligence for sourcing and procurement decisions. They do not constitute legal, regulatory, or financial advice.
No black-box scoring: Every score on this site has a documented methodology page explaining exactly how it was derived and from which sources.

Interpretation

Confidence Labeling

Outputs are written to make uncertainty explicit. A1AYN uses three confidence levels to distinguish the basis of each claim.

Measured: Directly supported by the cited source data. The source makes the claim; we are reporting it.
Inferred: Derived from consistent signals across multiple sources but not a direct statement of any single source. Reasoning is shown.
Hypothesis: A plausible interpretation that requires follow-up verification before acting on. Flagged explicitly in outputs.

Scoring Rubrics

Domain Methodologies

Each analytical domain maintains its own methodology page documenting the scoring framework, all data sources with citations and vintages, band definitions, and update cadence. This is where scoring rubrics live.

EU Compliance & Market Access: Country risk scoring across nine dimensions. Sources: TI CPI 2024, US DOL ILAB 2024, EUDR benchmarking May 2025, EU IUU carding records, LRQA EiQ 2024, EcoVadis 2025.
More domains: Methodology pages for additional domains will be added as each domain's scoring framework is formalised.

Caveats

Limitations

Data delays: Public data sources may be delayed, revised, or incomplete. Update cadence for each source is documented in domain methodology pages.
Rules of origin: Rules of origin and manufactured-in claims require case-by-case verification and are not determined by country-level scores.
Indicative only: Analyses are indicative intelligence. They do not substitute for legal review, supplier audits, or formal due diligence.
Sector variation: Country-level scores are starting points. Risk within a country varies significantly by sector, product category, and supply chain tier.