Research Standards & Integrity

Purpose

Falcon Research aims to make its research traceable, challengeable and proportionate to the strength of the available evidence. The standards below apply to E2F research and are adapted to the requirements of individual journals, repositories and publication formats.

Evidence and sources

• Prefer peer-reviewed research, primary data, official filings and authoritative scientific or public institutions for consequential claims.

• Use secondary sources primarily for context or discovery when stronger primary evidence is available.

• Retain sufficient bibliographic and source information to permit later verification.

• Do not attribute a proposition to a source unless the source actually supports it.

Counter-evidence and uncertainty

Research should actively search for contradictory evidence, alternative mechanisms and boundary conditions. Disagreement between credible sources is recorded rather than silently resolved in favour of the preferred hypothesis. Quantification distinguishes measured values, estimates, scenarios and assumptions and avoids false precision.

Use of AI-assisted research tools

AI tools may assist literature discovery, evidence organisation, synthesis, analysis and drafting. They are not treated as authoritative sources. Citations and DOI information used in formal research must be verified, fabricated references are prohibited, and final academic submissions remain subject to human author review and the disclosure requirements of the relevant journal or repository.

Conflicts, funding and independence

Material funding sources, commercial relationships, conflicts of interest and relevant affiliations should be disclosed in the publication where they could reasonably affect interpretation. Research conclusions should not be altered to satisfy a preferred commercial or policy narrative.

Corrections and versioning

Material errors should be corrected transparently. Working papers, research notes and public research may be revised as evidence improves; when revisions materially change a conclusion, the change should be identifiable rather than silently obscured.

Reproducibility and limitations

Where feasible and legally permissible, Falcon Research seeks to retain calculation logic, source registers, modelling assumptions and supporting material sufficient for an informed reader to understand how a conclusion was reached. Every major study should state its evidence gaps and limitations explicitly.