Evidence before publication, accountability after it

Research and source selection

We prefer current primary sources: government agencies for regulatory requirements, responsible organizations for external operational information, and verified product behavior for Tyllus capability claims. Every material claim records its scope and review date.

Third-party summaries can help locate evidence, but they do not replace the controlling source. Search rankings, AI answers, and generated citations are discovery signals, not proof. If a claim cannot be supported or its scope cannot be stated clearly, it is removed or qualified before publication.

AI assistance and human accountability

AI may assist with outlines, language review, or translation. A human remains accountable for the final meaning, cited evidence, operational limits, and localized accuracy. Tyllus does not use AI to manufacture expertise, unsupported claims, or high-volume thin pages.

Confidential shipment, document and customer information is not used in public articles. Factual claims must have an accountable reviewer and appropriate evidence.

Fact checks, corrections, and conflicts

The accountable owner checks factual claims against their named sources and a domain reviewer examines material operational, security, data, or regulatory statements. Commercial relationships do not change the evidence standard and any material conflict must be disclosed where it could affect interpretation.

Readers can report an error through the contact page. Confirmed material errors are corrected promptly, the affected page receives a new review date, and a correction with operational significance is recorded in the public changelog.

Content freshness service level

Scheduled review is the maximum interval, not a reason to wait. An official rule change, material product release, significant source change, security finding, or confirmed error starts an event-driven review immediately.