Trust Layer
OSN Reviewer Network
Reviewers evaluate project scope, technical rigor, milestone evidence, and reproducibility. High-quality reviews build verified reputation across OSN.
Reviewer Reputation and Confidence
Provisional prior
Verified background creates a capped starting estimate. Credentials never substitute for observed review conduct.
Six behavior dimensions
Fairness, scientific quality, integrity, reliability, constructiveness, and calibration are scored separately.
Evidence confidence
Every behavior event records its evidence strength and severity. Reputation is always shown with uncertainty.
COI and integrity
Conflict disclosure, confidentiality, and objective reasoning receive longer-lived weight than ordinary timing events.
Appeal and correction
Incorrect findings can be reversed. Confirmed remediation supports gradual recovery without erasing the audit trail.
Diminishing returns
Verified positive conduct follows a logarithmic curve: early evidence builds a record, while the highest tiers require sustained excellence.
Assignment safeguards
Low-confidence newcomers retain a controlled exploration path. Confirmed severe or sustained poor conduct reduces routing weight and can pause assignments.
Human oversight
Permanent blocking requires an audited administrator decision. Machine calibration remains capped and inactive until enough independently adjudicated labels exist.
Reward and Penalty Rules
Verified service credits
Only independently adjudicated positive behavior can create service credits; self-reported quality cannot.
Outcome independence
Funding success, agreement with OSN, and positive project decisions never determine reviewer reputation.
Proportionate penalties
Low-quality, conflicted, biased, fabricated, or confidentiality-breaking conduct creates evidence-backed penalty records.