/citation-integrity
GARP treats citation support as an inspectable workflow. Analytical records may cite exhibits, filings, transcripts, correspondence, reports, datasets, articles, or internal records, but ordinary prose does not show whether those citations resolve, whether the cited fragment exists in source text, or which references remain unmapped.
Citation Integrity makes that support layer visible. It is a methodology with a reference implementation, not a general legal analysis system, a truth engine, or a substitute for human review.
Source files and extracted text are bridged into a registry so the system can distinguish a citation that resolves to a known source from one that merely appears in prose. Registered sources may carry stable identifiers, labels, paths, content hashes, provenance level, and project context.
Analytical drafts are parsed deterministically for source references. The output is a structured inventory of what the draft claims to cite, with context preserved for review.
Extracted references are compared against the registered source set. Resolved references are reported with source identifiers, while unresolved references remain visible for operator review. The governing question is simple: Which references remain unmapped?
Governed fragments are checked against extracted source text under exact or documented normalization rules. SR-07 verifies that fragment text appears in the declared source text; it does not decide truth, legal significance, admissibility, or completeness.
Each stage produces inspectable output. A coverage report can be generated without creating fragments, fragments can be verified without rerunning coverage, and each layer can carry its own audit trail.
Real source folders are messy. File names vary, extracted text may live separately from originals, and citation labels may come from court filings, attachments, internal naming, or operator review. GARP uses a source mapping table as the human-reviewable record of which source file corresponds to which citation label.
| Review status | Meaning |
|---|---|
| accepted | Mapping confirmed by operator review. |
| provisional | Mapping useful for mechanical testing but not evidentiary reliance. |
| needs_review | Mapping flagged for human disposition. |
| rejected | Mapping considered and declined. |
| no_source_found | No registered source corresponds to the label. |
The distinction matters because raw coverage and clean reviewed coverage are different measurements. Provisional or unresolved rows may help an operator debug a corpus, but they should not be treated as reviewed source support.
The reference implementation includes source registration, citation extraction, coverage reporting, mapping validation, unresolved reference ranking, scoped fragment linting, clean coverage reporting, and SR-07 verbatim checks. It also includes a non-private synthetic fixture that exercises the workflow without relying on private source material.
The implementation is not distributed from this page. This page documents the public methodology and its boundaries.
SR-07 confirms that fragment text appears in extracted source text under exact or documented normalization checks. It does not confirm source authenticity, admissibility, completeness, or the truth of the proposition that cites the fragment.
Coverage analysis confirms that a citation reference resolves to a registered source. It does not confirm that the source supports the proposition, that the mapping is substantively correct, or that the citation meets a legal or editorial standard.
Source registration confirms that a source file has been bridged with an extracted text path. It does not prove extraction completeness, document recency, or external authentication.
Each registered source needs extracted text before verbatim fragment checks can run. Citation extraction operates on the draft as written, so references outside a documented label format are not visible to coverage analysis until the profile teaches the extractor that form.
The system makes a small number of mechanical claims and makes them precisely. It does not make broader claims that depend on judgment, doctrine, or external authority.