Claim

In the studied old-growth forest of northern Belize, ancient Maya wetland fields, settlements, and upland walls were each associated with distinct modern forest-structure metrics.

Type COMPARATIVE · truth-evaluable: yes · status at snapshot: ACTIVE · created seq 21558 · qualifiers {"location":"Northern Belize old-growth tropical forest study area.","time_range":"Modern forest structure associated with ancient features after centuries of abandonment."}

a conjunction joins clauses that may be separately evaluablea comma-separated series may list several propositions

Referenced 105 times: checked 1, looked up by assistants 0, viewed 83, shared 21. A count of attention, not evidence.

Topics

Archaeology · 1efd24fe Wildlife · 1efd24fe

Assessment

Supported

Score: 0.9820 under ledger-default@0.3.0 at snapshot 27745

1 of 4 review checks done · 1 counted

2 independent evidence lineages · review checks 1 of 4 · stability HIGH

Main unresolved issue: 3 counted evidence items have no independence review; repeats of one origin may be counted as several coverage:d4e844db-09a2-82e2-a509-31b86da6c4de

Not yet independently audited.Evidence reviewed so far supports this claim, but only 1 of 4 review checks has been done.Every quoted passage was confirmed on the page when Galedra fetched it.

Why?

Strongest counted support: The primary abstract directly reports significant correlations and feature-specific suites of modern forest-structure metrics. weight 2.000000 evidence

Suppressed as dependent: The passage reports significant correlations between ancient Maya features and modern forest structure, with distinct metric suites for wetlands, settlements, and upland walls.

Review gaps: qualifiers reviewed, opposing search done, independence reviewed

What would most change this: One independent, direct measurement that contradicts this claim would move it from Supported to Supported.

Hide calculation

0.9820 under ledger-default@0.3.0 at snapshot 27745 · state Supported · Review checks: 1 of 4 · stability HIGH · 3 sources, 2 independent lineages

Model ledger-default@0.3.0 (the default model, not the answer) · snapshot 27745 · trace sha256:f4df25dc3bf928d211bfcfcf0468bdd32303125fd295f5d0a3a1a5804f216eb6

Last changed at entry seq 25060; nothing logged since has borne on this claim.

How the number was reached

Each counted link is weighed by multiplying the factors the model declares; a factor it does not declare is not shown. Every factor name below links to what that number means.

Link	Working	Weight	Counted as
2f2846b1 support	relevance DIRECT 2.0 × observation MEASUREMENT 1.0 × interpretation 0 steps, 1 − 0.15 × 0 1.000000 × authenticity UNVERIFIED 1.0 × extraction UNVERIFIED 1.0 × provenance INDEPENDENT 1.0 × edition NAMED_OR_UNRELATED 1	2.000000	2.000000
b8f17262 support	relevance DIRECT 2.0 × observation DIRECT_TEXT 0.9 × interpretation 0 steps, 1 − 0.15 × 0 1.000000 × authenticity UNVERIFIED 1.0 × extraction UNVERIFIED 1.0 × provenance INDEPENDENT 1.0 × edition NAMED_OR_UNRELATED 1	1.800000	0.000000 (dependent strongest only, kept 2f2846b1)
ac05d659 support	relevance DIRECT 2.0 × observation MEASUREMENT 1.0 × interpretation 0 steps, 1 − 0.15 × 0 1.000000 × authenticity UNVERIFIED 1.0 × extraction UNVERIFIED 1.0 × provenance INDEPENDENT 1.0 × edition NAMED_OR_UNRELATED 1	2.000000	2.000000

prior 0.50 → log-odds 0.000000 + 4.000000 (the counted weights) = 4.000000 → probability 0.9820

Under neighbouring settings of the same model: 0.9427 to 0.9945, a spread of 0.0518.

Half-even rounding, six places for weights and four for the probability. The same inputs under the same model reproduce this exactly; that is what the trace hash above is for. How a score is worked out explains every factor, why it is there, and what the model sets it to.

Your view

Registered views

Nobody has registered a view yet.

Registered views are personal belief, not evidence: they never change Galedra's assessment. Affiliations are self-declared and shown only for groups of 5 or more.

Checked as part of

Statements this claim was broken out of. The claim is scored on its own; a statement's reading only counts its claims.

“A 2026 Scientific Reports study found that ancient Maya wetland fields, settlements, and upland walls in northern Belize remain associated with distinct...” · 2 claims · 29 September 2026

Evidence for

The primary abstract directly reports significant correlations and feature-specific suites of modern forest-structure metrics.

From The enduring legacy of the ancient Maya on tropical forests Read 2026-09-29 Relevance DIRECT Steps 0 Counted
Secondary coverage gives concrete canopy and forest-variation patterns associated with wetland fields, settlements, and walls.

From Old-growth tropical forests bear lasting legacy of ancient Maya civilization Read 2026-09-29 Relevance DIRECT Steps 0 Counted
The passage reports significant correlations between ancient Maya features and modern forest structure, with distinct metric suites for wetlands, settlements, and upland walls.

From The enduring legacy of the ancient Maya on tropical forests Read 2026-09-29 Relevance DIRECT Steps 0 Counted

Evidence against

None.

Qualifications

None.

Suppressed as dependent

Evidence	Group	Kept instead
7bf47953		2f2846b1

Inferences

Concluded from

None.

Used as a premise in

None.

An inference is interpretation, not evidence: it never changes the assessment of its conclusion. Each premise is a claim with its own evidence.

Threads

None. Threads are for disagreements about how a determination was made — a statement whose figures are not in the passage it rests on, two sources that may share an origin. Something about the world belongs in the evidence above.

Claim edges

None. Edges are stored and displayed; v0.1 does not propagate probability across them.

Review checklist

Review checks: 1 of 4

1 check by this claim's own author, alongside the independent review above. 1 EVIDENCE VERIFICATION. A check by the person who recorded a claim does not raise its review coverage.

Check	Done	By
qualifiers reviewed	no
opposing search done	no
independence reviewed	no
primary source reviewed	yes	2f2846b1, b8f17262

Summary

Supported. The main support is: The primary abstract directly reports significant correlations and feature-specific suites of modern forest-structure metrics. affc6e38

1 further item repeats the same origin and is not independent evidence. 7bf47953

Review checks: 1 of 4. coverage:d4e844db-09a2-82e2-a509-31b86da6c4de

Generated by stub-v0.1; every sentence cites graph ids.

Contribution history

seq	event	detail
21558	APPENDED
21559	ACCEPT	AUTOMATIC_AFTER_VALIDATION
21572	LINK_EVIDENCE	by 1efd24fe (accepted)
21574	LINK_EVIDENCE	by 1efd24fe (accepted)
25059	TASK_RESULT	by 1efd24fe (accepted)

Score trace

{
  "claim": "d4e844db-09a2-82e2-a509-31b86da6c4de",
  "links": [
    {
      "link": "980dd351-6a25-88fe-9a55-82052f2846b1",
      "group": null,
      "edition": "NAMED_OR_UNRELATED",
      "evidence": "b653d61c-14ab-8e4a-a883-ea86affc6e38",
      "direction": "SUPPORT",
      "magnitude": "2.000000",
      "relevance": "DIRECT",
      "extraction": "UNVERIFIED",
      "provenance": "INDEPENDENT",
      "observation": "MEASUREMENT",
      "source_type": "PRIMARY_TEXT",
      "authenticity": "UNVERIFIED",
      "audit_confirmed": false,
      "effective_weight": "2.000000",
      "interpretive_steps": 0
    },
    {
      "kept": "980dd351-6a25-88fe-9a55-82052f2846b1",
      "link": "ad4cbdc9-e213-8c79-8433-9c18b8f17262",
      "group": null,
      "reason": "dependent_strongest_only",
      "edition": "NAMED_OR_UNRELATED",
      "evidence": "6b7e3391-a89c-89df-90d7-b9d07bf47953",
      "direction": "SUPPORT",
      "magnitude": "1.800000",
      "relevance": "DIRECT",
      "extraction": "UNVERIFIED",
      "provenance": "INDEPENDENT",
      "observation": "DIRECT_TEXT",
      "source_type": "PRIMARY_TEXT",
      "authenticity": "UNVERIFIED",
      "audit_confirmed": false,
      "effective_weight": "0.000000",
      "interpretive_steps": 0
    },
    {
      "link": "b0d38310-4aa1-81e7-bd17-d6b9ac05d659",
      "group": null,
      "edition": "NAMED_OR_UNRELATED",
      "evidence": "ac8f28d1-6a4b-83cf-a2f7-3b431a4d9ac8",
      "direction": "SUPPORT",
      "magnitude": "2.000000",
      "relevance": "DIRECT",
      "extraction": "UNVERIFIED",
      "provenance": "INDEPENDENT",
      "observation": "MEASUREMENT",
      "source_type": "SECONDARY_TEXT",
      "authenticity": "UNVERIFIED",
      "audit_confirmed": false,
      "effective_weight": "2.000000",
      "interpretive_steps": 0
    }
  ],
  "model": "ledger-default@0.3.0",
  "prior": "0.50",
  "variants": {
    "spread": "0.0518",
    "permissive": "0.9945",
    "conservative": "0.9427"
  },
  "code_hash": "sha256:c61a6fdf35a754a0d7e958df149036a083c0eaeb7d2d2e52704ec32b0c36def7",
  "contested": false,
  "stability": "HIGH",
  "claim_type": "COMPARATIVE",
  "config_hash": "sha256:86768038080b8ab5233f1e4b7aba10af05b5bb44caa432095150b90e81209809",
  "probability": "0.9820",
  "provisional": true,
  "evidence_sum": "4.000000",
  "snapshot_seq": 25060,
  "prior_log_odds": "0.000000",
  "support_groups": 2,
  "model_dependent": false,
  "review_coverage": "0.25",
  "truth_evaluable": true,
  "assessment_state": "SUPPORTED",
  "review_checklist": {
    "qualifiers_reviewed": {
      "by": [],
      "ok": false
    },
    "opposing_search_done": {
      "by": [],
      "ok": false
    },
    "independence_reviewed": {
      "by": [],
      "ok": false
    },
    "primary_source_reviewed": {
      "by": [
        "980dd351-6a25-88fe-9a55-82052f2846b1",
        "ad4cbdc9-e213-8c79-8433-9c18b8f17262"
      ],
      "ok": true
    }
  },
  "contradict_groups": 0,
  "rounding_boundary": false,
  "posterior_log_odds": "4.000000",
  "not_applicable_reason": null,
  "independence_unreviewed": 3
}