Cross-Referencing Claims

Creating a vast structured dataset allows us to use the data itself as a cross-reference system for any claim made by citations. When there is a conflict or discrepancy between two or more claims the claims themselves can be balanced against one another to help determine which claim can be coded as accepted or conflict.

Cross-referencing is core to our approach because we do not grade one Publication as any better than any other Publication. In our experience official government sources have referenced non-existent geography, misidentified senior military commanders and contained other errors. This does not make them “low confidence” or “untrustworthy” sources of information, and that same principle applies to every other Publication (some of which have also contained similar types of errors).

The Montior’s data structure allows for a range of cross-referencing. This could be something simple, such as comparing units or persons to one another, to more complex analysis bringing together multiple types of claims to resolve conflicts. A public note should always accompany any cross-referencing analysis, and the various citations used in that cross-referencing should also be listed in the citation field for the claim. Some examples below show how cross-referencing data can be used to determine when claims are should be coded as conflict.

Example: Incorrect Commander

Citations from 2023-02-04, 2024-10-11 and 2025-01-18 evidence that Liam Johnson was commander of 18 Brigade on those dates. As a result, the data has one contiguous Posting for Johnson from at least 2023-02-04 to at least 2025-01-18. One other citation states that Theodore Smith was commander of 18 Brigade “in 2024”. In this case we would cross-reference the claims made about other brigade commanders to see if any of those other brigades had a similar non-contiguous commander like Smith. If not, then the claim about Smith could be coded as conflict.

Example: Commander Too Senior

A common issue is when a senior commander is identified as the “commander” of a low-level unit. Usually this means that they are ultimately in charge of the unit, but not the actual commander of the low-level unit. For example, a citation states that Major General John Smith was commander of 22 Battalion. Cross-referencing the postings of other major generals allows us to see that other citations evidence major generals in country command divisions, which command brigades, which in turn command battalions. Claims for other postings evidence that brigades are usually commanded by brigadier generals (a lower rank than Major General), and battalions are commanded by colonels (a lower rank than brigadier general). As a result, the claim could coded as conflict.

Example: Typo in Unit Name

Typos often create issues that can be resolved through cross-referencing. For example, a citation states that Elijah Williams received an award as commander of Police Station 1 for the actions of his officers in South Township on 2023-03-05. Other citations evidence that Williams was commander of Police Station 12 from at least 2022-12-02 to at least 2024-05-15. Additionally, other citations evidence that Police Station 12 operates in (has a Positioning of) South Township from at least 2021-09-06 to at least 2025-01-24. No other citations about Police Station 1 state that it operates in South Township. As a result the claim could be coded as conflict.

Similarly, sometimes multiple citations are needed to surface the claims made by a single citation. That process is explored further in the next section Claims With Multiple Citations.