Trust and transparency
Content and AI methodology
How ProteinIQ uses research, software, expert review, and AI assistance in public content.
Last reviewed:
Research workflow
- Define the reader question and the claims that require evidence.
- Collect primary papers, official documentation, release notes, and relevant standards.
- Separate established method behavior from ProteinIQ implementation details and from author interpretation.
- Check version, date, units, defaults, limitations, and source links before publication.
- Review time-sensitive claims when a method or product changes materially.
Use of AI assistance
AI systems may assist with outlining, editing, summarization, code-supported inventory work, and consistency checks. AI output is not treated as a source. A named human author or editor remains accountable for source selection, factual claims, citations, and the published text.
Scientific tool documentation
Tool pages preserve the underlying method’s behavior, defaults, outputs, units, and citations. Source repositories, versions, papers, integration review dates, citation paths, and limitations are included where they help a researcher verify the method. Absence of a public field is not replaced with an invented claim.
Research evidence labels
- Used ProteinIQ: the publication or supporting material reports running a ProteinIQ tool or service.
- Cited ProteinIQ: the publication cites or links ProteinIQ without enough evidence to claim direct use.
- Recommended ProteinIQ: the publication lists ProteinIQ as a recommended access route or resource.
- Independent benchmark: an unaffiliated comparison evaluates ProteinIQ output or performance against alternatives.