# Evaluate-transparency-reports — Six-axis rubric

Source: Black Box Notes, Methodology §03. https://blackboxnotes.com/methodology/evaluate-transparency-reports/
Licence: CC-BY 4.0.
Version: 2026-05-22.

Score each axis 0-3. The per-axis reading matters more than the composite.

## Axis 1 — Scope clarity
- 0: No system / scope / window stated
- 1: System named only
- 2: System + scope + window
- 3: As 2, plus rationale for excluding adjacent systems
- Score: __

## Axis 2 — Quantitative content
- 0: No numbers, or numbers without methodology
- 1: Numbers + summary methodology
- 2: Numbers + full methodology + definitions
- 3: As 2, plus raw data or replication path
- Score: __

## Axis 3 — Failure-mode disclosure
- 0: None
- 1: Categories of failure
- 2: Specific recent failures with conditions
- 3: As 2, plus recovery actions and residual risk
- Score: __

## Axis 4 — Independence of authorship
- 0: Operator's communications function
- 1: Operator's engineering / risk function
- 2: Co-written with named independent auditor
- 3: Independent auditor against published scope, operator response annexed
- Score: __

## Axis 5 — Counterfactual disclosure
- 0: No discussion of what is excluded
- 1: Excluded material named
- 2: Excluded material named with reasons
- 3: As 2, plus standing reason for future inclusion / exclusion
- Score: __

## Axis 6 — Reader-response affordance
- 0: No mechanism
- 1: Generic contact channel
- 2: Named editor / audit lead with response windows
- 3: As 2, plus published revision process for substantive response
- Score: __

## Per-axis notes
- [ ] Notes on Axis 1: ___________
- [ ] Notes on Axis 2: ___________
- [ ] Notes on Axis 3: ___________
- [ ] Notes on Axis 4: ___________
- [ ] Notes on Axis 5: ___________
- [ ] Notes on Axis 6: ___________

## Composite
- [ ] Score across axes: __ / 18
- [ ] "Disclosure inversion" pattern flagged Y / N
- [ ] Document qualifies as "transparency report" under the publication's standing definition Y / N