Verification Methodology
Every claim is debated,
then audited.
Foodgeist does not publish what it cannot verify. Before any technique, ingredient, or recipe enters the knowledge graph, it passes a multi-layer editorial verification chain — a structured debate between specialized review stages, with a final-gate audit that must approve.
Verification Pass Rate — Rolling 30 Days
10.9%
of entities pass final-gate review on first submission
9,193
entities audited
The Verification Pipeline
Stage 1
Source sweep
Ingest layer
Initial sweep — pulls claims from 68+ authoritative live sources, flags gaps.
Stage 2
Evidence check
Science layer
Scientific cross-check — verifies compounds, temperatures, and molecular reactions.
Stage 3
Reconciliation
Synthesis layer
Consensus synthesis — reconciles disagreements, builds structured output.
Stage 4
Final audit
Verification gate
Final gate — must APPROVE before anything is published. No appeal.
Published
Knowledge Graph
Embedded, indexed, linked to sources
Initial sweep — pulls claims from 68+ authoritative live sources, flags gaps.
Scientific cross-check — verifies compounds, temperatures, and molecular reactions.
Consensus synthesis — reconciles disagreements, builds structured output.
Final gate — must APPROVE before anything is published. No appeal.
Published
Knowledge Graph
What the Final Gate Checks
Source integrity
Every claim traces to a citable, non-fabricated source.
Scientific accuracy
Temperatures, compounds, and reactions match peer-reviewed literature.
Completeness ≥ 80
No structural gaps: origin, science, sensory, dietary flags all present.
No contradictions
Internal consistency across all sections; any exception explained.
No fabrication markers
Quantum/nano/plasma food terms and known-fake patterns auto-rejected.
Cultural accuracy
Origin civilization, era, and spread path verified against known records.
Minimum Quality Standards
An entity that clears final-gate review must still meet all of the following before entering the knowledge graph:
- Completeness score ≥ 80
- ≥ 3 signature preparations from different countries
- ≥ 2 failure modes with documented fixes
- ≥ 3 sensory aroma descriptors
- All dietary flags answered (no nulls)
- Semantic embedding generated and indexed
- Linked to at least one current trend topic if applicable
Compound & Flavor Data Provenance
Flavor and aroma compound data in Foodgeist is sourced exclusively from peer-reviewed databases and published datasets — never inferred from text or generated by language models.
FoodAtlas
Peer-reviewed food-bioactive triplets (food, compound, evidence type). Each link cites its source publication.
FooDB / PubChem
Compound identity (InChIKey, CID, SMILES) traced to PubChem CID — a public-domain chemical registry with 100M+ structures.
Pyrfume / GS-LF
Measured odor labels from published GC-olfactometry and psychophysics studies. Calibrated against Leffingwell, GoodScents, and FEMA GRAS.
GNN Ensemble (model estimates)
Graph neural network trained on the measured odor labels above. Predictions are clearly tagged as model estimates, never as measured data.
ChEMBL / Receptor binding
Experimentally measured receptor binding data (Kd, Ki, IC50) from peer-reviewed pharmacology studies. Links flavor compounds to taste receptor interactions.
RHEA (EMBL-EBI / SIB)
Expert-curated biochemical reaction database (CC BY 4.0). Maps flavor compounds to the reactions they participate in as reactants, products, or cofactors.
CTD / Disease links
Comparative Toxicogenomics Database: curated compound-disease associations from peer-reviewed literature, covering health and safety evidence per compound.
Machine-Readable
Verification pass rate and entity counts are available at /api/health (JSON). Live competitor benchmarks at /vs.