⚠WarningKorean source· Mar 14, 2025ID: DEMO

Protein Modification Research Study

Research · Local evidence record

80/100

Evidence score

⚠

Warning detected. The claimed role may be stronger than what the source evidence supports. Review role level comparison before sharing.

Reviewed against available source records, process evidence, contribution disclosure, AI transparency, and claim-to-evidence alignment. Does not mean 100% human-made work.

Preloaded Demo Dossier

· No data stored

This dossier shows a Korean source record compared against an inflated English application claim. The VEAP analysis below found a 3-level role gap. All detection runs in your browser — no AI API.

Build your own dossier How detection works

Reviewer summary

This claim may be stronger than the source evidence supports. Review the role level comparison before sharing.

Evidence score

80/100

Main issue

Role Inflation

Source role

L2 Assistant / Contributor

Claimed role

L5 Lead

Safe claim

Ready

Jump to section

Plain-English Summary

What Verifolio found

This claim may be stronger than the source evidence. The source supports an assistant/contributor role, while the claim suggests independent leadership.

Evidence Flow

Source record → claim → finding → safer wording

⚠Warning found

Source vs. Claim

01 / Source (Korean)

지도 교사의 감독 하에 데이터 수집 및 실험 분석을 보조하였다. 문헌 조사를 바탕으로 연구 배경을 정리하고, 일부 figure를 직접 제작하였다.

02 / Claim to Review

I independently led the experimental analysis and conducted original protein modification research.

03 / Finding

Role Inflation

This claim may not be fully supported by the source evidence. The original Korean source describes an assistant role under faculty supervision (Level 2). The English claim asserts independent leadership and original research (Level 5). This is a 3-level role mismatch.

Confidence: 91%

04 / Evidence-Safe Wording

I assisted with data collection and experimental analysis under faculty supervision, organized background research through literature review, and created selected figures.

Original Source Evidence

Source material compared against the claim

Metadata-only proof

Source language

Korean

Source type

File upload

Source title

No title recorded

Source URL

No URL recorded

Last edited

No date recorded

File name

research_report_korean.pdf

File type

application/pdf

File size

2.3 MB

Captured

March 14, 2025 at 09:23 AM UTC

Capture method

File upload

Source File Fingerprint

Algorithm: SHA-256Generated in browserFile uploadCaptured: March 14, 2025 at 09:23 AM UTC

a3f8c2d1e7b94a0f6c3d2e1b8a7f5c4d2e0a1b3c4d5e6f7a8b9c0d1e2f3a4b5

File hash proves this file version existed at upload time. To prove earlier authorship, additional evidence such as revision history, email records, teacher confirmation, or GitHub history may be needed.

Source Evidence Text (Korean)

지도 교사의 감독 하에 데이터 수집 및 실험 분석을 보조하였다. 문헌 조사를 바탕으로 연구 배경을 정리하고, 일부 figure를 직접 제작하였다.

We do not need to read your entire work to prove that a version existed at a specific time. This proves the file version existed at capture time without exposing the full private document.

Role Level Comparison

Source support compared with claimed role

⚠Warning

Source evidence

L2 / Assistant

Detected from original-language wording and role signals in the source text.

English claim

L5 / Lead

Detected from leadership, ownership, and attribution wording in the English claim.

3 levels above source evidence

Evidence-safe claim

I assisted with data collection and experimental analysis under faculty supervision, organized background research through literature review, and created selected figures.

Confidence: 91%

Claim-to-Evidence Alignment

Claim Review

⚠Warning

Original English claim

I independently led the experimental analysis and conducted original protein modification research.

Role Inflation · high severity

Evidence-supported claim

I assisted with data collection and experimental analysis under faculty supervision, organized background research through literature review, and created selected figures.

Consistent with L2 (Assistant) evidence found in the source.

Source role level

Assistant, supervised work

Claim role level

3 levels above evidence

Verifolio Evidence Alignment Protocol (VEAP)

Context-Weighted Claim Analysis

Inflated· High

Source evidence role

L2 · AssistantL2

Assisted or supported under supervision

Claim role

L5 · LeadL5

+3 levels above evidence

Inflated

The source describes L2 (Assistant — supervised work), while the claim describes L5 (Lead or Sole Creator — independent work). The 3-level gap may overstate the documented contribution. Additionally, the source states work was done under faculty supervision, while the claim describes independent execution.

Additional issues detected

Unsupported Original Research Claim · high

The claim references original research, but the source describes literature review, supervised assistance, or borrowed methodology. Independent original research is not supported by this evidence.

Supervision Context Missing · high

The source explicitly states the work was done under teacher or faculty supervision. The claim presents the work as independently conducted without supervision.

Evidence-safe wording

Assisted with data collection under teacher supervision; organized background research through literature review and created selected figures.

Consistent with L2 (Assistant) evidence. VEAP v0.1 — rule-based alignment, not AI-generated.

Evidence units detected

L2 AssistantUnder supervisionconf. 72%

“지도 교사의 감독 하에 데이터 수집 및 실험 분析을 보조하였다.”

L3 ContributorPartialconf. 84%

“문헌 조사를 바탕으로 연구 배경을 정리하고, 일부 figure를 직접 제작하였다.”

·Source evidence mentions work under faculty or teacher supervision.

·Unsupported Original Research Claim: The claim references original research, but the source describes literature review, supervised assistance, or borrowed methodology. Independent original research is not supported by this evidence.

·Supervision Context Missing: The source explicitly states the work was done under teacher or faculty supervision. The claim presents the work as independently conducted without supervision.

Verification Scorecard

Evidence Strength Score

Score

80/100

This is not a quality score. It measures how strongly the claim is backed by available evidence.

SignalWeightScore

Revision Depth

Revisions, drafts, rewrites, design iterations, research analysis, or structural changes

25%

82/100

Iteration Consistency

Active days, revision days, log days, service dates, or preparation spread. One-day dumps are penalized.

20%

78/100

Human Process Density

Bugfixes, feedback rounds, data sessions, assets, materials, hours, or practice sessions

20%

71/100

AI Transparency

100 = complete disclosure. 0 = missing or refused while requesting verification

15%

100/100

Source Integrity

File hash when present, source text, reference details, and warning severity

10%

70/100

Contribution Clarity

Direct role, mentor role, verifier details, and AI categories where provided

10%

100/100

Strong signals: strong revision history, consistent work spread over time, documented human process signals, complete AI-use disclosure, contribution map fully documented.

Note: Source Integrity is capped at 70 due to a high-severity semantic warning.

Contribution Timeline

Illustrative process timeline

Sample · not real data

This example shows how evidence signals develop across a research project — including fluctuations between active sprints and slower phases. Real dossiers with dated evidence records display an actual timeline here.

Source collected

Korean research paper uploaded · SHA-256 fingerprint recorded

Week 1

Research notes added

+8sprint

3 mentor meetings · 6 literature review sessions recorded

Week 2

Midterm slowdown

-5

Lower activity window · project temporarily paused

Week 3

Analysis sprint

+10sprint

Data analysis · 4 figures prepared · 6 sources reviewed

Week 4

Claim reviewed

-4

Role mismatch flagged · L2 Assistant → L5 Lead claim

Week 5

Safe wording generated

+9sprint

Evidence-aligned claim drafted · role inflation warning addressed

Week 6

Feedback applied

-4

Revision round · evidence score updated to 58/100

Week 7

Dossier finalized

+8sprint

Common App draft generated · source records complete

Week 8

Activity signals by week

135

total

weeks

peak

+22

net

Contribution Map

Documented role and assistance

team of 3

Student role

Organized literature review, collected data, created figures 3 and 4, assisted with western blot analysis under teacher supervision.

Mentor role

Faculty advisor provided research direction and reviewed experimental design.

AI use

translation, grammar. AI used for Korean-to-English translation of research background section and grammar checking of final draft.

Project format

Team project / 3 members

Process Evidence

3 evidence types

Manual record

Research or lab work

Research log days

Data collection sessions

Analysis sessions

Figures or tables created

Literature sources reviewed

Supervisor or mentor meetings

Lab notebook or report evidence

Teacher-reviewed lab notebook (physical) and report draft (Google Docs)

Teacher or mentor feedback

Mentor name or role

Faculty advisor (Biology department)

Feedback date

2025-02-20

Feedback type

Written comments on report draft + verbal discussion

What changed after feedback

Clarified figure captions to show direct contribution. Removed "led" language from introduction. Added explicit supervision acknowledgment.

Evidence location

Email thread from February 2025 — available for reviewer on request.

Presentation or event record

Event name

Annual STEM Research Showcase

Event date

2025-03-10

Role

Presenter (one of three team members)

Materials created

Poster, presentation slides (12 pages), summary handout

Practice or preparation sessions

Proof available

Presentation slides saved locally. Poster photo available.

AI-use Disclosure

Transparent Assistance

Disclosed use categories

translationgrammar

Description

AI used for Korean-to-English translation of research background section and grammar checking of final draft.

AI use has been disclosed. This transparency is factored positively into the AI Transparency subscore.

Activity Formatter

Common App Activity Draft

Evidence-safe format generated from source records and contribution mapping.

⚠Warning

Activity description uses evidence-safe wording because the original English claim was stronger than the source evidence. Position and description have been adjusted to match the reviewed contribution level.

Activity type*

Research

Position/Leadership description*(Max 50 characters)

18/50

Research Assistant

Organization Name*(Max 100 characters)

23/100

School Research Project

Please describe this activity, including what you accomplished and any recognition you received, etc.*(Max 150 characters)

145/150

I assisted with data collection and experimental analysis under faculty supervision, organized background research through literature review, and

Participation grade levels*

9101112Post-graduate

Timing of participation*

All year

Hours spent per week*

Weeks spent per year*

I intend to participate in a similar activity in college.*

YesNo

Evidence Warnings

Original claim was stronger than source evidence. Activity description uses safe wording.

Description was shortened to fit the 150-character Common App limit.

Position title was adjusted to match the reviewed contribution level.

Limitations

What this dossier does not prove

Absolute authorship. Cannot confirm who physically typed the content.

100% human-made work. AI use may be undisclosed.

AI-free work. Verifolio is not an AI detector.

Legal certificate or institutional endorsement.

Factual truth. It measures evidence strength, not project quality or truth.

Reviewer note

Verifolio does not eliminate bad-faith claims. It gives honest creators a structured way to show process evidence and gives reviewers clearer places to check.

Suggested reviewers for this dossier

Reviewers who might ask for this type of supplemental material. Not a submission — supporting context only.

College counselor

Review claim alignment before writing a recommendation. Check whether the student's claimed role matches the source evidence.

Admissions reviewer

Use as supplemental context when a student attaches a dossier link. Does not replace the application.

Research supervisor

Cross-reference the safer wording suggestion against your original feedback and supervision notes.

Scholarship committee

Evidence Strength Score and source integrity documentation show what process records exist behind the claim.

Verifolio does not submit to reviewers. You control sharing. Supporting material only — not an official credential.

Reviewed against available evidence. Does not mean 100% human-made, AI-free, or legally reviewed work.

Dossier Sections

1 / 13

Page progress0%