How every figure on this platform is produced

1. Two figures, never merged

Directly evidenced loss — documented lost contracts, cancelled orders, quantified withdrawals — is reported separately from modelled loss. Modelling is an estimate; documentary loss is evidence. Merging the two is how loss claims become indefensible.

2. Similarity weighting

Comparator judgments are scored against your facts using these weights. Only judgments verified against the primary source can contribute a figure.

recency

5%

claimant type

10%

quantification

20%

legal authority

20%

publication type

10%

factual similarity

20%

turnover proximity

15%

3. Turnover-band interpolation

Loss that is serious for a business turning over £180,000 may be immaterial for one turning over £40m. Where verified comparators exist in the same turnover band, their accepted loss figures are averaged. Where they exist above and below, a linear interpolation is taken across band midpoints and the working is shown. Where they do not exist, no comparator figure is produced and the report says so.

4. The research model

Where quantified economic research is transferable, a revenue effect is weighted for peer review, sector match, geography and causal design, then applied to turnover and adjusted by online dependency, reach, prominence, publication volume, duration, customer concentration, severity and the causation score. Every multiplier is printed in the report. Profit impact is derived using your margin where supplied, and a clearly labelled sector assumption where not.

5. Causation

Causation is scored from timing, enquiry and conversion data, customer statements, documented lost contracts, analytics and accounting evidence, and reduced for every competing explanation identified. A low causation score suppresses the modelled figure rather than being reported alongside it as a caveat.

6. Sensitivity

Every full report tests the central figure against a halved research effect, reduced online dependency, discounted causation and a documented-loss-only scenario, so you can see how fragile or robust the number is before anyone relies on it.

7. Known limitations

• The underlying economic literature is largely non-UK and concerns reviews, not defamation.
• UK judgments rarely quantify business loss, so comparator coverage is thin by nature.
• Turnover bands introduce imprecision that exact accounts remove.
• The model cannot assess defences; a strong truth defence defeats a strong loss case.
• No figure produced here predicts what a court would award.

Version notes

Initial methodology. Comparator weights, interpolation and formula multipliers are configurable; any change mints a new version and never alters existing reports. Weight keys aligned with the engine; multipliers, blend ratio and sector margins moved from code into this record.