Confidence Through Evidence: Blast Radius, And Mapping The Gaps
A computed peak of the concept map, argued in full.
team/humans/dinis_cruz/briefs/06/16/theses-and-reflections/v0.33.38__strategy-brief__confidence-through-evidence-blast-radius-graphs-mapping-the-gaps.md
Commitb561fa6b14 · carried 23 August 2026
LicenceApache-2.0 (repository) · CC BY 4.0 stated in the file
Bytes11,696 · 1,834 words · SHA-256 6d30f39aecf8293d
Dated16 June 2026
Why it is here
Confidence is a function of connectivity is the third-strongest concept on this site's concept map, and it was computed there rather than chosen. This is where it is argued: confidence is not a feeling and not a percentage, it is understanding the blast radius, and it grows with connected evidence. The move that makes it operational is the second half: map the gaps as well as the evidence, because absence of evidence is itself evidence.
What it says
- Confidence is a spectrum that grows with connected evidence.
- Confidence here means understanding the blast radius.
- Map not only the evidence you have but the gaps you are missing.
- Evidence has weight, and the absence of evidence is itself evidence.
- The core failure is that blast radius does not propagate across air-gapped graphs.
Worth re-reading for. Its gap-mapping argument is the source of the site's named-absence rule, and the two are not quite the same claim.
Where this document lands on the site
The document is the peak. Below it hang the concepts measured in its text and the places on this site that rest on it — and the two are different kinds of link, drawn differently: a measured edge is dashed and carries its count, an authored edge is solid. The method is stated in full on the hub.