Skip to content

Editorial Workflow

Editorial Workflow

Document Version: 1.0 Last Updated: March 26, 2026 Compliance: EU AI Act Article 50

1. Overview

This document describes the editorial process for AGILE SAPIENS monograph content, ensuring transparency, accuracy, and compliance with EU AI Act requirements.

2. Editorial Standards

2.1 Quality Framework

  • Scientific Accuracy: All factual claims verified through multiple sources
  • Banking-Level Standards: Zero tolerance for inaccuracies in published content
  • Voice Consistency: “Harari meets Dilbert” archetype maintained throughout
  • Controversy Calibration: Target 78% for optimal engagement while maintaining credibility

2.2 Content Categories

  • Verified: Fully fact-checked, multiple independent sources
  • Partially Verified: Key facts checked, some elements pending verification
  • Unverified: Preliminary content, requires full verification before publication
  • Draft: Work in progress, not ready for review

3. AI Transparency (EU AI Act Article 50)

3.1 AI Tool Disclosure

In compliance with EU AI Act Article 50, we disclose that automated tools are used in the content development process for:

  • Research assistance and fact-checking support
  • Editorial drafting and content structuring
  • Style consistency and voice calibration

3.2 Human Oversight

Critical Requirement: All content published undergoes mandatory human review and approval by qualified editors.

No Automated Publication: No content is published without human editorial oversight and fact-verification.

4. Editorial Process

4.1 Content Creation Phase

  1. Research: Primary and secondary source compilation
  2. Drafting: Initial content creation with automated tool assistance
  3. Self-Review: Author preliminary check
  4. Quality Gate 1: Fact verification and source validation

4.2 Review Phase

  1. Editorial Review: Professional editor evaluation

    • Factual accuracy verification
    • Style and voice consistency check
    • Scientific rigor assessment
    • Legal compliance verification

  2. Project Manager Review (Borges):

    • Strategic alignment with monograph objectives
    • Controversy calibration assessment
    • Target audience appropriateness

  3. Final Approval: Publication authorization

4.3 Publication Phase

  1. Metadata Completion: Required frontmatter fields
  2. Final Verification: Pre-publication checklist
  3. Publication: Content goes live
  4. Post-Publication Monitoring: Ongoing accuracy maintenance

5. Frontmatter Requirements

Every published article must include the following metadata:

---
title: "Chapter Title"
description: "Brief chapter description"
date: 2026-03-26
weight: 10
status: verified              # verified | partially_verified | unverified | draft
confidence: high             # high | medium | low
reviewed_by: "Editor Name"   # REQUIRED for status: verified/partially_verified
review_date: 2026-03-26     # REQUIRED - date of editorial review
sources:                    # REQUIRED - list of sources
  - "Source 1 URL/Citation"
  - "Source 2 URL/Citation"
tags: ["AI", "Future of Work", "Automation"]
category: "analysis"
---

6. Source Verification Standards

6.1 Source Quality Requirements

  • Primary Sources: Academic papers, government reports, corporate disclosures
  • Secondary Sources: Reputable news outlets, industry analyses
  • Minimum Sources: 2 independent sources for any factual claim
  • Source Dating: Sources must be current within 2 years unless historical context

6.2 Fact-Checking Protocol

  1. Initial Verification: All claims checked during drafting
  2. Cross-Reference: Multiple source verification for key facts
  3. Expert Consultation: Subject matter expert review for complex topics
  4. Update Monitoring: Ongoing monitoring of source validity

7. Quality Assurance

7.1 Review Requirements

  • Editorial Review: Mandatory for all published content
  • Review Documentation: reviewed_by and review_date fields required
  • Review Standards: Banking-level accuracy and completeness

7.2 Continuous Improvement

  • Feedback Integration: Reader feedback incorporated into future updates
  • Process Refinement: Regular workflow optimization based on outcomes
  • Training Updates: Editorial team kept current with best practices

8. Legal Compliance

8.1 EU AI Act Compliance

  • Transparency Requirements: Clear disclosure of AI tool usage
  • Human Oversight: Mandatory human review and approval
  • Quality Standards: Maintained to professional editorial standards

8.2 Content Licensing

  • Content License: CC BY 4.0 - freely shareable with attribution
  • Attribution Requirements: Proper credit and license acknowledgment required
  • Commercial Use: Permitted under CC BY 4.0 terms

9. Contact Information

For editorial process inquiries:

10. Document Updates

This workflow document is updated as needed to reflect process improvements and regulatory changes. All updates are dated and version-controlled.

Next Review Date: June 26, 2026