METHODOLOGY · V1.2

How we decide what is worth recommending.

AI Soul Map separates product facts, editorial judgment and user fit. A product must first pass a quality threshold; matching a need or category cannot make an unqualified product recommendable.

01 — TRUST LEVELS

Listing and recommendation are different decisions

01

Candidate
An internal research lead. It is not public and carries no endorsement.

02

Listed
A public bilingual profile with current core facts, usable media and at least medium evidence confidence.

03

Recommended
A Listed product with high overall evidence, complete fit boundaries and evidence for the capabilities behind the recommendation.

04

Editor’s Choice
A future, deliberately scarce distinction requiring structured first-hand experience and independent review. It is not currently inferred from a featured flag.

02 — EVIDENCE

Four evidence layers

01

Official sources
Product sites, pricing, documentation, policies, release notes and official app stores. Marketing claims prove only that the vendor made the claim.

02

Support evidence
Reproducible answers from official support or moderated official communities, with date and context.

03

Editorial tests
Recorded platform, version, plan, language, steps and observations. A test is not generalized beyond its conditions.

04

Independent sources
Regulators, research, audits and third-party testing with a stated method. Fast-changing facts still require a current primary source.

03 — EDITORIAL REVIEW

What every review must answer

01

What is verifiably available now?

02

Who is it best for, and under which constraints?

03

Who should avoid it or consider an alternative?

04

What are the meaningful strengths, caveats, privacy and content boundaries?

05

Which claims remain unknown, disputed or due for re-checking?

04 — WHO TESTS

Who does the testing

Research tools help us track changes and organize public evidence, but they do not write our conclusions. Before a product is listed, a member of our editorial team opens it directly, uses it across multiple sessions rather than a single visit, and records what they actually observed—platform, version, plan and steps included. "Best for" and "not ideal for" judgments are written by that person, not generated automatically.

05 — FRESHNESS

Freshness changes the conclusion

Links, availability, pricing, trials and age boundaries are checked most frequently. Capabilities, languages, platforms, privacy and safety facts have their own review periods. Expired evidence can remove a recommendation reason, downgrade a product or return it to review.

06 — INDEPENDENCE

Commercial independence

Affiliate links affect only the outbound destination and disclosure. They do not affect taxonomy, inclusion, ordering, recommendation eligibility or editorial language.

07 — SAFETY

Professional and crisis boundaries

Emotional, health and financial topics are framed as reflection or information support—not diagnosis, treatment, crisis intervention or professional advice. High-risk states should lead to local emergency or professional help, not a commercial recommendation funnel.

Read the affiliate disclosure