Coverage & methods

What the evidence can establish.

Coverage is assessed against named research questions, not a claim to cover the entire industry. This first collection prioritizes specific, traceable claims over broad counts.

partially covered

AI accelerators

Covered

NVIDIA A100 and H100 product/die/architecture distinctions
Blackwell 2024 process description
AMD MI300 product, memory and packaging specifications
Dated Blackwell wafer manufacturing at a named TSMC Phoenix site

Still missing

MI300 die-specific foundry proof
Exact die/SKU-to-fab-phase assignments
Shipment volumes and customer allocation

partially covered

HBM supply chain

Covered

HBM generation used by specific accelerator configurations
SK hynix and Micron dated HBM3E production announcements

Still missing

Direct supplier-to-accelerator contracts
HBM production fab assignments
Supplier shares and allocation history

partially covered

Foundries and fabs

Covered

TSMC Arizona first-fab N4 capability
Second-fab planned N3 capability kept separate
Samsung foundry selection for planned Tenstorrent chiplets
Blackwell wafer production at the TSMC Phoenix site, preserving separate 2025 and 2026 observations

Still missing

Exact Blackwell die, SKU, fab phase and process mapping
Actual installed equipment models
Cross-foundry process equivalence

partially covered

Startup and IP network

Covered

Samsung Catalyst Fund and Tenstorrent financing
Tenstorrent planned chiplets and foundry
Blue Cheetah historical IP licensing and acquisition announcement

Still missing

Named shipped Tenstorrent SKU and foundry
Legal closing dates and current ownership percentages
Independent evidence beyond issuer statements

planned

Equipment and materials

Still missing

ASML–TSMC customer-support source was insufficient to establish the proposed supplier claim; the claim is retained as retracted
Fab-level equipment installations
Process-step and material dependencies
Alternative qualified suppliers

planned

Broader semiconductor industry

Still missing

Mobile SoCs and Apple modem history
EDA and IP design wins
OSAT and substrate suppliers
Analog, power and automotive
Patents, papers and standards crosswalks

Quality measurements

Measure	Current result	Meaning
Evidence coverage	66/66	Claims with a traceable source record.
Primary-source coverage	66/66	Primary-source assertions; not independent verification.
Independent human verification	0	Requires an identified human review event.
Explicit validity	50/66	Includes dated source snapshots; not continuous history.
Orphan entities	0	Entities with no recorded claims.
Resolution precision	Not yet measured	Requires an adjudicated identity benchmark.

Read all quality measurements as JSON →

Confidence and verification

The evidence index combines source authority (up to 45), primary-source status (15), independent corroboration (15), extraction certainty (10), and entity-resolution certainty (15). It is a transparent ranking rule, not a calibrated probability. Repeated reports from the same origin do not count as independent sources.

UNVERIFIED candidates remain separate. SUPPORTED claims meet the source policy. VERIFIED requires human review. Conflicting evidence produces DISPUTED; overdue review produces STALE; withdrawn interpretations are RETRACTED and remain in history.

Two separate clocks

Validity records when evidence supports a relationship. Knowledge time records when VLSI observed or reviewed it. Publication, retrieval and production-start dates are different fields. Unknown dates remain unknown; intervals use an exclusive end date.

Source hierarchy and rights

Tier A covers direct official documentation, filings, technical reports and government or standards sources. Tier B covers research and credible industry analysis. Tier C covers secondary media, and Tier D covers community or unverified material. Lower-tier evidence can be retained without being accepted. This seed stores concise factual summaries and references; it does not redistribute source documents.

Traversal acceptance ledger

Company → chip → foundry → process → fab → equipment

partial Product/die/process and fab capability evidence exist. Blackwell wafer production has site-level proof at TSMC Phoenix; exact die/SKU, fab phase, process and installed equipment remain unproven.

Company → chip → memory → memory supplier → fab

partial A shared memory generation is a technology association, never proof of a supply relationship. Product-specific supplier and fab evidence remain gaps.

Company → supplier → supplier dependency → country

partial NVIDIA reports using TSMC and Samsung wafer-foundry services at portfolio level. Facility locations are covered separately. No numerical exposure or SKU-specific allocation is established.

Company → competitor → competing product

partial AMD-reported corporate competitors and product designs are covered. Specific product competition needs segment/time evidence.

Company → investment → startup → product → foundry

partial Financing participation and planned chiplet/foundry selection are covered. This is not evidence of completed manufacture or continuing ownership.

Next research priorities

Direct accelerator-to-HBM-vendor statements
Exact Blackwell die/SKU, fab phase, process and periods beyond the sourced snapshots
Fab equipment installation announcements
Two independent sources for the highest-value claims
Historical entity-name and acquisition event evidence

Planned capabilities

Production autonomous acquisition scheduler
PostgreSQL production system of record
Calibrated entity-resolution precision benchmark
Vector retrieval, GraphQL and MCP wrappers
Community correction submission and adjudication UI