Our Evidence Register and Editorial Method

Evidence before authority

Lenspicnictrovi explains how visual analysis and archival research can support the categorization of historic buildings. Our emphasis is traceability: the source of a claim, the alternatives it leaves open and the person or process responsible for reviewing it.

We distinguish model predictions from historical interpretations and both from formal designation. This website is an educational publication, not a monument authority, an official inventory or a professional building assessment service.

How the guide is organized

The four research tasks follow a record from its initial scope through source assembly, model review and reporting. Examples are selected to clarify the method rather than rank buildings or claim benchmark results.

Conceptual renders illustrate forms and evidence bundles. They are not photographs of surveyed buildings and should not be cited as architectural evidence. The local sample applies visible rules; it is not connected to a live AI service.

Reference points, not endorsements

The following organizations and standards provide useful starting points. Their inclusion does not imply affiliation, approval or endorsement of Lenspicnictrovi. Consult the primary material and the relevant jurisdiction for your own project.

UNESCO World Heritage Centre — international World Heritage information and documentation.
ICOMOS — conservation charters and heritage-related professional resources.
POP, French Ministry of Culture — access to French heritage resources.
Europeana — discovery of digitized cultural heritage and item-level rights information.
Gallica, Bibliothèque nationale de France — digitized publications, images and archival resources.
Deutsche Digitale Bibliothek — access to cultural and scientific heritage collections.
CIDOC CRM and DCMI Metadata Terms — frameworks for structured cultural and descriptive information.
W3C PROV — a family of specifications for provenance.
NIST AI Risk Management Framework — a framework for considering AI-related risks.

Corrections and enquiries

Send the page address, the claim you are questioning and a source that supports the correction. Please distinguish a factual error from an alternative interpretation; both are valuable, but they call for different editorial changes. We do not promise individual building assessments or a particular response time.

Prepare an enquiry Start with scope