Classify the change before redrawing the trend
A cosmetic chart edit is not the same as a new measured construct. Begin with field-level old and new evidence, then propose a treatment. The tool checks the proposal; it never chooses for the reviewer.
Build the baseline reset and series-break memo
Copy exact wording from method documents, exports, provider notices, and decision minutes. If evidence is unavailable, choose Undisclosed or unresolved instead of guessing.
Not generated
This is not approval. A ready package means the checklist found no encoded contradiction or missing required field. It does not verify the supplied evidence or authorize the treatment.
Critical conflicts
Missing evidence and actions
Field-level transition record
| Field | Old evidence | New evidence | Relationship |
|---|
Portable Markdown memo
Memo ready.
Three different changes need three different records
Use the examples to inspect the encoded gates. They are fictional and do not imply a real provider, organization, or measurement result.
Make the discontinuity visible wherever the series appears
A useful notice names the first affected period, the old and new concepts or methods, the cause, whether the effect is one-off or lasting, the estimated magnitude where supportable, and a link to full details. Do not visually join points across a known discontinuity as though the instrument remained unchanged.
General series-break controls are adapted cautiously from the OECD Data and Metadata Reporting and Presentation Handbook. That handbook addresses official statistics; this independent checklist applies its presentation discipline to supplied AI-visibility records and does not claim OECD endorsement, conformity, or statistical certification.
Need to document one method before comparing versions? Use the AI visibility methodology disclosure generator. If two providers produced different headline numbers, use the separate AI visibility score reconciliation template.
Frequently asked questions
When should an AI visibility baseline be reset?
Consider a forward-only reset or separate series when a material change alters the measured construct, formula or denominator, prompt population, AI products or surfaces, or reporting window. Record the effective date, preserve the earlier values and method, and label the break in every downstream use.
Should historical scores be recalculated after a method change?
Not by default. A disclosed restatement needs preserved originals, reproducible old and new calculations, named period coverage, a documented bridge and its limits, downstream propagation, and authorized human approval. Otherwise preserve the prior series and begin a new baseline or separate series.
Does an AI model update always require a new series?
No. First determine what changed in the observed instrument. A presentation-only label change can preserve continuity; a bounded non-critical change may support annotated continuity; a new model, surface, prompt population, formula, window, or construct may require a visible break. The evidence, not the release-note label, determines the review.
Does “ready for human review” mean approved?
No. It means only that the form contains the fields required by the selected path and no encoded contradiction remains. A qualified human still needs to verify the evidence, authority, statistical reasoning, contractual consequences, and final communication.
Does this page upload or retain the record?
No. Classification, conflict checks, memo generation, copying, and download happen locally in the browser. Closing or refreshing the tab clears unsaved entries.