FAQ · Evidence, review, and access

How Benchpro records scientific expertise claims.

Benchpro keeps a person’s expertise claim, self-reported contribution level, optional publication source, peer-review response, and public visibility distinct. These answers explain what each part establishes—and what it does not.

Records and sources

A Benchpro record is a person-specific expertise claim. A publication may supply provenance, but is optional and does not by itself establish the claimed expertise.

What does a Benchpro expertise record contain?

A record identifies the scientist, one named area of expertise, the scientist’s self-reported contribution level, and an optional note. It may link one publication and includes requested reviewer records, review responses and status, and resulting visibility.

It is evidence about one claim—not certification of the person, a judgment of publication merit, or a prediction of future performance.

Do I need to link a publication?

No. A scientist can submit an activity-backed claim by describing the research or training activity where they used the expertise. Publication-backed claims still use a linked work as source context; peer review remains the verification mechanism.

Activity-backed claim · self-asserted source context

What does publication import or parsing establish?

Import may store bibliographic and parsed publication metadata internally; only a relevant subset is shown in the wizard and public views. Automated expertise classifications are unchecked suggestions until the scientist chooses one, supplies a role and claim details, and selects a reviewer.

Parsing establishes source context only. It does not create or approve a claim, prove authorship in every deployment, or prove that the scientist performed a method. Benchpro records a whole-publication association and optional notes, not a structured Methods or Supplement source location.

Expertise claims

The scientist chooses an area of expertise and describes their role in that work. The labels describe participation in the named work, not a general proficiency rank.

What is an expertise claim?

An expertise claim is a person-specific record about one named area of expertise in one work context. It records the scientist’s self-reported role, an optional note, an optional linked publication, and one or more requested peer reviewers. Source context and peer-review state remain separate from the claim.

What do Observed, Took part, and Led mean?

Observed: Observed this work closely and can review how it was carried out.
Took part: Contributed directly to this work as part of the team.
Led: Led this work and can speak for the decisions, execution, and outcomes.

These labels describe the claimant’s role in this work, not general ability, seniority, or a quality ranking.

Are publication-based suggestions already claims?

No. Automated suggestions begin unchecked. A manually added area of expertise is also incomplete until configured. Once selected, configured, and submitted, both origins use the same claim record and review process; origin alone makes neither stronger nor weaker.

What is the difference between publication-backed, activity-backed, and legacy claims?

A publication-backed claim has one work attached as source context. An activity-backed claim has a self-asserted research or training activity attached as source context. Older legacy claims may show source context unavailable; source and peer-review status remain separate.

What is the difference between configured and submitted?

Configured is a wizard draft state: the scientist has selected the area of expertise, a valid role, and at least one reviewer; notes remain optional. Submitted means the claim and its pending review request or requests have been recorded. Submission is not approval or public confirmation.

Peer confirmation and trust boundaries

A peer response applies only to the named person, area of expertise, and claim. Review state remains explicit and does not expand into universal trust language.

Who can be asked to review, and how many reviewers are required?

The scientist selects at least one reviewer for each claim and is instructed to choose someone who directly observed the work. Publication-linked flows may offer mapped publication authors other than the claimant; claims without a publication support ORCID search. A claimant cannot review their own claim. Selection creates a request, not confirmation.

What happens when a review is pending, verified, or skipped?

Pending: A response is unresolved; it does not confirm the claim.
Verified: The reviewer confirmed this specific claim.
Skipped: The reviewer chose not to decide the claim; it remains unconfirmed.

What does a verified response confirm—and what does it not establish?

It supports one specific record: the named scientist’s claim that they demonstrated expertise in the named area, at the reported level and in the stated context.

It does not certify the person, verify other areas of expertise, rank a publication, establish scientific merit or hiring suitability, guarantee accuracy or truth, or predict future performance.

Does requesting a review guarantee delivery or a response?

No. A request records the selected reviewer and remains Pending unless a response is recorded. Benchpro attempts email delivery for eligible requests; selection and submission do not prove that an email reached the reviewer or guarantee a response or response time.

When does Benchpro display a claim as peer confirmed?

A qualifying claim with a verified peer response may be shown as peer confirmed. Benchpro does not publish a fixed reviewer-count threshold here, and peer confirmation must not be read as verification of the whole person or profile.

Visibility, search, and access

Public display and company search expose bounded evidence, while signed-in actions remain role-gated. Audience guides provide the safe next route for each reader.

What appears on a public profile?

A public profile can show public identity and profile fields, external links, education, works, and qualifying expertise claims with verified reviewer information. A claim may show the scientist-reported role and a linked publication when one exists. Sensitive account fields are removed before rendering, and not every public claim is publication-linked.

Do pending or skipped claims appear as public confirmation?

No. Only qualifying claims with a verified peer response appear as confirmed. Pending and Skipped reviews are not presented as public confirmation.

What can company users search and inspect?

Talent search is limited to authenticated company accounts. Authorized users can search scientist profiles, narrow results by confirmed expertise evidence, and inspect the evidence presented with a scientist. Unfiltered browsing can include scientist accounts without implying that every result has the searched evidence or is peer confirmed.

How do I access Benchpro today?

Scientists use the scientist and ORCID sign-in path, and expertise claim creation is restricted to scientist accounts. Talent search requires an existing company account. Availability can vary with the current beta and signup configuration; Benchpro does not promise open company registration, guaranteed access, or permanent pricing.

Where should I go next?

Use the scientist or company guide for role-specific access, or read the institutional explanation of how the record works. These public routes explain the available next action without sending signed-out readers into a role-gated screen.

Continue from the evidence

Read the guide for your role, or review how Benchpro defines the record.