> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://docs.cortex.aic.io/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://docs.cortex.aic.io/workflow-guides/analyse/assessment-dimensions.md).

# Assessment Dimensions

**Open this area:** In the CORTEX menu, select **Intelligence cycle → Analyse**.

Use each field for its own decision and correct a failed save without losing the draft.

**Who uses this:** Collector, Analyst, Author, Reviewer, Recipient\
**Open in CORTEX:** `/analyse`\
**In-app guide:** `/help?topic=assessment-dimensions`

## Expected result

Probability, confidence, source evaluation, classification and legal authority remain independently explained.

## Before you start

* Check the exact adopted profile, assessment edition and source-use authority.
* Classification and access determine who may see the record, not whether its content is correct.

## What to do

{% stepper %}
{% step %}

## Probability: how likely is the proposition?

Choose the retained probability edition and justify the likelihood of the stated event. It does not measure source trustworthiness or evidence quality.
{% endstep %}

{% step %}

## Confidence: how strong is the assessment basis?

Explain the evidence base, uncertainty and stability of the judgement separately. A likely event can have low analytical confidence.
{% endstep %}

{% step %}

## Source and information evaluation: what supports this account?

Record source reliability and information credibility or knowledge codes under their exact JDP or APP edition. Identical letters in different schemes do not have interchangeable meanings.
{% endstep %}

{% step %}

## Handling: who may receive this?

Set classification, compartments, caveats and any independent sharing conditions. High classification is neither high confidence nor release approval.
{% endstep %}

{% step %}

## Authority: may this action be performed?

Check the separate current purpose, processing activity, source-use decision and any required legal authority or release approval. No probability, source grade or security label supplies a lawful power.
{% endstep %}

{% step %}

## Correct a failed save

Read the error and follow How to resolve this in a separate tab if needed. Validation and concurrency failures retain typed drafts in the connected P1 editors. Correct the named field or refresh and compare before resubmitting; do not assume the first attempt saved. Access loss clears sensitive state and requires renewed authorised access.
{% endstep %}
{% endstepper %}

## Check the result

* Have I explained each dimension separately?
* Am I using the exact edition and approved jurisdiction?
* Did I compare a stale record before retrying?

## If you get stuck

<details>

<summary>Does a reliable source make this almost certain?</summary>

No. Assess the proposition against the evidence and explain confidence separately; source reliability is only one input.

</details>

<details>

<summary>Why was a valid code refused?</summary>

The adopted catalogue may allow a narrower set or another edition. Keep the draft, inspect its exact profile and follow the linked domain guidance.

</details>

<details>

<summary>Why did my draft disappear?</summary>

A confirmed access loss clears sensitive fields. Do not re-enter restricted content until access and scope are restored. Ordinary validation or stale-version failures have a different recovery path.

</details>

## Responsibility and limits

* Users remain responsible for their judgements and current authority.
* A model answer, checklist or help example cannot approve its own output.

**Reference and scope:** Use the editions retained by the workflow: PHIA uncertainty, the approved JDP/APP evaluation scheme, government security markings and separately reviewed authority.

## Related workflows

* [Choose a probability edition and retain uncertainty](/workflow-guides/analyse/probability-editions.md)
* [Record JDP or policing evaluation and sharing conditions](/menu-areas/police-and-defence/policing-evaluation.md)
* [Record authority before new source use](/sources-and-evidence/source-authority.md)
* [Record processing purposes and privacy applicability](/workflow-guides/assurance/processing-activities.md)
* [Read guidance for the exact retained UK profile](/workflow-guides/assurance/uk-profile-guidance.md)