Research Ethics and Publication Standards

PraxiHub distinguishes Working Papers, Literature Reviews, Research Notes, Technical Analysis, Concept Papers, Evidence Reviews, Methodology Notes, Product-Related Research, Industry Analysis, Insights, and Knowledge. One classification must not be presented as another.

Peer-reviewed status requires supporting evidence. Insights are editorial rather than formal Research, while Knowledge entries are educational explanations.

• Sources must be traceable and references must not be fabricated.
• Quotations require attribution and data sources should be identified where practical.
• Unsupported precision should be avoided.
• Broken or retracted references should be corrected when discovered.
• Fabricated evidence, citations, findings, statistics, affiliations, or review claims are prohibited.

Short educational entries are not represented as having a full bibliography unless one is supplied.

Named authors remain responsible for originality, accuracy, classification, citations, attribution, permissions, legal compliance, limitations, and disclosures. Profile roles do not establish academic rank or certification.

• Authorship and contributor order must be represented accurately, and the submitter must have permission to provide the work.
• Sources, quotations, data, methods, and disclosures must be complete and must not be fabricated.
• Confidential, restricted, or personal data must not be submitted without appropriate authorization.
• Funding and conflicts of interest must be stated rather than inferred or prefilled.
• Submitters remain responsible for notifying PraxiHub about material errors requiring correction after publication.

Submitted disclosures are retained as editorial-intake records distinct from published content. Later publication requires review and appropriate public disclosure. A submission record does not establish external peer-review status or guarantee publication.

Authors should disclose affiliations relevant to the subject or interpretation of a publication. Shared team identity between PraxiHub and Praxifi must remain visible where relevant.

PraxiHub is associated with Praxifi and serves as its research and knowledge initiative. Some authors, editors, contributors, or administrators of PraxiHub may also hold roles, ownership interests, or professional responsibilities within Praxifi.

Research involving Praxifi must disclose the relationship and must not present internal commercial claims as independently validated academic conclusions.

Financial, ownership, professional, product, sponsored, or personal relationships that could reasonably affect interpretation must be disclosed. PraxiHub does not infer that no conflict exists when no statement is supplied.

Product-related work must identify the product relationship, evidence boundary, assumptions, methodology, limitations, and relevant author interests. Marketing claims and undisclosed sponsored conclusions must not be presented as research findings.

Formal Research should identify material funding support when supplied. Funding statements must reflect known facts and must not be fabricated or inferred.

• AI tools may assist with language, organization, code review, or research workflows.
• Authors remain responsible for factual accuracy and must verify citations and claims independently.
• AI output is not a source; fabricated references or results are prohibited.
• Material AI assistance should be disclosed where appropriate.
• Confidential or restricted data must not be uploaded to unauthorized AI tools.

Research should describe methods, evidence boundaries, important assumptions, and material limitations in proportion to its classification. Data provenance should be identified where practical.

Publication on PraxiHub does not equal peer review. Any external review claim requires a separate documented process and supporting evidence. Internal editing, automated review, or author review must not be represented as independent peer review.

• Minor correction: spelling, formatting, or non-substantive clarification.
• Material correction: a factual error, incorrect figure, important methodological clarification, or disclosure update.
• Revision: a substantial update preserving the original publication identity.

Meaningful revisions remain visible in the publication record.

A withdrawn item should no longer be treated as current or reliable. Its public route remains available where transparency requires it, with a prominent reason and without active promotion.

Copied language, ideas, data, figures, and code require appropriate attribution. Plagiarism, concealed copying, and invented source claims are prohibited.

PraxiHub provides general research and education, not individualized investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Content must not be framed as a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold an asset.

Readers can review the public correction process and record on the Corrections page. Correction, content-removal, and publication-integrity concerns may be sent to praxifi.official@gmail.com.