Analytical Standards
Intelligence Tradecraft, Applied
Most geopolitical commentary doesn't distinguish between an outcome that is 30% probable and one that is 80% probable. That gap matters in decisions. Beurling applies professional intelligence tradecraft to every report: calibrated probability language, structured analytic techniques that target specific reasoning failures, and full source attribution. This page documents the standards behind every assessment.
ICD 203 — Intelligence Community Directive
ICD 203 is the analytical standards directive issued by the US Director of National Intelligence, mandating structured analytic techniques across all 17 US intelligence agencies — CIA, DIA, NSA, and others. It was created in the aftermath of 9/11 and the Iraq WMD failure: both were failures of analytical process, not raw information. Equivalent standards govern the UK Joint Intelligence Committee, NATO, and Five Eyes partners.
The directive requires four things from every key judgment:
- — Explicit confidence levels attached to every assessment
- — Alternative hypotheses considered and documented
- — Key assumptions stated and flagged for review
- — Observable warning indicators identified in advance
Beurling applies these requirements to every report cycle. Where the evidence base is thin, we say so. Where a judgment rests on assumptions that could be wrong, we name them.
7-Level Likelihood Scale
Every key judgment uses standardised probability language. "Likely" means the same thing in every report. Probability and confidence are two separate dimensions — a judgment can be highly probable but rest on thin sourcing.
| Term | Range |
|---|---|
| Almost certainly | >90% |
| Very likely | 75–90% |
| Likely | 60–75% |
| Roughly even odds | 35–60% |
| Unlikely | 15–35% |
| Very unlikely | 5–15% |
| Remote | <5% |
Confidence levels (independent of probability)
High confidence
Multiple independent corroborated sources; minimal collection gaps
Moderate confidence
Some corroboration; reliable sources; incomplete picture
Low confidence
Thin sourcing; unverified reporting; significant collection gaps
Structured Analytic Techniques
Six core SAT passes run on every report cycle before synthesis: KAC, Scenario Analysis, ACH, Red Team, Premortem, and Indicators & Warnings. Each technique targets a specific failure mode in analytical reasoning, and its outputs are preserved into the final assessment.
Key Assumptions Check (KAC)
Identifies assumptions the analysis depends on and stress-tests which, if wrong, would materially change the assessment. Prevents conclusions from being anchored to hidden premises.
Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH)
Evaluates evidence systematically across multiple hypotheses. Forces the analyst to seek disconfirming evidence rather than confirming the leading hypothesis — the core failure in the Iraq WMD assessment.
Scenario Analysis
Builds distinct, probability-weighted futures with observable triggers, disconfirming evidence, and reference classes before final synthesis. This keeps scenario work from collapsing into a single post-hoc narrative branch.
Red Team Analysis
Argues the strongest possible case against the dominant assessment. Identifies the evidence that, if true, would require a fundamentally different analytical conclusion.
Premortem Analysis
Assumes the current assessment will prove wrong and works backward to identify the most plausible failure path. Surfaces blind spots before they become record-breaking misses.
Indicators & Warnings (I&W)
Defines observable, concrete indicators that would signal a developing situation is evolving toward specific outcomes. Updated each cycle against the 72-hour watchlist.
Source Standards
Every report discloses its sources, classified by publisher family. Source families carry different default reliability assessments that inform how heavily any single source drives a judgment.
Official / Government
Statements from ministries, defence departments, heads of state. High reliability for declared positions; requires corroboration for capability or intent claims — official statements are also information operations.
Established Press
Wire services and established outlets with editorial standards and correction policies. High reliability for factual reporting; assessed with attention to national framing and sourcing transparency.
Think Tanks & Research
Policy institutes, university research centres, and analytical organisations. High reliability for structural analysis; assessed against known institutional biases and funding sources.
Regional & Local Press
Local and regional outlets with proximity to events. Variable reliability; high value for ground-truth detail unavailable to international press; cross-referenced before use in key judgments.
Adversarial / State Media
State-affiliated media and outlets with documented disinformation mandates. Included deliberately — adversarial framing is analytically significant. Flagged and assessed against independent corroboration.
Financial & Market Data
Pricing data, market movements, financial disclosures. High reliability for revealed preferences and economic signals; integrated in topics where markets serve as leading indicators for political developments.
Source count and family diversity are reported for each assessment. A judgment resting on a single source family carries lower confidence than one corroborated across three or more independent families.
Judgment Tracking
Every key judgment is assigned a stable identifier at publication. When events develop, judgments are formally resolved with one of three outcomes:
- Confirmed The predicted development occurred as assessed.
- Falsified The prediction did not materialise.
- Superseded The analytical framing was updated before the event resolved. Excluded from directional accuracy calculations.
Subscribers on the relevant topic receive an email notification when a judgment resolves. The scored outcome remains attached to the underlying assessment record so it can be reviewed alongside the original analysis.
See the standards in practice
Every Beurling report applies these standards: likelihood estimates with numeric ranges, confidence levels, SAT outputs integrated into the assessment, and sources disclosed by family. Sample reports are available without an account.
Beurling is an independent intelligence platform. All analysis is open-source — no classified sources are used or claimed. For questions about methodology or to report an analytical error, use the contact page.