How We Work
Methodology
Conflict.asia applies structured, transparent workflows to transform open-source information into reliable geopolitical analysis. Every data point on the platform is designed to be traceable back to its source and the editorial decisions made along the way.
1. Source Collection
We monitor a continuously expanding set of open sources including government communications, credible wire services and regional news outlets, military and defence ministry releases, satellite imagery providers, social media accounts with established track records, and specialist OSINT communities. Each source is catalogued with a reliability rating that informs how its data is weighted in the editorial process.
The News Desk module aggregates articles from these sources and applies automated bias scoring across five categories — Left, Lean Left, Center, Lean Right, and Right — so readers can evaluate perspective alongside fact.
2. Verification & Triage
Every incoming report is triaged through a multi-step verification process before it enters the map or event timeline. Reports are cross-referenced across at least two independent sources where possible. When a single-source report carries high operational significance, it is published with a clear "unverified" tag so readers can calibrate their assessment.
Each event carries a binary verification status (verified / unverified) that reflects whether the core claim has been corroborated through independent means. Our analysts reassess verification status as new information emerges.
3. Event Normalization
Raw reports are transformed into structured event records with consistent fields: title, summary, category, severity rating (1–5), geographic coordinates, country code, timestamp, source URL, and verification status. This normalization allows events to be filtered, searched, and plotted on the map with precise spatial and temporal accuracy.
Severity Scale
- 1
- Routine — minor incidents, no strategic shift expected
- 2
- Noteworthy — localised escalation or policy signal
- 3
- Significant — multi-actor involvement or confirmed casualties
- 4
- Major — cross-border implications or infrastructure strikes
- 5
- Critical — theatre-level escalation or mass-casualty event
4. Geospatial Mapping
The live conflict map is the platform's primary interface. Events are plotted at their precise coordinates and can be filtered by category, severity, country, date range, and source perspective. A heatmap toggle reveals conflict density patterns. Premium infrastructure layers overlay military installations, energy networks, datacenters, internet exchange points, and transport chokepoints.
Events are clustered at lower zoom levels to prevent visual overload and disaggregated as users zoom in for detail. Each point links directly to its full event record and source.
5. Analyst Commentary & Briefings
Long-form analyses published through the Analyses section provide deeper context behind the data. These briefings connect individual events into narratives — tracing escalation patterns, identifying strategic shifts, and assessing implications. Premium analyses are available to subscribers and offer time-sensitive assessments not found in the open feed.
Each analysis is tagged by country, conflict category, and theme to enable structured navigation. Analyst identities are disclosed where operationally safe to do so.
6. Community Forum
The forum enables structured discussion between analysts, researchers, and informed observers. Threads are organized by country and topic, allowing focused discourse on unfolding situations. All contributions are moderated to maintain analytical rigor and prevent misinformation. Verified members can start threads, share primary-source intelligence, and engage in cross-referencing discussions.
7. Transparency & Corrections
When new information contradicts a published event or analysis, corrections are applied promptly and noted. We do not silently alter records. Source reliability ratings are reviewed quarterly. The methodology itself evolves based on operational lessons and reader feedback — this page reflects the current state of practice.
All structured data fields, taxonomies, and layer definitions are documented in the Data Dictionary.
Questions or Feedback
Have questions about our process?
If something on the platform appears inaccurate or if you want to discuss sourcing practices, reach out through the contact page or raise it in the forum.