Editorial standards

These standards apply to articles, comparisons and buying guides published by RoboFutur.

1. Source hierarchy

We prioritise first-hand material: technical documentation, official communications, scientific publications, public registers and current product pages. We then compare these with specialist reporting and, where relevant, independent testing.

A company publication establishes what the company claims. It does not always prove performance under independent conditions.

2. Facts, announcements and projections

Our text should clearly distinguish:

• what is available and verifiable today;
• what has been announced with a target or date;
• what remains an estimate, rumour or scenario.

Prices are dated and described as indicative when they can change. Controlled demonstrations are not presented as proof of general autonomy.

3. Selection and buying guides

A guide explains its criteria and limitations. We do not claim physical hands-on testing when it did not happen. A recommendation may rely on documentation, cross-checked independent reviews and specification comparisons; the method must say so explicitly.

4. Artificial intelligence

AI tools may assist research, translation, transcription or outlining. They are never evidence. Important claims must be checked against cited sources, and published text remains the responsibility of the RoboFutur editorial team.

5. Commercial independence

No commercial relationship grants a right of editorial approval. Advertising, affiliate links, loaned products and sponsored content must receive a clear disclosure. The site currently displays none of them.

6. Corrections and updates

Factual corrections are incorporated as soon as they are verified. A material change receives an updated date or a note in the article. A simple typographical correction may be made without a note.

To request a correction, include the URL, disputed passage and a verifiable source through the contact page or email contact@robofutur.com.