Strategic Institutional Research Initiative  ·  SOE

UAP Standards of
Evidence Initiative

Establishing the rigorous, cross-disciplinary evidentiary framework that the scientific study of Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena requires — modeled on the biosignatures standards of evidence developed by the astrobiology community for NASA.

Status Organizing — AstroAccel Summit, Lisbon, August 2026
Lead Coordinators Dr. Gretchen Stahlman · Dr. Michael C. Cifone
Participant Network 55+ confirmed scholars, 14+ countries
Primary Deliverable Community White Paper — SOE Framework v1.0

Science without standards is conjecture

Despite decades of credible observation and an accelerating international research landscape, the scientific study of UAP currently operates without a commonly accepted framework for conducting research, evaluating evidence, or deriving conclusions from data. Most existing studies remain forensic in nature — relying on retrospective case reports and eyewitness testimony — which, while valuable as an initial resource, cannot provide the kind of measurable, controlled data required for robust hypothesis testing.

This is not a novel problem. The philosophy of science has long distinguished between "historical sciences" — which reconstruct events from traces — and "experimental sciences" — which generate repeatable data under controlled conditions. UAP inquiry currently exists in the former mode, not because the phenomena resist systematic observation, but because the field lacks the community-endorsed standards of evidence that would define what systematic observation should look like and how its results should be interpreted.

The absence of such standards has a compounding effect: evidence is routinely dismissed for failing to meet conditions it could never satisfy under the current framework, creating an epistemic loop that impedes legitimate progress. The UAP Standards of Evidence Initiative exists to break that loop.

The Precedent — Astrobiology

In 2022, the astrobiology community confronted an identical challenge: how to evaluate claims about potential biosignatures in ways that are scientifically rigorous and publicly credible. Their response — the Community Report from the Biosignature Standards of Evidence Workshop — produced a framework subsequently reviewed by the U.S. National Academies of Sciences and adopted as the field's shared evidentiary standard.

The UAP SOE Initiative is modeled explicitly on this precedent — the same structure, the same process, the same ambition: a community white paper that the scientific field can collectively endorse and build upon.

National Academies review of biosignature SOE →

The UAP Evidence Ladder

One of the Initiative's primary outputs is a structured confidence framework — analogous to astrobiology's Confidence of Life Detection (CoLD) scale — that defines the conditions under which raw UAP observations can be progressively elevated to the status of scientific evidence.

The Ladder gives the research community shared language: a common vocabulary for distinguishing between indicative data, consistent data, corroborated data, and data that meets the threshold for scientific claim. Without such a framework, every UAP finding is argued for or against on ad hoc grounds.

The draft below represents a prototype structure, to be refined through the working group process. It is explicitly provisional and will be substantially developed through the AstroAccel and subsequent workshop process.

UAP Evidence Ladder — Prototype Draft

VI
Scientific Claim
Peer-reviewed conclusion meeting full community SOE standards; independently replicated or independently verified; eligible for submission to National Academies-level review.
V
Verified Anomaly
Multi-instrument, multi-site corroboration; natural and anthropogenic explanations formally ruled out via agreed protocols; chain-of-custody documented per MOD schema.
IV
Corroborated Observation
Independent confirmation from a second calibrated instrument or observer; uncertainty quantification meets Minimum Observational Dataset standards; no straightforward conventional explanation.
III
Consistent Data
Calibrated single-instrument observation meeting data quality thresholds; internally consistent across sensors; conventional explanations considered but not definitively excluded.
II
Indicative Data
Observation from an instrument not purpose-designed for UAP detection; some calibration information available; conventional explanation possible but uncertain. Analogous to a medical case report — motivates further investigation.
I
Testimonial Record
Credible eyewitness report or post-event forensic documentation; important as a historical record and for targeting observational assets; not independently sufficient for evidentiary claims.
Testimonial Scientific claim

The researchers building this framework

The Initiative is coordinated by an interdisciplinary team spanning philosophy of science, information science, astrophysics, and science education — each bringing distinct expertise essential to the multi-layered evidentiary problem.

Dr. Michael C. Cifone
Society for UAP Studies · Hamburg University
Initiative Coordinator · ED/President, SUAPS

Philosophy of science; conceptual foundations of theoretical physics; evidence standards and methodological foundations for emerging scientific domains. Founding Executive Director of SUAPS.

Dr. Gretchen Stahlman
Florida State University
Lead Coordinator · Information Science

Early career information scientist; research at the intersection of data curation, interdisciplinary collaboration, and emerging scientific fields. Author of the first systematic review of UAP scholarship (1967–2023). Co-organizer of the 2024 NSF-supported UAP workshop and 2025 DoD-supported narrative data workshop.

Dr. Laura Dominé
Harvard–Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
AURA Project Manager · Astrophysics

Particle physics, instrumentation, and data-driven analysis of weak signals in noisy environments. Leads the Initiative's focus on experimental design and calibration practices for multimodal observatories.

Dr. Tim Spuck
Associated Universities, Inc. (AUI)
Education & Engagement Lead

Director of Education and Public Engagement at AUI; responsible for innovative STEM education programs internationally. Leads the Initiative's focus on workforce development, education, and public communication of scientific standards.

Dr. Giovanna Pugliese
University of Amsterdam
EU Engagement & Science Communication

Astrophysicist and science communication expert with extensive experience in European research infrastructures. Strengthens Dutch and broader EU engagement in the Initiative and its outputs.

Proposed sub-committees

To address the multifaceted nature of UAP evidentiary standards, the working group will form specialized sub-committees, each addressing a distinct dimension of the problem — from physical instrumentation to the philosophical status of anomalous experience.

Physical Sciences & Instrumentation

Observational methods, instrument calibration, multimodal data collection, and statistical standards for physical detection of anomalous events. Draws on methodological frameworks from astrophysics, atmospheric physics, and radar/EO/IR sensing.

Data Infrastructure & Information Science

Metadata standards, data provenance and chain-of-custody, curation protocols, long-term stewardship, and interoperable repository design. Essential for ensuring that physical observations can be transformed into usable, reproducible scientific data.

Materials Analysis

Standards of evidence for the analysis of physical materials potentially associated with UAP, including chain-of-custody requirements, isotopic and elemental analysis protocols, and criteria for distinguishing terrestrial from anomalous material composition.

Biological & Life Sciences

Investigative and evidentiary standards for reported biological and physiological effects on witnesses and observers — a category of evidence that existing frameworks treat inconsistently and that requires dedicated methodological attention.

Social & Human Sciences

Cultural, political, and sociological dimensions of the UAP-human interface; analysis of how social and institutional factors shape data collection, reporting behavior, stigma, and the conditions under which observations enter or are excluded from scientific consideration.

Witness Testimony & Epistemology

The evidentiary status and philosophical analysis of first-person human experience; criteria for integrating testimonial evidence into a systematic framework; and the broader epistemological question of how to reason from anomalous data toward plausible hypotheses.

AstroAccel 2026 — The next step

The Initiative has pivoted from a Lorentz Center workshop application (declined April 2026) to the AstroAccel 2026 Innovation Summit, Lisbon, August 15–17, 2026 as its next anchor event — to form a core international advocacy group, present a funding pitch, and initiate the institutional partnerships needed to advance to a full community workshop.

The Lorentz Center application — which was submitted with 20+ confirmed participants representing 14+ countries and disciplines spanning astrophysics, data science, philosophy of science, and social sciences — produced substantive intellectual development that now frames the AstroAccel pitch. The full proposal, including the five-day program structure, the Minimum Observational Dataset schema concept, and the UAP Evidence Ladder prototype above, emerged from that preparatory process and remains the roadmap for the full workshop.

The AstroAccel Summit, organized by Laura Dominé, is a natural venue for the next phase: its audience includes exactly the astrophysics and instrumentation community that forms the physical sciences core of the SOE working group, and its structure is designed to accelerate initiatives from proposal stage to funded workshop.

A core advocacy group of 8–12 researchers will be identified and formalized at or immediately following AstroAccel, with the goal of submitting a new community workshop application before the end of 2026.

Five-day workshop structure

The following program structure was developed for the Lorentz Center workshop submission and represents the working blueprint for the full community workshop — to be convened at a venue to be confirmed following AstroAccel.

10:00–11:30
Tutorial: History of UAP research and evidentiary challenges
Establishing shared disciplinary context across the participant cohort
11:30–12:30
Tutorial: Philosophy of evidence and lessons from astrobiology's biosignature SOE process
14:00–15:30
Breakouts: Defining common language, success criteria, and preliminary evidence categories
16:00–17:30
Plenary: Report-outs and synthesis
17:30–19:00
Welcome reception
09:00–10:30
Lightning talks: Instrumentation, calibration, and metadata challenges
Physicists, engineers, and data scientists; existing observational initiatives (Galileo Project, IFEX, UAPx, VASCO)
11:00–12:30
Breakouts: Drafting the Minimum Observational Dataset (MOD) schema — metadata, uncertainty quantification, chain-of-custody
14:00–15:30
Plenary: Integrating and refining the MOD schema draft
16:00–17:30
Mentoring session: Early-career and senior researcher pairing
09:00–10:30
Plenary: Uncertainty quantification, inference methods, and hypothesis testing in anomaly-rich science
11:00–12:30
Breakout sprint #1: Prototyping the UAP Evidence Ladder — modeled on astrobiology's CoLD scale
14:00–15:30
Synthesis sprint: Refining Evidence Ladder draft; plenary discussion on technosignature hypotheses and Bayesian reasoning
19:00–21:00
Workshop dinner
09:00–10:30
Breakouts: Drafting pilot observational protocols for multimodal UAP detection campaigns
11:00–12:30
Breakouts: Designing multimodal data repositories and governance frameworks
FAIR data stewardship; interoperability with existing astronomical data infrastructure
14:00–15:30
Plenary: Transparency, public communication, and reporting standards — lessons from GEIPAN and other national programs
16:00–17:30
Mentoring roundtables for early-career participants
09:00–10:30
Plenary: Finalizing SOE v0.1 — agreed terminology, MOD schema, Evidence Ladder framework
11:00–12:30
Writing pods: Drafting sections of the Community Report
14:00–15:30
Closing plenary: Timeline, follow-up commitments, next steps for international network and pilot projects
15:30
Workshop close

55+ scholars across 14+ countries

The Initiative has assembled one of the most internationally diverse and disciplinarily broad participant cohorts in UAP research history — spanning astronomy, astrophysics, data science, information science, philosophy of science, social science, and engineering.

Community White Paper Structure

The Initiative's primary deliverable is a community white paper establishing standards of evidence for UAP science — to be submitted as an open-access preprint (arXiv), published in Limina: The Journal of UAP Studies, and submitted to an independent review body analogous to the National Academies review of the biosignature SOE report.

  1. 01Defining Standards of Evidence in Science — foundational concepts and their discipline-specific instantiations
  2. 02What Constitutes Scientific Evidence and Data? — the transition from observation to evidential claim
  3. 03Historical Handling of Anomalous Observations — precedents, lessons, and failures in prior treatments of scientific anomalies
  4. 04The Minimum Observational Dataset (MOD) Schema — calibration, chain-of-custody, and uncertainty quantification standards
  5. 05The UAP Evidence Ladder — confidence framework from testimonial record to scientific claim
  6. 06Methodology for Designing Experiments for the Unknown — a framework for proactive observational UAP science
  7. 07Validation, Verification, and Peer Review Standards — how a UAP scientific result achieves community acceptance
  8. 08Post-Conclusion: Communication, Governance, and Societal Impact

What the Initiative produces

DOC
SOE Framework v0.1

Consensus document defining shared terminology, evidence categories, data quality requirements, and governance model for UAP science.

SCHEMA
MOD Schema

Minimum Observational Dataset schema covering calibration standards, chain-of-custody requirements, and uncertainty quantification for UAP observations.

FRAMEWORK
UAP Evidence Ladder

Six-rung confidence framework analogous to astrobiology's CoLD scale — defining the conditions for progressively elevating UAP data to evidence to scientific claim.

NETWORK
International Working Group

A durable standing committee under SUAPS, with formal working group structure and international representation, committed to follow-up publications and future workshop organization.

PAPER
Community White Paper

Peer-reviewed community report; open-access preprint (arXiv); published in Limina; submitted for independent review by a National Academies-level body.

PROTOCOLS
Pilot Protocols

Preliminary designs for observational campaigns and shared data repository architectures, ready for implementation by partner research groups.

Join the Initiative

The UAP Standards of Evidence Initiative is actively building its core advocacy group for the AstroAccel Summit and the full workshop. Researchers across relevant disciplines are invited to inquire about participation.

Contact the Coordinators