> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.startupsuperpowers.io/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.
# The evidence graph
> How hypotheses, interviews, surveys, and experiments link into one traceable trail of evidence
The plugin's core discipline is simple: **decisions trace back to evidence, and evidence traces back to actual customer words.** The mechanism behind it is equally simple — Obsidian-style `[[slug]]` links between markdown files.
## Hypotheses are the hub
Every assumption your idea depends on becomes a file in `startup/hypotheses/` — a testable statement with a status (`untested`, `confirmed`, `invalidated`, or `archived`) and a type tag:
| Tag | What it claims | How it's best tested |
| --------------------- | ----------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| `#problem` | The pain is real | Customer conversations |
| `#solution` | Your approach actually helps | A lightweight prototype or demo |
| `#willingness_to_pay` | People will pay for it | A pricing gate — waitlist, pre-order, payment link |
| `#urgency` | It hurts *now*, not "someday" | Behavioral signals: what people already tried, spent, worked around |
The tag isn't decoration — it drives what kind of validation move the plugin suggests for each bet.
## Everything links back
As evidence accumulates, other artifacts point at hypotheses by slug:
* **Interview statements.** Each analyzed interview yields statements like `- "I track every invoice in a spreadsheet but forget to update it." #problem [[users-track-invoices-in-spreadsheets]]` — a real quote, tagged, linked to the bets it bears on.
* **Interview script topics** carry `**Why it matters:** [[hypothesis-slug]]` lines, so every conversation topic exists *because* of a specific assumption.
* **Survey questions** each carry a `Tests: [[hypothesis-slug]]` line.
* **The MVP plan** lists the hypotheses the experiment tests and what a positive result looks like for each.
A statement that doesn't fit any hypothesis stays unlinked on purpose — it's raw material. When the same unlinked theme shows up across multiple interviews, the plugin proposes it as a *new* hypothesis.
## How evidence becomes a verdict
When you ask how your hypotheses are doing (or right after an interview is analyzed), an independent assessment pass searches for every `[[slug]]` mention across your interview files and re-reads those statements *in context* — it doesn't trust any single interview's summary. It weighs evidence the way you'd want a skeptical co-founder to:
* Counts **distinct interviews**, not repeated statements from one enthusiastic person
* Discounts agreement that your own question framing produced
* Requires cross-interview support before flipping a status
What comes back, per hypothesis: **what changed** since the last assessment, and a **next action** — the smallest observable next validation move, biased toward putting something in front of a real human rather than "do more research." One cross-hypothesis **Top pick** names the single sharpest move right now. Status changes always need your explicit confirmation; the advisory next actions are written eagerly so your hypothesis files double as a live dashboard.
The `## Next Action` section in each hypothesis file is machine-maintained and overwritten on every assessment — it always reflects the latest read, not a history. The history lives in your interviews and the plan's log.
## Browsing the graph
Because links are plain `[[slug]]` text in plain markdown, the graph is yours to explore with free tools:
* Open `startup/` as an **Obsidian vault** — hypotheses, interviews, and scripts appear as a connected graph, and frontmatter fields (status, tags, dates) are filterable with Dataview.
* Or stay in the terminal: `grep -rl "users-track-invoices" startup/interviews/` lists every interview bearing on that hypothesis.
## Related
Surfacing, tracking, and assessing your assumptions.
Where the evidence comes from.