F031: Source Trust Scoring

Source

• ai16z/elizaOS: “Trust Scores” to filter social signals for autonomous trading
• Minsky Ch 18: Parallel bundles - weight evidence by source reliability
• CSTP calibration: We already track decision accuracy, extend to source tracking

Overview

Assign and maintain trust scores for information sources referenced in decisions. When querying past decisions, weight results by the reliability of their sources. Enables agents to distinguish high-signal from low-signal information and make better-calibrated decisions.

Problem

Today, all decisions are treated equally in retrieval regardless of where their information came from. A decision based on peer-reviewed research and one based on a random tweet have the same weight. We need source provenance.

API

Recording Source Attribution

Enhanced cstp.recordDecision:

{
  "method": "cstp.recordDecision",
  "params": {
    "decision": "Adopted HSM architecture for long-context processing",
    "confidence": 0.85,
    "category": "architecture",
    "stakes": "high",
    "sources": [
      {"id": "arxiv:2602.01234", "type": "paper", "name": "Hierarchical Shift Mixing", "url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.01234"},
      {"id": "mit-media-lab", "type": "institution", "name": "MIT Media Lab"},
      {"id": "moltbook:user123", "type": "social", "name": "happy_milvus"}
    ]
  }
}

New RPC Method: cstp.getSourceTrust

{
  "method": "cstp.getSourceTrust",
  "params": {
    "sourceId": "moltbook:user123"
  }
}

Response

{
  "result": {
    "sourceId": "moltbook:user123",
    "type": "social",
    "name": "happy_milvus",
    "trustScore": 0.72,
    "decisionsReferenced": 8,
    "successRate": 0.75,
    "lastReferenced": "2026-02-10T15:00:00Z",
    "breakdown": {
      "accuracy": 0.75,
      "recency": 0.80,
      "consistency": 0.65
    }
  }
}

Enhanced Query Results

cstp.queryDecisions response includes source trust:

{
  "result": {
    "decisions": [{
      "id": "dec_abc",
      "decision": "...",
      "sourceWeightedScore": 0.91,
      "sources": [
        {"id": "arxiv:2602.01234", "trustScore": 0.95},
        {"id": "moltbook:user123", "trustScore": 0.72}
      ]
    }]
  }
}

Trust Score Computation

trustScore = w1 * accuracy + w2 * recency + w3 * consistency

accuracy   = successful_outcomes / total_outcomes (from decisions referencing this source)
recency    = decay_factor(days_since_last_reference)
consistency = 1 - stddev(outcome_scores)

Default weights: w1=0.5, w2=0.2, w3=0.3

Source Types

Type	Example	Initial Trust	Notes
paper	arXiv, journals	0.80	High baseline, peer-reviewed
institution	MIT, Google Research	0.75	Track record weighted
documentation	Official docs, RFCs	0.85	Authoritative
social	Moltbook, Twitter	0.50	Starts neutral, earned
agent	Minski, CodeReviewer	0.70	Track by agent ID
empirical	Own experiments	0.90	Direct evidence

Use Cases

• Moltbook engagement: Weight posts by author trust score before engaging
• Research briefings: Flag stories from low-trust sources
• Decision retrieval: Surface high-trust decisions first
• Agent collaboration: Track which sub-agents give reliable reviews

Acceptance Criteria

• sources field on cstp.recordDecision
• cstp.getSourceTrust RPC method
• cstp.listSources RPC method (with filters)
• Trust score computation from decision outcomes
• Source-weighted query results in cstp.queryDecisions
• MCP tools exposed
• Dashboard: Source trust leaderboard
• Automatic trust decay for stale sources