Cross-Case Behaviour Matrix
Each row is a case. Each column is a reported behaviour. Dot colour reflects the physics classification of that behaviour: green = within known physics, amber = at the boundary, red = requires new physics. Row and column scores reveal which cases are most anomalous and which behaviours recur most consistently — the signal in the noise.
Most Anomalous Behaviour
—
Most Consistent Cross-Case Pattern
—
Behavioural Clusters
Behaviours that consistently co-occur across cases form clusters. Clusters are more informative than individual behaviours — they suggest a common underlying system or capability rather than isolated anomalies. Each cluster is assessed for what it implies about the nature of the phenomenon.
Case Anomaly Fingerprints
Each case has a unique behavioural signature. Comparing fingerprints reveals whether different incidents share enough characteristics to suggest the same phenomenon — or whether the UAP category contains multiple distinct phenomena with different explanations. Cases with identical or near-identical fingerprints are the most significant for investigation.
Hypothesis Consistency Scoring
Each candidate hypothesis is tested against the full cross-case pattern. The question is not whether a hypothesis can explain any single case — almost any hypothesis can. The question is whether it can consistently explain the full behavioural profile across all cases simultaneously, without requiring different mechanisms for different cases.
The Disclosure Arc
The institutional response to UAP has shifted more in the last decade than in the preceding fifty years. This timeline maps the key events in the transition from official denial to official acknowledgement — and identifies where the investigation currently sits in that arc. Understanding the disclosure context is essential for evaluating witness credibility and evidence availability.