Peer Review First

Kronos treats independent peer review as the primary standard of credibility, with open deposits ensuring the evidence is public when reviewers look.

The standard we hold ourselves to

Kronos's credibility strategy is peer-review-first: the primary bar for a claim is scrutiny by independent experts through the established review process, not a company announcement. Preprints and open deposits support that process rather than replace it — they ensure the underlying data and code are already public when reviewers, and everyone else, examine the work.

Why review comes first

• Independent reviewers apply expertise and incentives we do not have — including the incentive to find fault.
• Review disciplines claims to their evidence, which is exactly what a design-and-simulation program needs.
• A reviewed result carries a credential a press release cannot.
• Open deposits let reviewers, and later readers, reproduce rather than merely read; see independent reproduction.

How it fits the rest of the strategy

Peer review and open reproduction are complementary tests: review checks the reasoning, reproduction checks the computation. Kronos does both, and sequences preprints and deposits so that neither has to wait on the other. See preprints and the public record.

Beyond a single venue

Peer-review-first also shapes where the work goes: toward venues that subject it to genuine expert scrutiny, mapped by machine and topic, rather than toward the easiest possible outlet. The point is not a stamp; it is exposure to reviewers who can and will push back. That exposure, added to public reproduction, is what earns the credibility the whole open-science strategy is after.

We want our claims reviewed by people paid to doubt them, with the evidence open while they look.