How LaptopCompat verifies compatibility

LaptopCompat separates facts from conclusions.

A fact might be:

• a laptop contains two DDR5 SO-DIMM slots
• a USB-C port supports DisplayPort Alt Mode
• a laptop accepts USB Power Delivery input
• an SSD bay accepts M.2 2280 NVMe drives

Each fact is stored with its source.

Compatibility rules then compare laptop requirements with accessory specifications.

For example, we do not mark a USB-C charger compatible simply because its advertised wattage looks high enough. We also consider whether the laptop accepts USB Power Delivery and whether the charger supports appropriate output behavior.

When information is missing or contradictory, we prefer Unknown or Varies by configuration over pretending to know.

1. Exact model identification

Laptop naming is messy — the same physical model can carry different marketing names, model numbers, machine types and regional SKUs. We keep meaningfully different variants (e.g. Intel vs. AMD configurations of the same generation) as separate records rather than merging them, since their memory, ports and display specs can differ.

2. Authoritative sources

We prioritize manufacturer specification pages, PDF manuals and maintenance/service manuals. Reputable technical reviews and platform documentation corroborate manufacturer data. Community evidence (forums, user reports) is used only where marked, and never silently overrides manufacturer documentation.

3. Structured facts

Every fact used in a compatibility answer is stored with its source, retrieval date, and an extraction method (parsed automatically, AI-assisted with human review, entered by hand, imported via API, or derived by a rule).

4. Deterministic rules

Compatibility results come from rules written and tested in code — not from a language model guessing based on general knowledge. AI may assist with extracting or summarizing source material for human review, but it does not decide what is compatible.

5. Confidence levels

Results are labeled Verified, High, Medium, Low or Unknown, reflecting how directly the evidence supports the conclusion. We avoid presenting Low-confidence results as a purchase recommendation.

6. Conflict handling

When sources disagree, we prefer the newer authoritative manufacturer document where clearly applicable, check for SKU/variant differences, and preserve both facts internally rather than silently picking one. The public result becomes “Varies by configuration” or a note to verify your exact SKU, rather than false certainty.

7. Re-verification

Current models are rechecked on a regular cadence; discontinued models less frequently. A source that fails to load is flagged immediately.

8. User corrections

Anyone can report a suspected error via the correction form on any model page. Corrections are reviewed by a human before anything changes — nothing is auto-published from a user submission.