Labtrace tracks scientific events, not articles. One event is one paper or one official announcement, with every outlet that covered it listed underneath. The outlet is not the source. The paper is.
How much the world is talking about it, and how fast. It combines the number of independent outlets, the rate at which new ones pile on, and whether the story crossed from a specialist outlet into general media. Heat is what makes a row climb the feed: eight outlets in two hours is an explosion, eight outlets over four days is a slow burn. Same final count, opposite realities.
Under every title, what actually backs the claim. Reviewed means other scientists checked the work before publication. Not reviewed yet means it is a preprint: real research, posted early, not yet verified by anyone else. Most preprints hold up. Some do not. Almost no news outlet tells you which one you are reading.
heavy coverage / thin evidence Everyone is writing about it and the underlying proof is weak. Usually a preprint that got picked up too fast.
solid / under-covered Peer reviewed, properly done, and almost nobody noticed. These are the ones worth your time.
Those two boxes are the whole point of this site. No other aggregator shows them.
Always the moment the primary source published, never the moment we put it on screen. We regulate the display rate so the feed stays readable. We never adjust the stated time.
Real pipeline activity, live: every fetch, every comparison, every score. Nothing there is decorative and nothing is invented. When nothing is happening it says so.
Switch to instruments in the header for the raw numbers: velocity per hour, identifiers, queue depth and source weights.