Event · Strait of Hormuz

Iran says it seized a second US underwater drone

Claims ledger rebuilt 3 Oct 2026Event name (example): ev.hormuz.uuv-seizure.2026-09-27

27 Sep, in the strait
Unclear: Iran says it happened; the US military denies it.
7 claims from 6 outlets say it happened; 1 disputes it.
Outlets disagree

GET https://sigb.ai/api/event/ev.hormuz.uuv-seizure.2026-09-27

{
  "schema": "sb.event.v1 (example shape)",
  "eventId": "ev.hormuz.uuv-seizure.2026-09-27",
  "eventIdState": "example — no producer gives events a lasting name yet",
  "subject": "hormuz",
  "firstSeen": "2026-09-27",
  "members": {
    "claims": 8,
    "saysItHappened": 7,
    "disputing": 1
  },
  "corroboration": {
    "state": "disputed"
  },
  "notMerged": [
    {
      "eventId": "ev.hormuz.uuv-capture.2026-09-08",
      "firstSeen": "2026-09-08",
      "claims": 4,
      "why": [
        "different-date",
        "different-object"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "groupingRule": "A claim joins the 8 Sep event if it names the Dive-LD drone or was first seen before 20 Sep; every other underwater-drone claim joins the 27 Sep event. A claim saying the seizure was denied or rejected is filed as disputing it.",
  "ledger": {
    "file": "lib/claims_hormuz.json",
    "schema": "sb.claims.v1",
    "computedAt": "2026-10-03T00:20:25+00:00"
  }
}

Example request: no event endpoint is live yet. The object is built from the same claims ledger rows this page shows.

GET https://sigb.ai/api/event/ev.hormuz.uuv-seizure.2026-09-27/where-from?expand=1

{
  "level": "event",
  "label": "Every report on this event",
  "children": [
    {
      "level": "reports",
      "label": "The Jerusalem Post: Iran's IRGC claims to have seized…",
      "children": {
        "count": 1,
        "unfold": "expand=+1"
      }
    },
    {
      "level": "reports",
      "label": "Tehran Times: IRGC Navy intercepted and captured an…",
      "children": {
        "count": 1,
        "unfold": "expand=+1"
      }
    },
    {
      "level": "reports",
      "label": "ITAR-TASS: The Iranian Navy intercepted a U.S.…",
      "children": {
        "count": 1,
        "unfold": "expand=+1"
      }
    },
    {
      "level": "reports",
      "label": "Middle East Eye: The IRGC captured a US Remus…",
      "children": {
        "count": 1,
        "unfold": "expand=+1"
      }
    },
    {
      "level": "reports",
      "label": "Middle East Eye: The IRGC Navy claimed it seized…",
      "children": {
        "count": 1,
        "unfold": "expand=+1"
      }
    },
    {
      "level": "reports",
      "label": "Euronews: The seized REMUS 600 has been…",
      "children": {
        "count": 1,
        "unfold": "expand=+1"
      }
    },
    {
      "level": "reports",
      "label": "Middle East Eye: The US military denied an Iranian…",
      "children": {
        "count": 1,
        "unfold": "expand=+1"
      }
    },
    {
      "level": "reports",
      "label": "Marine Insight: Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy…",
      "children": {
        "count": 1,
        "unfold": "expand=+1"
      }
    }
  ]
}

Example request, same rows. Each child unfolds one more level with expand=+1, down to the source link.

One event, one name

Reports join the event under one name. A similar event is kept apart, under its own name.

ev.hormuz.uuv-seizure.2026-09-278 claims joined · 1 dispute it

a report joins
a report that disputes it

Not merged. Same kind of thing, same strait, same two countries. A different date, 19 days earlier. A different drone: a Dive-LD, made by Anduril as reported, against a REMUS 600. The 27 Sep reports call theirs the second.

ev.hormuz.uuv-capture.2026-09-08its own event · 4 claims

Solid rail: the 27 Sep event. Dashed rail: the 8 Sep event, kept apart. Sharing the same parties does not make two reports one event.

Real every claim, date, outlet and link: lib/claims_hormuz.jsonExample event names: no producer gives events a lasting name yet, so this page names them by date

How this page groups the claims: A claim joins the 8 Sep event if it names the Dive-LD drone or was first seen before 20 Sep; every other underwater-drone claim joins the 27 Sep event. A claim saying the seizure was denied or rejected is filed as disputing it.

Who reported it, who disputes it

Says it happened

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, as reported

Disputes it

The US military, as reported

27 Sep
Middle East Eye
The US military denied an Iranian claim that the Revolutionary Guard seized an advanced US underwater drone in the Strait of Hormuz.

No first-hand source on file for either side. The ledger reads 2647 articles archived by our sweeps between 2026-08-31 and 2026-10-02 — secondary press; primary maritime and government feeds were not wired during this window.

The 8 Sep event, kept apart

How the story moved

7 claims say it happened. 3 of them keep the word “claim”, so the seizure stays Iran’s statement; the others report it as an act.

27 Sep
The Jerusalem Post “claims” … “seized” · keeps “claim”
27 Sep
Tehran Times “intercepted” … “captured”
27 Sep
ITAR-TASS “intercepted” … “captured”
27 Sep
Middle East Eye “captured”
27 Sep
Middle East Eye “claimed” … “seized” · keeps “claim”
27 Sep
Euronews “seized”
29 Sep
Marine Insight “claimed” … “seized” · keeps “claim”

Real wording: the claim text in lib/claims_hormuz.json, as extracted from each report

What this rests on, and where it stops

This event is 12 rows of a ledger of 1,598 claims and 428 attributed statements about Hormuz, rebuilt 3 Oct 2026. 22 claims are carried by several separate reports, 83 by two, and 1,493 by one. 113 older claims were retired and stay on file.

The maintained Hormuz record behind it joins 552 documents from 149 outlets, 19 Aug to 3 Oct. This record is current: the newest source item is from 2026-10-03, inside its daily cadence.

Corpus: 2647 articles archived by our sweeps between 2026-08-31 and 2026-10-02 — secondary press; primary maritime and government feeds were not wired during this window.

Limits, as the ledger states them

Consensus measures reporting agreement, not reality — a uniformly repeated error passes any count.
Chains are collapsed by syndication tracing; residual shared-upstream risk remains.
Retroactive: computed 2026-10-03 over the archive, not tracked live.
Receipt gate: 45 extracted claim(s) excluded — no receipt whose own text supports the claim (the extractor's row binding is verified mechanically, never trusted).
Relative-anchor supersession: 77 claim(s) that described themselves as the most recent/last-known fact were retired because a claim from the SAME reporting thread describes a later instance of the same subject — see 'retired'. Same-chain detection only: an anchor claim updated by a DIFFERENT outlet is not auto-retired, though its own firstSeen/lastSeen still render so a reader can judge its age.
Domain-competence gate: 1920 kernel claim(s) and 325 frame(s) excluded — every supporting chain came from outlets confidently placed outside this subject's coverage domains (aerospace_defense, auto, energy, europe_politics, india_south_asia, iran_regime, …). An outlet counts as competent when its measured home beat intersects the domains the subject's own corpus lives in; outlets with too few observations are never branded and always count.
Semantic-dome membership: 5349 kernel claim(s) and 1392 frame(s) were source-faithful but failed typed-signature membership and are excluded — a claim enters this ledger only if its signature names a family entity (party, place, or authority) AND either its action class sits in the family's geopolitical profile or it names a family place outright.
Extraction coverage: rebuilt mechanically from the extraction cache; 2583 of 2647 articles had been read, the other 64 await the next live extraction — consensus counts are a floor, not a census.
3 kernel claim(s) published in the prior ledger were not re-read by this mechanical rebuild; with no exact words on file they are retained, not shown.
An item is published only when it is RECEIPTED: the outlet's own source link AND the source's exact words (verbatim: a literal span of the stored document, offsets into it, content-addressed by docId). The claim text is the extracted proposition and is never a quote. Anything else is UNRECEIPTED: retained, counted here by reason, never shown; every published count is computed from receipted items only.

Real lib/claims_hormuz.json (honesty, kernel, frames, retired) and the maintained Hormuz record, hormuz.json (its counts and currency)