Claim Admissibility in Archived Energy System Simulations: A Case Study of PV, CSP, Geothermal and Waste Heat Recovery

Heterogeneous simulation archives can contain traceable numerical outputs that do not support the physical or comparative claims attached to them. This study presents a retrospective, author-applied case study of claim admissibility in one prototype-scale photovoltaic (PV), concentrated solar power (CSP), geothermal and waste heat recovery archive. A procedural checklist separates four evidence classes from five gates addressing traceability, numerical credibility, physical closure, commensurability and downstream assessment inputs. Intended claims are registered before the present scoring, and any narrower permitted statement is recorded separately. The audit identifies byte-identical mesh inspection files under different model filenames and unresolved discrepancies between saved solver states and scenario exports. PV DC exports of 33.31–65.44 W and CSP heat transfer exports of 2.333–6.421 kW remain reportable as archived values. The CSP launcher inputs imply a Reynolds number of approximately 141; unresolved receiver geometry, boundary mapping and inlet-state evidence prevent a demonstrated energy balance. Pressure–flow quantities remain as diagnostics because the thermal-to-electric chain is unclosed. Within-scenario PV voltage–temperature relations reproduce an archived correction rather than independently validate electrical performance. The numerical models themselves have not been validated, and this study does not establish predictive accuracy. The contributions are a documented procedure and its application to this archive, not a new uncertainty theory. Independent scoring reliability, cross-dataset generalizability and an empirical all-gates-pass case remain untested.