Give a connection meaning
Typed, directed relationships distinguish an asset that contains a component from a document that describes it. Your application defines the meaning of each relation.
Explore the models / 8DB
Graphs & hierarchies
Follow the relationship to a better answer.
Represent connected entities, traverse typed relationships and bring the relevant paths back into the application.
Connect · traverse · follow
Model / GraphsConceptual diagram
Implementation snapshot / Reviewed 18 September 2026
Follow changed evidence to the work that needs review.
Source-reviewed research fixtureThe research evidence twin has a concrete dependency-withdrawal example. Its query source follows recorded derivation edges; the regression expects two dependent statements and excludes independently supported work. This provides a specific application of relationships and evidence rules.
Inspect the dependency example →Required premiseRecorded premiseSelected for withdrawal
Depends on premiseStatement CReview
Depends on CStatement DReview
Separate supportIndependent resultOutside this cascade
Review queueStatement C + Statement D
The selected item itself is excluded. Affected means its recorded support needs reassessment; it does not mean the conclusion is false.
Browser illustration of the reviewed dependency fixture; the mathematical labels identify records, not validated mathematical claims. This control runs in the browser, not against 8DB.
Download the example and evaluation checklist ↓API, release scope and evidence limits
Archived Rust interfaces: retraction_cascade, direct_premises and confidence_ceiling_path. Source snapshot dated 12 September 2026; reviewed 18 September.
Source review is not a new test run or a generally released change-management service. Customer rules, current build, APIs and deployment need matching qualification. The fixture follows recorded support; it does not prove causation or assess all possible independent evidence.
Capabilities / documented scope
Ask how things connect.
Then follow the consequence.
Follow the question either way
Supported bidirectional traversal lets a workflow move from an observation to its asset, or from an asset toward related observations.
Represent dependencies and hierarchies
Use relationships to represent parentage and recorded dependencies. The application determines which relations express support, ownership or an operational dependency.
Documentary review, 18 September 2026 UTC. Qualify traversal depth, fanout, persistence and consistency on the selected build. Graph representation does not establish general Cypher compatibility or automatic dependency maintenance.
Why consider 8DB / connected native models
Every connection has a bigger story.
Follow a relationship into the material that helps a person assess it.
Source passages
Inspect what supports the relationship.
Explore model ↗Dated observations
Understand the state around the change.
Explore model ↗Richer relationships
Represent several participants in one event.
Explore model ↗Conceptual model connections. 8DB offers these native representations; fewer handoffs and simpler application assembly are opportunities to test on the supported combination.
Input → usable value / interactive design example
See a change travel through the evidence.
Inspection revised
A source finding changes for Pump P-17. Keep the source passage and the affected asset identity together.
Next: Follow the dependencies
Illustrative application design, not an executed benchmark. Qualify the composed path, including external models, authorization, persistence and update visibility.
What belongs in the complete-workflow comparison?
Measure from the declared input state to the usable output, including required parsing, embeddings, storage, index readiness, querying and result assembly. Report database-stage timing separately. Include memory, storage, network and measured energy when relevant.
Market context
Compare the relationship
and the work around it.
| Approach | What it brings | What to compare with 8DB |
|---|---|---|
| Neo4j | A property-graph model with typed relationships, properties, indexes and constraints. | Required graph operators, query tooling, traversal behavior and how the application uses source evidence. |
| SurrealDB | Graph relationships within a broader data-model offering. | Equivalent connected workflows, supported representations and operating requirements. |
| 8DB | Typed relationships alongside documents, observations and additional native structures. | The complete route from incoming evidence to a correct, inspectable impact report. |
Property graphs can already represent rich context. 8DB's case should rest on the useful combination of operations and deployment characteristics your workload can demonstrate.
Vendor documentation reviewed 18 September 2026 UTC. This is a selection guide, not a traversal-performance ranking.
Modality performance / Evidence reviewed 18 September 2026
Follow five relationships in one query.
queries / second Higher is better · linear scale from zero
8DB23,300
Eight workers · median
Neo4j4,134
32 connections · best reported round
M1 laptop; one million persons and five million directed relationships. Simplified five-friend query, different clients and returned-data contracts. Original traversal log is unavailable; retained report records successful checks. Resident reads, not durable ingestion or a full LDBC score.
Read the results, comparison and methods →What happens when models work together?
See the separate graphs + time series + spatial benchmark against SurrealDB →
01Exact affected set
02Depth, fanout & p95
03Updates & source assembly
Include memory, storage, energy and hardware writes
Record build-time and serving memory separately, original and derived stored bytes, measured joules per completed job, and physical writes including indexing, compaction and recovery. A smaller representation does not by itself prove lower energy or longer device life.
Match correctness, freshness, durability and protection across alternatives. Encryption, authorization, adapters, network setup and output delivery belong in the complete-job comparison wherever required. No universal zero-overhead claim follows from these results.
Choose the path that fits your deployment.
Verify the supported API/SDK, data format, persistence and indexing behaviour for the release you plan to use. Match the operation-by-modality protection profile and device qualification to the workload.
Related articles
Take the next step into the thinking.
When Evidence Changes, Know Which Decisions Need Review
Explore the ideas and implementation context behind this capability.
Show Your Work: Provenance as a Query, Not a Forensic Reconstruction
Explore the ideas and implementation context behind this capability.
Reference / Reviewed 18 September 2026 UTC
Readable, shareable and traceable.
This reference explains 8DB’s public modality description with an explicit workload and selection criteria. It is a documentary review, not fresh execution of every operator or platform.
Public sources include the linked vendor documentation in the comparison above. Additional context: 8DB modality scope; Neo4j graph concepts; the related articles above. Internal source leads and outstanding release checks remain in the editorial record.
Download this referenceEvaluate the question
your application needs to answer.
Bring the data shapes, input state, expected output and the systems you use today. Define a comparison around that complete job.
Discuss your workload