Evidence-Maturity and Technology-Readiness Assessment for Photopolymer Manufacturing: Claims, Gates and Decision Confidence

Technology-readiness labels can compress a complex development state into one number, but photopolymer manufacturing decisions require more detail. A prototype can demonstrate a mechanism while material identity, process capability, measurement traceability, ageing and supply continuity remain immature. This review develops a claim-centred evidence-maturity architecture that separates technology demonstration from manufacturing readiness and qualification confidence. Evidence is scored qualitatively by relevance, independence, reproducibility, state control and decision coverage rather than by publication count. Gates require explicit claims and blocking evidence objects: feasibility, bounded process window, repeatability, transfer, product-representative validation and production surveillance. NIST work on AM qualification and readiness supports the distinction between demonstration and the data needed for qualified industrial deployment. The central conclusion is that maturity belongs to a claim and its use context, not to a technology name. Different claims for the same resin-process platform can legitimately occupy different maturity states.

ER-299 · Version 0.3.