Proven Fact

What are the qualifications for something to be proven or a fact?

Upon 1st thought and glance, facts seem certain, and it seems obvious whether or not something has been proven.
Proven; is something which evidence has demonstrated to be true right?
Fact; is information known to be true right? 

On 2nd thought, looking deeper, is it all so distinct?
Who decides on the quantity and accuracy of evidence for something to be considered proven?
And how certain must how many people be, of a fact?

The slight difference between “proven” and “fact”, seems to be that proven is more based on context and adaptable to new variables, where a fact is more commonly understood as information which is true, regardless of context or interpretation. 

Since something proven (or proof for short (in this meaning of the term proof)) is more adaptable to context, it is similar to evidence, but seems to be a more finalized stage of a proposal, than evidence. Proof seems to include a sufficient degree of evidence in its requirement. In my last post; Evidence of Evidence, I questioned what is considered to be evidence. It seems that for something to be considered evidence, it requires interpretation of a best estimate, and agreement between parties involved in the context. There is a broad spectrum of degrees of evidence, based on (usually) an estimate of probability. Proof seems to be a similar concept, in that it requires a Best Guess (as further explained in that post) of any individuals involved. In the situation of proof, it seems to be a best estimate of sufficiency of any more specific portions of evidence involved in a proposition being conclusively proven. So not only do any individuals involved, have to estimate the relevancy of each portion of evidence, but also estimate whether or not all the evidence combined is accurate and probable enough. Since the relevancy of total evidence is an estimate on a virtual scale from low to high probability, that which is considered proven, does not seem so distinct. 

A “fact” still fits the definition and concept of something that has been proven, but is information which has been accepted to be proven so many times, by so many people, that it is commonly assumed to be completely true. The term “fact” also usually infers that the information is true in objective reality, regardless of subjective interpretation. By this understanding, it seems there would indeed be distinct facts about objective reality. But determining what information does actually describe objective reality, can still be subjective. Just because there may be absolute truth, doesn't mean any person knows that absolute truth. It still comes down to individuals, to make a best estimate of probability of which information is most likely to be that absolute truth about objective reality. Confirmation of others, such as commonly accepted “facts” makes the probability quite high that the information is objectively true, but from the highest probable “fact”, every other bit of information is somewhere lower on the scale of probability. As every bit of information known to humanity has some different degree of accuracy of measurement (or evidence), and a different degree of total sum agreement, this means, even for a “fact”, there is a scale of Indistinctivity, requiring a best estimate, based on interpretation, of whether the information qualifies.

For something to be proven, it seems that, just as each portion of evidence involves interpretation, so too does the total evidence require an estimate for sufficiency. A fact may refer to objective truth, but to determine which information qualifies, involves a subjective estimate, on a scale of probability. The lack of distinction and certainty of proof or facts in this world, is (highly probably, but not certainly); Proof of Fact.