Preponderance of the evidence ? VOP - violation of probation

"Preponderance of evidence" is a burden of persuasion. Burden of persuasion is the standard by which a party has to convince the trier of fact that the facts being asserted are true. In criminal cases, the burden of persuasion is "beyond a reasonable doubt." In some other situations, such as civil commitment proceedings, a burden of persuasion called "clear and convincing" is used.
"Preponderance of evidence" is the lowest standard. It is just enough evidence to make it more likely than not, that the allegation is true. If the trier of fact can be convinced that there is a 51% chance that the allegation is true, it meets the burden. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is the highest standard.
In your situation, the government is going to have to convince the judge that you violated your probation, and the judge is going to have to be 51% convinced that you did violate the terms of your probation.
You should hire a lawyer or speak to a public defender.

For any side to win in a leagal action or case, it has to present enough evidence to convince a jury or judge [called the trier of fact]. Preponderance means more than. So, in this case, the DA has to put enough evidence on to convince the court that the terms of probation were violated.
The determination is actually subjective.

Same standard of proof as in civil. 50.01 percent the judge needs to be convinced that you did something to violate your probation. In a normal case when you go to trial the percentage is like 99% although a percentage is not allowed to be assigned to beyond a reasonable doubt. If jury has reasonable doubt than they can not convict. Translation on a VOP the judge can violate you if there is a 50.01 chance that you did anything contrary to your conditions of probation