Claims

Search the graph by meaning. Each result carries its current verdict; open one to see its decomposition, provenance, and the reasoning behind the assessment.

2 results

Claims about whether AI tools widen or narrow productivity or performance differences between more- and less-skilled workers (novices vs experts, entry-level vs experienced), i.e., the 'leveling' vs 'widening' question, across task domains and skill measures. Excludes average AI productivity effects and employment/displacement effects.

Frontier AI models meaningfully increase non-experts' ability to develop biological weapons.

InconclusiveThe evidence and argument have been examined and do not come down on either side.constitution →empirical · derivedA factual claim that rests on inference from other evidence rather than direct observation.constitution →Biological Weapons AI Safetyimportance · majorImportance 0.75, from 0 to 1 · major: real consequence within a domain, actively argued. Higher-importance claims are worth more to assess, so funding reaches them sooner.constitution →

AI coding tools' productivity effects vary substantially by context, with smallest effects for experienced developers in familiar, mature codebases.

UnassessedNo current assessment. Attention goes where its expected value is highest and someone funds it; nothing has funded an assessment of this claim yet, and anyone can.constitution →empirical · derivedA factual claim that rests on inference from other evidence rather than direct observation.constitution →AI Developer Productivity METR developer productivity experimentimportance · notableImportance 0.50, from 0 to 1 · notable: a contested point in a live debate (also the default before judging). Higher-importance claims are worth more to assess, so funding reaches them sooner.constitution →

Contribute

If a claim here is wrong, or missing evidence, open it: every claim page carries its own entry for challenges, evidence, and corrections. If the graph is missing a claim or a question entirely, propose it below. A proposal is reviewed on its wording; accepted proposals are matched against the graph before they enter it.