Browse

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 the factual accuracy of beliefs held across a general population, including public knowledge, widespread misperceptions, and factors or interventions that change their accuracy. Excludes the accuracy of public-facing content itself unless population beliefs are the focus.

AI capability improvements alone improve the accuracy of widely held public beliefs.

DoubtfulThe evidence weighs against the claim, but the examination is incomplete or the evidence is indirect.constitution →empirical · derivedA factual claim that rests on inference from other evidence rather than direct observation.constitution →Artificial intelligenceimportance · minorImportance 0.35, from 0 to 1 · minor: narrow or largely settled, cheap to get right. Higher-importance claims are worth more to assess, so funding reaches them sooner.constitution →

Fact-check corrections improve factual belief accuracy on average, including on politically polarized issues.

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 →Fact-Checking Cognitive Psychology Political Scienceimportance · minorImportance 0.35, from 0 to 1 · minor: narrow or largely settled, cheap to get right. 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.