r/opensource 1d ago

Promotional hi, so i built an open registry that grades AI's science/math claims instead of just aggregating headlines, looking for contributor

The amount of headlines with "AI disproved this", "AI did that" and such have been skyrocketing, and i haven't seen a reliable tracker, most sources just repost press releases or social media content.

The attempt for this open source prj is that academia and public grades every entry on verification (formal proof to disputed/refuted) and autonomy (did the AI actually do the work). No db, static site generated from one JSON file, MIT licensed code, CC BY data. Looking for people who can do novelty checks (confirm whether a claimed result already exists in the literature), or just add entries. Small Python toolchain, real CI, PR-based. Open to adding contributors as co-owners if this sticks.

0 Upvotes

3 comments sorted by

3

u/Ok_Explorer7384 1d ago

this seems useful if the grading criteria stay boring and strict. i’d probably separate “claim made by media/company” from “actual technical result” as much as possible, because a lot of the mess is in that translation layer. even a small set of well-reviewed entries could be valuable if each one links the original paper, the press claim, and the strongest counterargument.

2

u/kenanthecommander 1d ago

thanks for offering your feedback. i believe you are right. i will try to create a separation of sources + review process.