How we check AI news.
Every signal should help you distinguish what a source says from what has been measured or confirmed. These six questions guide the public reading panel on each story. They are intended to be answered for each claim. The current panel shows what AINewsIQ has recorded at the signal level and labels gaps plainly; it is not a verdict on whether a claim is true.
- 01
Who is making each claim?
Name the vendor, article author, independent party, or other claimant. Distinguish what that person measured from what they asserted. An organization's own benchmark remains its claim.
- 02
What was actually tested?
Look for sample size, tasks, model and benchmark versions, conditions, and a method someone could reproduce. A small demo does not establish broad performance.
- 03
Where are the sources?
Open the primary page, paper, repository, or original discussion. Note its date and named author. A discovery post or link to other coverage does not replace a source for a quoted result.
- 04
What could mislead?
Check for vendor numbers stated as fact, selective comparisons, mismatched benchmark versions, old events presented as new, and conflicts of interest. Preserve qualifiers and missing baselines.
- 05
What is at risk if wrong?
Consider the consequence of acting on the claim: safety, privacy, cost, or a poor adoption decision. The answer depends on the reader's use, not popularity.
- 06
What would change the view?
Identify the next useful check, such as an inspectable primary method or independent replication. A second post, editor link review, or source-based brief alone is not replication.
Source trail first. Verification stated precisely.
AINewsIQ records original and discovery links, publication or discovery dates, available source material, stored briefs, and any editor link review or source-check concern. A brief may summarize a fetched page, feed excerpt, or abstract. When a check is still open, the signal can remain visible with a clickable concern.
The six-question panel is a reading framework. Claim-by-claim measurement, baseline, quote location, and independent-evaluator records are not complete for every signal. Where those records are missing, the panel says so and sends you to the original source.
Attention, evidence, and impact answer different questions.
Likes, points, and reposts describe observed attention on particular platforms. The source-evidence index describes how much of the source trail is available to inspect. Neither measures truth, peer review, safety, or business value. Those judgments require the relevant methods, context, and review.
Read the signal, then open the source.
Start with the article's short read and six checks. Follow its original link for the full context. If a claim or source status appears wrong, send the link and the specific issue to our editorial team.