Scores by kind of claim
Each kind of claim is scored on its own, out of 100: the share that held up, with the range it likely falls in. Fewer resolved claims give a wider range.
-
Factual claims
Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
83 78 88 -
Predictions
Statements about events outside the person's control, checked once they fell due: did they come true?
Insufficient record: 2 predictions resolved, 5 needed for a score.
-
Promises
Commitments to the person's or organisation's own future action, with something to deliver: was it delivered?
Insufficient record: 0 promises resolved, 5 needed for a score.
All types combined: 83 (likely 78 to 88, high confidence), from 86 claims: 86 factual claims. It mixes kinds of claim in different proportions for different people, so compare people kind by kind.
Daniela Amodei's claims
38 claims
“If that scenario ever changed drastically, it would cause problems because both Anthropic and OpenAI have already purchased a lot of compute for the future, which is very costly.”
Daniela Amodei, Anthropic president, interviewee 9 May 2026 Daniela Amodei, Co-Founder and President of Anthropic: Building AI the Right Way (transcript) (The Transcript Desk)
Anthropic and OpenAI have already purchased a lot of compute for the future, which is very costly.
Mostly true True in substance, wrong in a detail.
Said for an organisation they lead or work for; it counts on both records.
What would count as true or false
Judged as of 2026-05-09. True: public announcements or filings show that both Anthropic and OpenAI had entered into large, multi-year compute purchase or capacity commitments for future use (e.g. deals with cloud providers, chipmakers or data-centre developers worth billions of dollars) by that date. Mostly true: both firms have large future compute commitments, but some are described as leases, partnerships or credits rather than purchases. Mixed: only one of the two firms has substantial documented forward compute commitments. Mostly false: both firms' commitments are small or mostly short-term. False: neither firm had made significant forward compute commitments.
Evidence
- Anthropic and Amazon expand compute collaboration Anthropic · 20 April 2026 Own record
“We are committing more than $100 billion over the next ten years to AWS technologies, securing up to 5GW of new capacity to train and run Claude.”
- Microsoft, NVIDIA, and Anthropic partnerships Anthropic · 18 November 2025 Own record
“Anthropic has committed to purchase $30 billion of Azure compute capacity and to contract additional compute capacity up to one gigawatt.”
- OpenAI, Oracle, and SoftBank expand Stargate with five new AI data center sites OpenAI · 23 September 2025
“This represents a partnership that exceeds $300 billion between the two companies over the next five years.”
- OpenAI, Oracle, and SoftBank expand Stargate with five new AI data center sites OpenAI · 23 September 2025
“This puts us on a clear path to securing the full $500 billion, 10-gigawatt commitment we announced in January by the end of 2025, ahead of schedule.”
Reasoning
Anthropic's official announcements say it committed more than $100 billion over ten years to AWS for up to 5GW of capacity (E1), and committed to buy $30 billion of Azure compute capacity (E2). Both were announced before 2026-05-09. For OpenAI, its announcements describe a 'partnership that exceeds $300 billion' with Oracle over five years (E3) and a $500 billion, 10-gigawatt Stargate commitment (E4). These are large multi-year forward commitments, but OpenAI's are described as partnerships or commitments rather than outright purchases, which fits the 'mostly true' criterion.
Cite this claim
Daniela Amodei, “Anthropic and OpenAI have already purchased a lot of compute for the future, which is very costly.” (said 9 May 2026). Verdict: mostly true. Reliability API, claim c_0a8ffd665382, method 0.1.0+28da144b. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_0a8ffd665382
Claims without a verdict
Is a verdict here wrong, or do you speak for Daniela Amodei? Reply on the claim's own page, with the form at its foot (how replies work). Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts and scores are made.