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
15 claims
“That’s why we chose to incorporate as a public benefit corporation.”
Daniela Amodei, Anthropic president, interviewee 29 June 2026 Daniela Amodei Says Curiosity Is Underrated (Stanford GSB)
Anthropic was incorporated as a public benefit corporation.
Not researched Checkable, but outside the sample that was researched.
Said for an organisation they lead or work for; it counts on both records.
Cite this claim
Daniela Amodei, “Anthropic was incorporated as a public benefit corporation.” (said 29 June 2026). Verdict: not researched. Reliability API, claim c_003419296b1e, method 0.1.0+28da144b. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_003419296b1e
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.