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?
74 68 79 -
Predictions
Statements about events outside the person's control, checked once they fell due: did they come true?
Insufficient record: 1 prediction 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: 1 promise resolved, 5 needed for a score.
All types combined: 74 (likely 68 to 79, high confidence), from 97 claims: 97 factual claims. It mixes kinds of claim in different proportions for different people, so compare people kind by kind.
Steven Pinker's claims
“intelligence may not be like a building you build higher and higher, but it may be like a circle that gets rounder and rounder, that there’s eventually diminishing returns.”
Steven Pinker, cognitive scientist 7 October 2026 Steven Pinker on AI Doom and Consciousness (Conspicuous Cognition)
Intelligence may show diminishing returns as AI scales, rather than growing without limit.
Unresolvable The public record could not settle it.
Reasoning
Hedged ('may') prediction with no horizon.
Cite this claim
Steven Pinker, “Intelligence may show diminishing returns as AI scales, rather than growing without limit.” (said 7 October 2026). Verdict: unresolvable. Reliability API, claim c_070e6374630c, method 0.1.0+28da144b. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_070e6374630c
Claims without a verdict
Is a verdict here wrong, or do you speak for Steven Pinker? 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.