Cited by 21Risk Perception and ManagementClimate Change and GeoengineeringDisaster Management and Resilience

Working together to face humanity's greatest threats: Introduction to the Future of Research on Catastrophic and Existential Risk

Open access
Currie, Adrian, Ó hÉigeartaigh, Seán·2018·Futures

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.futures.2018.07.003

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A risk is composed of hazards, vulnerabilities, and exposure, not just individual threats.

    “Second, a risk is composed of hazards, vulnerabilities, and exposure, not just individual threats (IPCC, 2012; Avin et al., 2018; Currie and Ó hÉigeartaigh, 2018; Liu et al., 2018).”

    From A Fate Worse Than Warming? Stratospheric Aerosol Injection and Global Catastrophic Risk (2021) · cites this paper as Currie and Ó hÉigeartaigh, 2018

    Section 2 (p. 3) says risk analysis should look beyond individual shocks to systemic stability, resilience and interacting threats. It does not state that risk is composed of hazards, vulnerabilities and exposure; the specific three-part formulation is unsupported by this paper. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Ambrose, S. H. (1998). Late Pleistocene human population bottlenecks, volcanic winter, and differentiation of modern humans. Journal of Human Evolution, 34(6), 623-651.
  2. Collins, A. et al (2018). The Global Risks Report 2018 13th Edition. World Economic Forum.
  3. Mitchell, J. S., Roopnarine, P. D., & Angielczyk, K. D. (2012). Late Cretaceous restructuring of terrestrial communities facilitated the end-Cretaceous mass extinction in North America. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(46), 18857-18861.
  4. ÓhÉigeartaigh, S. S. (2017). The State of Research in Existential Risk. Proceedings of the First International Colloquium on Catastrophic and Existential Risk. The B. John Garrick Institute for the Risk Sciences, UCLA.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Currie, A., & Ó hÉigeartaigh, S.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Venue
Futures
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-09
Volume
102
Pages
1-5
ISSN
0016-3287 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2852104586
Cited by
21
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1
FWCI
4.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Futures (publishedVersion)
  • Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Apollo
Funders
  • Templeton World Charity Foundation (TWCF)
  • Future of Life Institute
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate Change and Geoengineering
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
Keywords
existential risk, catastrophic risk, risk communication, responsibility, epistemology of risk, interdisciplinary research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review