Slicing soup
Open accessThe 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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Humans cannot be divided into biologically distinct subcategories.
“Genetics demonstrates that humans cannot be divided into biologically distinct subcategories.”
From ASHG Denounces Attempts to Link Genetics and Racial Supremacy (2018) · cites this paper as [1]
The editorial (p. 637) argues that conventional racial categories are poor genetic divisions, likening attempts to define race genetically to ‘slicing soup.’ But the claim is more absolute than the source: it allows that geographically isolated populations may provide a basis for defining groups and notes inherited differences among some human groupings. (LLM, conf=0.86)
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.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
ASHG Denounces Attempts to Link Genetics and Racial Supremacy
(2018) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2018.10.011 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
- Venue
- Nature Biotechnology
- Published
- 2002-07
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 637-637
- ISSN
- 0733-222X (ISSN-L)
- 1087-0156
- 1546-1696
- OpenAlex
- W4248859544
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Nature Biotechnology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Race, Genetics, and Society
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Forensic and Genetic Research
- Keywords
- HapMap, human genome, association studies, race and ethnicity, genetic ancestry, racial profiling, genetic privacy, population stratification, National Institutes of Health
- MeSH terms
- Ethnicity, Humans, Terminology as Topic, United States, Genome, Human, Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Racial Groups
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
