Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 34

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Patrilocality and hunter-gatherer-related ancestry of populations in East-Central Europe during the Middle Bronze Age

Chyleński, Maciej, Makarowicz, Przemysław, Juras, Anna, Krzewińska, Maja, Pospieszny, Łukasz, Ehler, Edvard, Breszka, Agnieszka, Górski, Jacek, Taras, Halina, Szczepanek, Anita, Polańska, Marta, Włodarczak, Piotr, Lasota-Kuś, Anna, Wójcik, Irena, Romaniszyn, Jan, Szmyt, Marzena, Kośko, Aleksander, Ignaczak, Marcin, Sadowski, Sylwester, Matoga, Andrzej, Grossman, Anna, Ilchyshyn, Vasyl, Yahodinska, Maryna O., Romańska, Adriana, Tunia, Krzysztof, Przybyła, Marcin, Grygiel, Ryszard, Szostek, Krzysztof, Dabert, Miroslawa, Götherström, Anders, Jakobsson, Mattias, Malmström, Helena·2023·Nature Communications
DOI 10.1038/s41467-023-40072-9PMC PMC10393988
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The demographic history of East-Central Europe after the Neolithic period remains poorly explored, despite this region being on the confluence of various ecological zones and cultural entities. Here, the descendants of societies associated with steppe pastoralists form Early Bronze Age were followed by Middle Bronze Age populations displaying unique characteristics. Particularly, the predominance of collective burials, the scale of which, was previously seen only in the Neolithic. The extent to which this re-emergence of older traditions is a result of genetic shift or social changes in the MBA is a subject of debate. Here by analysing 91 newly generated genomes from Bronze Age individuals from present Poland and Ukraine, we discovered that Middle Bronze Age populations were formed by an additional admixture event involving a population with relatively high proportions of genetic component associated with European hunter-gatherers and that their social structure was based on, primarily patrilocal, multigenerational kin-groups.

Overview

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 · 10.1038/s41467-023-40072-9

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 The geographical and temporal context and genetic affinities of the analysed Bronze Age individuals. A Maps showing the locations of samples published in this study and the geographical range of their associated cultural entities; the size of the marker corresponds to the number of samples from each site. The map was created using QGIS 2.12.249 and basemap from NOAA National Geophysical Data Center. 2009: ETOPO1 1 Arc-Minute Global Relief Model. NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information. Accessed 2013. B The age of the newly generated genomes (calculated as an average of 2σ BCE dates) corresponding to the temporal range of the archaeological cultures they are associated with. C The results of unsupervised admixture analysis (K = 7) on the selected populations. D PCA plot of ancient individuals projected onto contemporary individuals from West Eurasia from the Human Origins reference panel (not shown). The symbols in both the PCA and admixture analysis correspond to individuals associated with the following cultures: IC - Iwno Culture, KC – Komarów Culture, MC – Mierzanowice Culture, SC – Strzyżów Culture, TC – Trzciniec Culture (from this study and reference populations), AFN – Afanasievo Culture, ALP – Alföld Linear Pottery Culture, AN – Anatolian Neolithic, AND – Andronovo Culture, BABL – Bronze Age Baltic, BAC – Battle Axe Culture, BACz Bronze Age Czechia, BAHU – Bronze Age Hungary, BAP – Bronze Age Poland, BASC – Bronze Age Scandinavia, BBC – Bell Beaker Culture (Poland, Czechia and Germany, respectively), BKG – Brześć Kujawski Group, CAT – Catacomb Culture, CWC – Corded Ware Culture, EBG – Early Bronze Age Germany, EHG – Eastern Hunter Gatherers, ENSt – Eneolithic Steppe, FBC – Funnel Beaker Culture, GAC – Globular Amphora Culture, HGBL – Hunter Gatherer Baltic, LBK – Linear Pottery Culture, LNBG – Late Neolithic/Bronze Age Germany, MNG – Middle Neolithic Germany, NBL – Neolithic Baltic, NEU – Neolithic Ukraine, POL – Poltavka Culture, PWC – Pitted Ware Culture, SHG – Scandinavian Hunter Gatherers, SNT – Sintashta Culture, SRB – Srubnaya Culture, UNC – Únětice Culture, WHG – Western Hunter Gatherers, YAM – Yamnaya Culture.
Fig. 1 The geographical and temporal context and genetic affinities of the analysed Bronze Age individuals. A Maps showing the locations of samples published in this study and the geographical range of their associated cultural entities; the size of the marker corresponds to the number of samples from each site. The map was created using QGIS 2.12.249 and basemap from NOAA National Geophysical Data Center. 2009: ETOPO1 1 Arc-Minute Global Relief Model. NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information. Accessed 2013. B The age of the newly generated genomes (calculated as an average of 2σ BCE dates) corresponding to the temporal range of the archaeological cultures they are associated with. C The results of unsupervised admixture analysis (K = 7) on the selected populations. D PCA plot of ancient individuals projected onto contemporary individuals from West Eurasia from the Human Origins reference panel (not shown). The symbols in both the PCA and admixture analysis correspond to individuals associated with the following cultures: IC - Iwno Culture, KC – Komarów Culture, MC – Mierzanowice Culture, SC – Strzyżów Culture, TC – Trzciniec Culture (from this study and reference populations), AFN – Afanasievo Culture, ALP – Alföld Linear Pottery Culture, AN – Anatolian Neolithic, AND – Andronovo Culture, BABL – Bronze Age Baltic, BAC – Battle Axe Culture, BACz Bronze Age Czechia, BAHU – Bronze Age Hungary, BAP – Bronze Age Poland, BASC – Bronze Age Scandinavia, BBC – Bell Beaker Culture (Poland, Czechia and Germany, respectively), BKG – Brześć Kujawski Group, CAT – Catacomb Culture, CWC – Corded Ware Culture, EBG – Early Bronze Age Germany, EHG – Eastern Hunter Gatherers, ENSt – Eneolithic Steppe, FBC – Funnel Beaker Culture, GAC – Globular Amphora Culture, HGBL – Hunter Gatherer Baltic, LBK – Linear Pottery Culture, LNBG – Late Neolithic/Bronze Age Germany, MNG – Middle Neolithic Germany, NBL – Neolithic Baltic, NEU – Neolithic Ukraine, POL – Poltavka Culture, PWC – Pitted Ware Culture, SHG – Scandinavian Hunter Gatherers, SNT – Sintashta Culture, SRB – Srubnaya Culture, UNC – Únětice Culture, WHG – Western Hunter Gatherers, YAM – Yamnaya Culture.CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 The hunter-gatherer ancestry in the Middle Bronze Age populations from East-Central Europe. A The shared genetic drift between the newly published individuals and WHG hunter-gathers was estimated with the use of the f3-statistic, shown separately for autosomal and (B) X-chromosome data. C the WHG ancestry estimated for new (outlined in black) and reference individuals from the Final Neolithic to the Middle Bronze Age. The degree of ancestry was estimated from three-way admixture models including the WHG, AN and YAM, the points represent coefficient for WHG ancestry calculated using qpAdm (only values with p value for nested models <0.05). Error bars in (A–C) correspond to one standard error for the f3-statistics or qpAdm values (vertical) and 2σ for the dates (horizontal). The fit lines in (A–C) display smoothed conditional means for all individual (blue) and after removal of outliers (red) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (light blue and yellow respectively). D Outgroup f3 statistics values of form f3_Xchr(YRI, TC, popX) and f3_Autosomes(YRI, TC, popX) plotted against each other with error bars representing one standard deviation for each value, red line represents linear regression inserted for visualisation purpose. E The patrilocal character of Żerniki Górne cemetery as shown by the difference in the D-statistic in the form D(YRI, Żerniki individual; Żerniki, TC) for the two sexes. The boxplots show the median (middle horizontal line), interquartile range (25th and 75th percentile) indicated with lower (25th percentile) and upper (75th percentile) hinges of the box, and whiskers extending to the lowest (highest) value that is within 1.5 times the interquartile range of the upper (lower) hinge. The labels in all panels are as follows: IC – Iwno Culture, KC – Komarów Culture, MC – Mierzanowice Culture, SC – Strzyżów Culture, TC – Trzciniec Culture, AN – Anatolia Neolithic, BAC – Battle Axe Culture, BAHu – Bronze Age Hungary, BAP – Bronze Age Poland, BASC – Bronze Age Scandinavia, BBC – Bell Beaker Culture, BKG – Brzesc Kujawski Group, CWC – Corded Ware Culture, EBG – Early Bronze Age Germany, FBC – Funnel Beaker Culture, GAC – Globular Amphora Culture, LNBG – Late Neolithic/Bronze Age Germany, MNG Middle Neolithic Germany, NBL Neolithic Baltic, NCHu Neolithic/Chalcolithic Hungary.
Fig. 2 The hunter-gatherer ancestry in the Middle Bronze Age populations from East-Central Europe. A The shared genetic drift between the newly published individuals and WHG hunter-gathers was estimated with the use of the f3-statistic, shown separately for autosomal and (B) X-chromosome data. C the WHG ancestry estimated for new (outlined in black) and reference individuals from the Final Neolithic to the Middle Bronze Age. The degree of ancestry was estimated from three-way admixture models including the WHG, AN and YAM, the points represent coefficient for WHG ancestry calculated using qpAdm (only values with p value for nested models <0.05). Error bars in (A–C) correspond to one standard error for the f3-statistics or qpAdm values (vertical) and 2σ for the dates (horizontal). The fit lines in (A–C) display smoothed conditional means for all individual (blue) and after removal of outliers (red) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (light blue and yellow respectively). D Outgroup f3 statistics values of form f3_Xchr(YRI, TC, popX) and f3_Autosomes(YRI, TC, popX) plotted against each other with error bars representing one standard deviation for each value, red line represents linear regression inserted for visualisation purpose. E The patrilocal character of Żerniki Górne cemetery as shown by the difference in the D-statistic in the form D(YRI, Żerniki individual; Żerniki, TC) for the two sexes. The boxplots show the median (middle horizontal line), interquartile range (25th and 75th percentile) indicated with lower (25th percentile) and upper (75th percentile) hinges of the box, and whiskers extending to the lowest (highest) value that is within 1.5 times the interquartile range of the upper (lower) hinge. The labels in all panels are as follows: IC – Iwno Culture, KC – Komarów Culture, MC – Mierzanowice Culture, SC – Strzyżów Culture, TC – Trzciniec Culture, AN – Anatolia Neolithic, BAC – Battle Axe Culture, BAHu – Bronze Age Hungary, BAP – Bronze Age Poland, BASC – Bronze Age Scandinavia, BBC – Bell Beaker Culture, BKG – Brzesc Kujawski Group, CWC – Corded Ware Culture, EBG – Early Bronze Age Germany, FBC – Funnel Beaker Culture, GAC – Globular Amphora Culture, LNBG – Late Neolithic/Bronze Age Germany, MNG Middle Neolithic Germany, NBL Neolithic Baltic, NCHu Neolithic/Chalcolithic Hungary.CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 3 The kinship structure of the Middle Bronze Age populations from East-Central Europe. The proposed pedigrees of detected kin groups from Bronze Age cemeteries associated with the Trzciniec culture, asterisk (*) marks instances where more than one interpretation of the detected kinship is possible. The colours correspond to either the collective burials on the plan of the site in which the individuals were interred (in the case of Żerniki Górne) or the skeletal remains within collective burials. The burial photographs were reprinted with permission from Wiley from Juras, A. et al. Mitochondrial genomes from Bronze Age Poland reveal genetic continuity from the Late Neolithic and additional genetic affinities with the steppe populations. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 172, 176–188 (2020); © 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc All Rights Reserved.
Fig. 3 The kinship structure of the Middle Bronze Age populations from East-Central Europe. The proposed pedigrees of detected kin groups from Bronze Age cemeteries associated with the Trzciniec culture, asterisk (*) marks instances where more than one interpretation of the detected kinship is possible. The colours correspond to either the collective burials on the plan of the site in which the individuals were interred (in the case of Żerniki Górne) or the skeletal remains within collective burials. The burial photographs were reprinted with permission from Wiley from Juras, A. et al. Mitochondrial genomes from Bronze Age Poland reveal genetic continuity from the Late Neolithic and additional genetic affinities with the steppe populations. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 172, 176–188 (2020); © 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc All Rights Reserved.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 16 references

Research works printed but not linked: 52

  1. Skoglund, P. et al. Origins and Genetic Legacy of Neolithic Farmers and Hunter-Gatherers in Europe. Science 336, 466–469 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  2. Malmström, H. et al. The genomic ancestry of the Scandinavian Battle Axe Culture people and their relation to the broader Corded Ware horizon. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 286, 20191528 (2019). · DOI
  3. Furholt, M. Mobility and Social Change: Understanding the European Neolithic Period after the Archaeogenetic Revolution. J. Archaeol. Res. 29, 481–535 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  4. Olalde, I. et al. The Beaker phenomenon and the genomic transformation of northwest Europe. Nature 555, 190–196 (2018). · DOI · Paper page
  5. Mathieson, I. et al. The genomic history of southeastern Europe. Nature 555, 197–203 (2018). · DOI
  6. Kukawka, S. The State of Current Knowledge of the Eastern European Sub-Neolithic in Poland. Archaeol. Pol. 57, 63–77 (2019). · DOI
  7. Mittnik, A. et al. The genetic prehistory of the Baltic Sea region. Nat. Commun. 9, 442 (2018). · DOI
  8. Saag, L. et al. Extensive Farming in Estonia Started through a Sex-Biased Migration from the Steppe. Curr. Biol. 27, 2185–2193.e6 (2017). · DOI
  9. Coutinho, A. et al. The Neolithic Pitted Ware culture foragers were culturally but not genetically influenced by the Battle Axe culture herders. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 172, 638–649 (2020). · DOI
  10. Malmström, H. et al. Ancient DNA Reveals Lack of Continuity between Neolithic Hunter-Gatherers and Contemporary Scandinavians. Curr. Biol. 19, 1758–1762 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  11. Czebreszuk, J. & Szmyt, M. Background to Beakers. Inquiries into regional cultural backgrounds of the Bell Beaker complex. in Bell Beakers and the cultural milieu of north European plain (eds. Fokkens, H. & Nicolis, F.) 157–175 (Sidestone Press, 2012).
  12. Makarowicz, P. The construction of social structure: Bell Beakers and Trzciniec complex in north-eastern part of Central Europe. Przegląd. Archeol. 51, 123–158 (2003).
  13. Czebreszuk, J. & Szmyt, M. Identities, Differentiation and Interactions on the Central European Plain in the 3rd millennium BC. in Sozialarchäologische Perspektiven: Gesselschaftlicher Wandel 5000-1500 v. Chr. zwischen Atlantik und Kaukasus. Internationale Tagung 15.−18 (eds. Hansen, S. & Müller, J.) vol. 24 247–269 (Philipp von Zabern, 2011).
  14. Juras, A. et al. Mitochondrial genomes from Bronze Age Poland reveal genetic continuity from the Late Neolithic and additional genetic affinities with the steppe populations. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 172, 176–188 (2020). · DOI
  15. Damm, C. Continuity and change An analysis of social and material patterns in the Danish Neolithic. (Cambridge University Press, 1991).
  16. Cassidy, L. M. et al. A dynastic elite in monumental Neolithic society. Nature 582, 384–388 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
  17. Fowler, C. et al. A high-resolution picture of kinship practices in an Early Neolithic tomb. Nature 601, 584–587 (2022). · DOI · Paper page
  18. Sánchez-Quinto, F. et al. Megalithic tombs in western and northern Neolithic Europe were linked to a kindred society. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 116, 9469 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  19. Schroeder, H. et al. Unraveling ancestry, kinship, and violence in a Late Neolithic mass grave. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 116, 10705 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  20. Furtwängler, A. et al. Ancient genomes reveal social and genetic structure of Late Neolithic Switzerland. Nat. Commun. 11, 1915 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
  21. Romaniszyn, J., Niculică, B. P. & Ignat, I. Funeral rites on the southern boundary of the Komarov culture. Spraw. Archeol. 69, 83–112 (2017). · DOI
  22. Harney, É., Patterson, N., Reich, D. & Wakeley, J. Assessing the performance of qpAdm: a statistical tool for studying population admixture. Genetics 217, iyaa045 (2021). · DOI
  23. Manasterski, D. Exchanges between Syncretic Groups from the Mazury Lake District in Northeast Poland and Early Bronze Age Communities in Central Europe. Archaeol. Balt. 13, 126–139 (2010).
  24. Vai, S. et al. How a paleogenomic approach can provide details on bioarchaeological reconstruction: a case study from the globular amphorae culture. Genes 12, 910 (2021). · DOI
  25. Makarowicz, P. et al. The absolute chronology of collective burials from the 2nd millennium BC in East Central Europe. Radiocarbon 63, 669–692 (2021). · DOI
  26. Haak, W. et al. Ancient DNA, Strontium isotopes, and osteological analyses shed light on social and kinship organization of the Later Stone Age. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 105, 18226–18231 (2008). · DOI
  27. Goldberg, A., Günther, T., Rosenberg, N. A. & Jakobsson, M. Ancient X chromosomes reveal contrasting sex bias in Neolithic and Bronze Age Eurasian migrations. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 114, 2657–2662 (2017). · DOI
  28. Mittnik, A. et al. Kinship-based social inequality in Bronze Age Europe. Science 366, 731 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  29. Marlowe, F. W. Marital Residence among Foragers. Curr. Anthropol. 45, 277–284 (2004). · DOI · Paper page
  30. Alt, K. W. et al. A community in life and death: the Late Neolithic megalithic tomb at Alto de Reinoso (Burgos, Spain). PloS ONE 11, e0146176 (2016). · DOI
  31. Yang, D. Y., Eng, B., Waye, J. S., Dudar, J. C. & Saunders, S. R. Improved DNA extraction from ancient bones using silica-based spin columns. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 105, 539–543 (1998). · DOI
  32. Svensson, E. M. et al. Tracing genetic change over time using nuclear SNPs in ancient and modern cattle. Anim. Genet. 38, 378–383 (2007). · DOI
  33. Günther, T. et al. Population genomics of Mesolithic Scandinavia: Investigating early postglacial migration routes and high-latitude adaptation. PLOS Biol. 16, e2003703 (2018). · DOI
  34. Meyer, M. & Kircher, M. Illumina Sequencing Library Preparation for Highly Multiplexed Target Capture and Sequencing. Cold Spring Harb. Protoc. 2010, pdb.prot5448 (2010). · DOI
  35. Briggs, A. W. & Heyn, P. Preparation of Next-Generation Sequencing Libraries from Damaged DNA. in Ancient DNA: Methods and Protocols (eds. Shapiro, B. & Hofreiter, M.) 143–154 (Humana Press, 2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-61779-516-9_18. · DOI
  36. Juras, A. et al. Investigating kinship of Neolithic post-LBK human remains from Krusza Zamkowa, Poland using ancient DNA. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 26, 30–39 (2017). · DOI
  37. Schubert, M., Lindgreen, S. & Orlando, L. AdapterRemoval v2: rapid adapter trimming, identification, and read merging. BMC Res. Notes 9, 88 (2016). · DOI
  38. Kircher, M. Analysis of High-Throughput Ancient DNA Sequencing Data. in Ancient DNA: Methods and Protocols (eds. Shapiro, B. & Hofreiter, M.) 197–228 (Humana Press, 2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-61779-516-9_23. · DOI · Paper page
  39. Li, H. & Durbin, R. Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows–Wheeler transform. Bioinformatics 25, 1754–1760 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  40. Skoglund, P. et al. Genomic diversity and admixture differs for Stone-Age Scandinavian foragers and farmers. Science 344, 747–750 (2014). · DOI
  41. Skoglund, P., Storå, J., Götherström, A. & Jakobsson, M. Accurate sex identification of ancient human remains using DNA shotgun sequencing. J. Archaeol. Sci. 40, 4477–4482 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  42. Li, H. et al. The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools. Bioinforma. Oxf. Engl. 25, 2078–2079 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  43. Briggs, A. W. et al. Patterns of damage in genomic DNA sequences from a Neandertal. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 104, 14616–14621 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  44. Andrews, R. M. et al. Reanalysis and revision of the Cambridge reference sequence for human mitochondrial DNA. Nat. Genet. 23, 147–147 (1999). · DOI · Paper page
  45. Weissensteiner, H. et al. HaploGrep 2: mitochondrial haplogroup classification in the era of high-throughput sequencing. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, W58–W63 (2016). · DOI
  46. Amorim, C. E. G. et al. Understanding 6th-century barbarian social organization and migration through paleogenomics. Nat. Commun. 9, 3547 (2018). · DOI
  47. Danecek, P. et al. The variant call format and VCFtools. Bioinformatics 27, 2156–2158 (2011). · DOI
  48. Patterson, N., Price, A. L. & Reich, D. Population Structure and Eigenanalysis. PLOS Genet. 2, 1–20 (2006). · DOI · Paper page
  49. Alexander, D. H., Novembre, J. & Lange, K. Fast model-based estimation of ancestry in unrelated individuals. Genome Res. 19, 1655–1664 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  50. Purcell, S. et al. PLINK: a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 81, 559–575 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  51. Behr, A. A., Liu, K. Z., Liu-Fang, G., Nakka, P. & Ramachandran, S. pong: fast analysis and visualization of latent clusters in population genetic data. Bioinformatics 32, 2817–2823 (2016). · DOI
  52. Yaka, R. et al. Variable kinship patterns in Neolithic Anatolia revealed by ancient genomes. Curr. Biol. 31, 2455–2468.e18 (2021). · DOI

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Chyleński, M., Makarowicz, P., Juras, A., Krzewińska, M., Pospieszny, Ł., Ehler, E., Breszka, A., Górski, J., Taras, H., Szczepanek, A., Polańska, M., Włodarczak, P., Lasota-Kuś, A., Wójcik, I., Romaniszyn, J., Szmyt, M., Kośko, A., Ignaczak, M., Sadowski, S., Matoga, A., Grossman, A., Ilchyshyn, V., Yahodinska, M. O., Romańska, A., Tunia, K., Przybyła, M., Grygiel, R., Szostek, K., Dabert, M., Götherström, A., Jakobsson, M., & Malmström, H.
Venue
Nature Communications
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2023-08-01
Volume
14
Issue
1
ISSN
2041-1723
DOI
10.1038/s41467-023-40072-9
PMC
PMC10393988
Cited by
34
References
16
Language
en
Licence

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