CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 1Scientific Computing and Data ManagementEthics and Social Impacts of AIAcademic Writing and Publishing

From Fluent to Verifiable: Claim-Level Auditability for Deep Research Agents

Open access
Rasheed, Razeen A, Banerjee, Somnath, Mukherjee, Animesh, Hazra, Rima·2026·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2602.13855arXiv 2602.13855
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

A deep research agent produces a fluent scientific report in minutes; a careful reader then tries to verify the main claims and discovers the real cost is not reading, but tracing: which sentence is supported by which passage, what was ignored, and where evidence conflicts. We argue that as research generation becomes cheap, auditability becomes the bottleneck, and the dominant risk shifts from isolated factual errors to scientifically styled outputs whose claim-evidence links are weak, missing, or misleading. This perspective proposes claim-level auditability as a first-class design and evaluation target for deep research agents, distills recurring long-horizon failure modes (objective drift, transient constraints, and unverifiable inference), and introduces the Auditable Autonomous Research (AAR) standard, a compact measurement framework that makes auditability testable via provenance coverage, provenance soundness, contradiction transparency, and audit effort. We then argue for semantic provenance with protocolized validation: persistent, queryable provenance graphs that encode claim--evidence relations (including conflicts) and integrate continuous validation during synthesis rather than after publication, with practical instrumentation patterns to support deployment at scale.

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2602.13855

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.

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?

  • Claim-level auditability and evidence-licensed claims are attempts to make machine-generated science verifiable by construction, since post-hoc verification does not scale.

    “Claimlevel auditability [152] and evidence-licensed claims - calibrating assertion strength to supporting evidence [185] - are attempts to make machine-generated science verifiable by construction, since post-hoc verification does not scale.”

    From Recursive Self-Improvement in AI: From Bounded Self-Refinement to Autonomous Research Loops (2026) · cites this paper as [152]

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 69

  1. [1][1] 2024. Wiley's 'fake science' scandal is just the latest chapter in a broader crisis of trust. ABC News (Australia) (May 2024). Published May 20, 2024. -
  2. [2][2] 2026. HalluCitation Matters: Revealing the Impact of Hallucinated Citations. arXiv (Jan. 2026). arXiv:2601.18724. - · arXiv
  3. [3][3] Ibrahim Adabara, Bashir Olaniyi Sadiq, Aliyu Nuhu Shuaibu, Yale Ibrahim Danjuma, and Venkateswarlu Maninti. 2025. Trustworthy Agentic AI Systems: A Cross-Layer Review of Architectures, Threat Models, and Governance Strategies for Real-World Deployment. F1000Research 14 (2025), 905. doi:10.12688/f1000research.169927.1 - · DOI · Paper page
  4. [4][4] Gastão Amaral et al. 2024. ProVe: A pipeline for automated provenance verification of knowledge graphs against textual sources. Semantic Web Journal (2024). -
  5. [6][6] Rauno Arike, Elizabeth Donoway, Henning Bartsch, and Marius Hobbhahn. 2025. Technical Report: Evaluating Goal Drift in Language Model Agents. arXiv:2505.02709 [cs.AI] doi:10.48550/arXiv.2505.02709 - · DOI
  6. [7][7] Adam Bates, Dave Tian, Kevin R. B. Butler, and Thomas Moyer. 2015. Trustworthy Whole-System Provenance for the Linux Kernel. In 24th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 15) . USENIX Association, 319-334. -
  7. [8][8] Joeran Beel and Min-Yen Kan. 2025. Evaluating Sakana's AI Scientist: Bold Claims, Mixed Results, and a Promising Future? arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.14297 (2025). https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.14297 - · arXiv
  8. [10][10] Bernal Bernal, Weizhe Yuan, O Harari, et al. 2024. HippoRAG: Neurobiologically Inspired Long-Term Memory for Large Language Models. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) , Vol. 37. -
  9. [11][11] Maciej Besta, Lorenzo Paleari, Jia Hao Andrea Jiang, Robert Gerstenberger, et al. 2025. Affordable AI Assistants with Knowledge Graph of Thoughts. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.02670 (2025). - · arXiv
  10. [12][12] Siddhant Bhambri, Upasana Biswas, and Subbarao Kambhampati. 2025. Do Cognitively Interpretable Reasoning Traces Improve LLM Performance? arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.16695 (2025). https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.16695 - · arXiv
  11. [13][13] Wulfram Blau, Vinton G. Cerf, Juan Enriquez, Joseph S. Francisco, Urs Gasser, Mary L. Gray, Mark Greaves, Barbara J. Grosz, Kathleen Hall Jamieson, Gerald H. Haug, et al. 2024. Protecting scientific integrity in an age of generative AI. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 121, 22 (2024), e2407886121. doi:10.1073/pnas.2407886121 - · DOI · Paper page
  12. [14][14] Daniil A Boiko, Robert MacKnight, Ben Kline, and Gabe Gomes. 2023. Autonomous chemical research with large language models. Nature 624, 7992 (2023), 570-578. doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06792-0 - · DOI · Paper page
  13. [15][15] Vasilis Bountris, Lauritz Thamsen, and Ulf Leser. 2025. HyProv: Hybrid Provenance Management for Scientific Workflows. arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.07574 (2025). - · arXiv
  14. [16][16] Samuel R Bowman, Gabor Angeli, Christopher Potts, and Christopher D Manning. 2015. A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inference. In Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing . 632-642. -
  15. [17][17] Andres M Bran, Sam Cox, Oliver Schilter, Carlo Baldassari, Andrew D White, and Philippe Schwaller. 2024. ChemCrow: Augmenting large-language models with chemistry tools. Nature Machine Intelligence 6 (2024), 525-535. doi:10.1038/s42256024-00832-8 - · DOI
  16. [18][18] C Brundy. 2024. The paper mill crisis is a five-alarm fire for science. Insights: the UKSG journal (2024). Discusses Wiley/Hindawi retractions exceeding 11,300 as of April 2024. -
  17. [19][19] Mert Cemri, Melissa Z. Pan, Shuyi Yang, Lakshya A. Agrawal, et al. 2025. Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail? arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.13657 (2025). - · arXiv
  18. [20][20] Mikaël Chelli, Jules Descamps, Vincent Lavoué, Christophe Trojani, Michel Azar, Marcel Deckert, Jean-Luc Raynier, Gilles Clowez, Pascal Boileau, and Caroline Ruetsch-Chelli. 2024. Hallucination Rates and Reference Accuracy of ChatGPT and Bard for Systematic Reviews: Comparative Analysis. J Med Internet Res 26 (22 May 2024), e53164. doi:10.2196/53164 - · DOI · Paper page
  19. [21][21] Mikaël Chelli, Jules Descamps, Vincent Lavoué, Christophe Trojani, Michel Azar, Marcel Deckert, Jean-Luc Raynier, Gilles Clowez, Pascal Boileau, and Caroline Ruetsch-Chelli. 2024. Hallucination Rates and Reference Accuracy of ChatGPT and Bard for Systematic Reviews: Comparative Analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research 26 (2024), e53164. doi:10.2196/53164 - · DOI · Paper page
  20. [22][22] I Chern, Steffi Chern, Shiqi Chen, Weizhe Yuan, K Feng, C Zhou, J He, Graham Neubig, and Pengfei Liu. 2024. FacTool: Factuality Detection in Generative AI A Tool Augmented Framework. In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics . -
  21. [23][23] Mingxuan Du, Benfeng Xu, Chiwei Zhu, Xiaorui Wang, and Zhendong Mao. 2025. DeepResearch Bench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Deep Research Agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.11763 (2025). - · arXiv
  22. [24][24] Yilun Du, Shuang Li, Antonio Torralba, Joshua B. Tenenbaum, and Igor Mordatch. 2023. Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debate. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) , Vol. 36. 31114-31136. -
  23. [25][25] Sebastian Farquhar, Jannik Kossen, Lorenz Kuhn, and Yarin Gal. 2024. Detecting hallucinations in large language models using semantic entropy. Nature 630 (2024), 625-630. doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07421-0 - · DOI · Paper page
  24. [26][26] Paul Fernsel, Cedric Maier, Ehsan Toreini, and Dominik Kowald. 2024. Assessing the Auditability of AI-integrating Systems: A Framework and Learning Analytics Case Study. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.08906 (2024). - · arXiv
  25. [27][27] Sharon Goldman. 2026. NeurIPS research papers contained 100+ AI-hallucinated citations. Fortune (Jan. 2026). Published Jan 21, 2026. -
  26. [30][30] Melanie Herschel, Ralf Diestelkämper, and Houssem Ben Lahmar. 2017. A survey on provenance: What for? What form? What from? The VLDB Journal 26, 6 (2017), 881-906. -
  27. [31][31] Yikuan Hu, Jie Zhou, Ganqu Cui, Shengding Hu, and Maosong Sun. 2025. ReMindRAG: Low-Cost LLM-Guided Knowledge Graph Traversal for Efficient RAG. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.13193 (2025). - · arXiv
  28. [32][32] Moritz Baumgart Joeran Beel, Min-Yen Kan. 2025. Evaluating Sakana's AI Scientist for Autonomous Research. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.14297 (2025). https://arxiv. org/html/2502.14297v2 - · arXiv
  29. [33][33] Jared Kaplan, Sam McCandlish, Tom Henighan, Tom B Brown, Benjamin Chess, Rewon Child, Scott Gray, Alec Radford, Jeffrey Wu, and Dario Amodei. 2020. Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.08361 (2020). - · arXiv
  30. [34][34] Roham Koohestani et al. 2025. AgentGuard: Runtime Verification of AI Agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.23864 (2025). - · arXiv
  31. [35][35] Minghao Li, Ying Zeng, Zhihao Cheng, Cong Ma, and Kai Jia. 2025. ReportBench: Evaluating Deep Research Agents via Academic Survey Tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.15804 (2025). https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.15804 - · arXiv
  32. [36][36] Miles Q. Li, Benjamin C. M. Fung, Martin Weiss, Pulei Xiong, Khalil Al-Hussaeni, and Claude Fachkha. 2026. A Benchmark for Evaluating Outcome-Driven Constraint Violations in Autonomous AI Agents. arXiv:2512.20798 [cs.AI] https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.20798 - · arXiv
  33. [37][37] Q. Vera Liao and Jennifer Wortman Vaughan. 2024. AI Transparency in the Age of LLMs: A Human-Centered Research Roadmap. Harvard Data Science Review 6, 2 (2024). -
  34. [38][38] Hunter Lightman, Vineet Kosaraju, Yura Burda, Harri Edwards, Bowen Baker, Teddy Lee, Jan Leike, John Schulman, Ilya Sutskever, and Karl Cobbe. 2023. Let's Verify Step by Step. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.20050 (2023). - · arXiv
  35. [39][39] Zachary C Lipton. 2018. The Mythos of Model Interpretability. Queue 16, 3 (2018), 31-57. -
  36. [40][40] Nelson F Liu, Kevin Lin, John Hewitt, Ashwin Paranjape, Michele Bevilacqua, Fabio Petroni, and Percy Liang. 2024. Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contexts. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics 12 (2024), 157-173. -
  37. [41][41] Chris Lu, Cong Lu, Robert Tjarko Lange, Jakob Foerster, Jeff Clune, and David Ha. 2024. The AI Scientist: Towards fully automated open-ended scientific discovery. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.06292 (2024). https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.06292 - · arXiv
  38. [42][42] Ruofan Lu, Yichen Li, and Yintong Huo. 2025. Exploring Autonomous Agents: A Closer Look at Why They Fail When Completing Tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.13143 (2025). https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.13143 - · arXiv
  39. [43][43] Potsawee Manakul, Adian Liusie, and Mark J. F. Gales. 2023. SelfCheckGPT: ZeroResource Black-Box Hallucination Detection for Generative Large Language Models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08896 (2023). - · arXiv
  40. [44][44] Ananya Mantravadi, Shivali Dalmia, Olga Pospelova, Abhishek Mukherji, Nand Dave, and Anudha Mittal. 2025. LegalWiz: A Multi-Agent Generation Framework for Contradiction Detection in Legal Documents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.03418 (2025). Corrected authors (previously attributed to Zhang).. - · arXiv
  41. [45][45] Dasha Metropolitansky and Jonathan Larson. 2025. VeriTrail: Closed-Domain Hallucination Detection with Traceability. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.21786 (2025). - · arXiv
  42. [46][46] Sewon Min, Kalpesh Krishna, Xinxi Lyu, Mike Lewis, Wen-tau Yih, Pang Wei Koh, Mohit Iyyer, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Hannaneh Hajishirzi. 2023. FActScore: Finegrained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generation. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing . 12076-12100. -
  43. [47][47] Sonia Natalie Mitchell, Andrew Lahiff, Nathan Cummings, Jonathan Hollocombe, Bram Boskamp, Ryan Field, Dennis Reddyhoff, Kristian Zarebski, Antony Wilson, Bruno Viola, et al. 2022. FAIR Data Pipeline: provenance-driven data management for traceable scientific workflows. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 380, 2233 (2022), 20210300. doi:10.1098/rsta.2021.0300 - · DOI
  44. [50][50] Akshat Naik, Patrick Quinn, Guillermo Bosch, Emma Gouné, Francisco Javier Campos Zabala, Jason Ross Brown, and Edward James Young. 2025. AgentMisalignment: Measuring the Propensity for Misaligned Behaviour in LLM-Based Agents. arXiv:2506.04018 [cs.AI] https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.04018 - · arXiv
  45. [51][51] Thomas Pasquier, Xueyuan Han, Mark Goldstein, Thomas Moyer, David Eyers, MargoSeltzer, and Jean Bacon. 2017. Practical Whole-System Provenance Capture. In Proceedings of the 2017 Symposium on Cloud Computing (SoCC '17) . 405-418. -
  46. [52][52] Luca Della Pellegrina, Ylber Haxhimusa, Raza Malik, et al. 2025. AI for scientific integrity: Detecting ethical breaches, errors, and fraud using generative AI tools and large language models. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence 8 (2025), 1644098. doi:10.3389/frai.2025.1644098 - · DOI · Paper page
  47. [54][54] Paul Rasmussen and The Zep Team. 2025. Zep: A Temporal Knowledge Graph Architecture for Agent Memory. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.13956 (2025). - · arXiv
  48. [55][55] Anjali Sharma, Christopher Lin, et al. 2025. ResearchRubrics: Auditing the Citation Integrity of Deep Research Agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.07685 (2025). - · arXiv
  49. [56][56] Manasi Sharma, Chen Bo Calvin Zhang, Chaithanya Bandi, Clinton Wang, Ankit Aich, Huy Nghiem, Tahseen Rabbani, Ye Htet, Brian Jang, Sumana Basu, Aishwarya Balwani, Denis Peskoff, Marcos Ayestaran, Sean M. Hendryx, Brad Kenstler, and Bing Liu. 2025. ResearchRubrics: A Benchmark of Prompts and Rubrics For Evaluating Deep Research Agents. arXiv:2511.07685 [cs.AI] https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.07685 - · arXiv
  50. [57][57] Ilia Shumailov, Zakhar Shumaylov, Yiren Zhao, Yarin Gal, Nicolas Papernot, and Ross Anderson. 2024. AI models collapse when trained on recursively generated data. Nature 631 (2024), 755-759. doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07566-y - · DOI · Paper page
  51. [58][58] Ilia Shumailov, Zakhar Shumaylov, Yiren Zhao, Nicolas Papernot, Ross Anderson, and Yarin Gal. 2024. AI models collapse when trained on recursively generated data. Nature 631, 8022 (01 Jul 2024), 755-759. doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07566-y - · DOI · Paper page
  52. [59][59] Sameer Kumar Singh. 2026. State Drift in Language-Conditioned Autonomous Agents: A Failure Mode of Long-Horizon Reasoning. Preprints (January 2026). doi:10.20944/preprints202601.0910.v1 - · DOI
  53. [60][60] Kevin Song, Anand Jayarajan, Yaoyao Ding, Qidong Su, Zhanda Zhu, Sihang Liu, and Gennady Pekhimenko. 2025. Aegis: Taxonomy and Optimizations for Overcoming Agent-Environment Failures in LLM Agents. arXiv:2508.19504 [cs.MA] https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.19504 - · arXiv
  54. [61][61] Renan Souza, Rafael Ferreira da Silva, et al. 2024. Workflow Provenance in the Computing Continuum for Responsible, Trustworthy, and Energy-Efficient AI. In Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE International Conference on Cluster Computing (CLUSTER) . IEEE. -
  55. [62][62] Renan Souza, Amal Gueroudji, Stephen DeWitt, Daniel Rosendo, Tirthankar Ghosal, Robert Ross, Prasanna Balaprakash, and Rafael Ferreira da Silva. 2025. PROV-AGENT: Unified Provenance for Tracking AI Agent Interactions in Agentic Workflows. In 2025 IEEE 21st International Conference on e-Science (e-Science) . IEEE. -
  56. [63][63] Yoo Yeon Sung, Hannah Kim, and Dan Zhang. 2025. VeriLA: A Human-Centered Evaluation Framework for Interpretable Verification of LLM Agent Failures. arXiv:2503.12651 [cs.AI] https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.12651 - · arXiv
  57. [64][64] Nathan J Szymanski, Bernardus Rendy, Yuxing Fei, Rishi E Kumar, Tanjin He, David Milsted, Matthew J McDermott, Max Gallant, Ekin Dogus Cubuk, Amil Merchant, et al. 2023. An autonomous laboratory for the accelerated synthesis of novel materials. Nature 624, 7990 (2023), 86-91. doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06734-w - · DOI · Paper page
  58. [65][65] SpecMAS Team. 2025. SpecMAS: A Multi-Agent System for Self-Verifying System Generation via Formal Model Checking. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) . -
  59. [66][66] Pranav Narayanan Venkit, Philippe Laban, Yilun Zhou, Kung-Hsiang Huang, Yixin Mao, and Chien-Sheng Wu. 2026. DeepTRACE: Auditing Deep Research AI Systems for Tracking Reliability Across Citations and Evidence. In The Fourteenth International Conference on Learning Representations . https://openreview.net/for um?id=QkaeTea16Y -
  60. [67][67] Andrew Wang, Sophia Hager, Adi Asija, Daniel Khashabi, and Nicholas Andrews. 2025. Hell or High Water: Evaluating Agentic Recovery from External Failures. In Second Conference on Language Modeling . https://openreview.net/forum?id= Zk224WPT42 -
  61. [68][68] Lei Wang, Chen Ma, Xueyang Feng, Zeyu Zhang, Hao Yang, Jingsen Zhang, Zhiyuan Chen, Jiakai Tang, Xu Chen, Yankai Lin, et al. 2024. A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.11432 (2024). - · arXiv
  62. [69][69] Yuxia Wang, Bela GIpp, and G Spanakis. 2024. Factcheck-GPT: End-to-End Fact-Checking with Large Language Models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.09657 (2024). , , - · arXiv
  63. [70][70] Jason Wei, Yi Tay, Rishi Bommasani, Colin Raffel, Barret Zoph, Sebastian Borgeaud, Dani Yogatama, Maarten Bosma, Denny Zhou, Donald Metzler, et al. 2022. Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models. Transactions on Machine Learning Research (2022). https://openreview.net/forum?id=yzkSU5zdwD -
  64. [71][71] Robert Wolfe, Isaac Slaughter, Bin Han, Bingbing Wen, Yiwei Yang, Lucas Rosenblatt, Bernease Herman, Eva Brown, Zening Qu, Nic Weber, and Bill Howe. 2024. Laboratory-Scale AI: Open-Weight Models are Competitive with ChatGPT Even in Low-Resource Settings. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.16820 (2024). https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.16820 - · arXiv
  65. [72][72] Boming Xia, Qinghua Lu, Liming Zhu, Zhenchang Xing, Dehai Zhao, and Hao Zhang. 2024. Evaluation-Driven Development and Operations of LLM Agents: A Process Model and Reference Architecture. In arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.13768 . - · arXiv
  66. [73][73] Lianmin Zheng, Wei-Lin Chiang, Ying Sheng, Siyuan Zhuang, Zhanghao Wu, Yonghao Zhuang, Zi Lin, Zhuohan Li, Dacheng Li, Eric P Xing, et al. 2024. Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2024). -
  67. [74][74] Qinhao Zhou, Zihan Zhang, Xiang Xiang, Ke Wang, Yuchuan Wu, and Yongbin Li. 2024. Enhancing the General Agent Capabilities of Low-Parameter LLMs through Tuning and Multi-Branch Reasoning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.19962 (2024). https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.19962 - · arXiv
  68. [75][75] Jialiang Zhu, Gongrui Zhang, Xiaolong Ma, Lin Xu, Miaosen Zhang, Ruiqi Yang, Song Wang, Kai Qiu, Zhirong Wu, Qi Dai, Ruichun Ma, Bei Liu, Yifan Yang, Chong Luo, Zhengyuan Yang, Linjie Li, Lijuan Wang, Weizhu Chen, Xin Geng, and Baining Guo. 2025. RE-TRAC: REcursive TRAjectory Compression for Deep Search Agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.02486 (2025). - · arXiv
  69. [76][76] Minjun Zhu, Qiujie Xie, Yixuan Weng, Jian Wu, Zhen Lin, Linyi Yang, and Yue Zhang. 2025. AI Scientists Fail Without Strong Implementation Capability. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.01372 (2025). · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rasheed, R. A., Banerjee, S., Mukherjee, A., & Hazra, R.
ORCID
Hazra, Rima
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2026
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2602.13855
arXiv
2602.13855
OpenAlex
W7129190838
Cited by
1
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Scientific Computing and Data Management
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
Keywords
deep research agents, semantic provenance, provenance graphs, evidence synthesis

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