Evidence (8974 claims)
Search and filter individual claims pulled from the papers. Looking for a specific finding ("what's the effect on wages?"), you're in the right place. Want to compare whole outcome categories against each other instead? Use the Evidence Explorer.
The board below groups claims two ways: by broad theme (nine paper-level topics) and by outcome category (the 34 claim-level outcomes that the Explorer and Syntheses also use).
Browse by theme
Nine broad, paper-level topics. Click one to filter the claims below.
Adoption
10085 claims
Filter claims →
Productivity
8974 claims
Filtered →
Governance
8062 claims
Filter claims →
Human-AI Collaboration
7749 claims
Filter claims →
Org Design
5057 claims
Filter claims →
Innovation
4896 claims
Filter claims →
Labor Markets
4088 claims
Filter claims →
Skills & Training
3372 claims
Filter claims →
Inequality
2377 claims
Filter claims →
Claims by outcome category
Counts by direction of finding. These are the same 34 outcome categories the Explorer compares and the Syntheses are written for. A linked row has a published synthesis.
| Outcome | Positive | Negative | Mixed | Null | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | 882 | 244 | 117 | 1097 | 2424 |
| Governance & Regulation | 1010 | 469 | 229 | 135 | 1875 |
| Organizational Efficiency | 977 | 235 | 149 | 90 | 1462 |
| Technology Adoption Rate | 781 | 299 | 143 | 128 | 1362 |
| Research Productivity | 506 | 155 | 74 | 363 | 1110 |
| Output Quality | 555 | 219 | 71 | 70 | 915 |
| Decision Quality | 395 | 200 | 95 | 54 | 751 |
| Firm Productivity | 523 | 67 | 101 | 27 | 724 |
| AI Safety & Ethics | 262 | 309 | 75 | 36 | 688 |
| Market Structure | 195 | 201 | 135 | 30 | 566 |
| Task Allocation | 248 | 77 | 96 | 38 | 464 |
| Innovation Output | 300 | 34 | 55 | 20 | 411 |
| Skill Acquisition | 207 | 75 | 65 | 21 | 368 |
| Employment Level | 138 | 67 | 119 | 24 | 350 |
| Fiscal & Macroeconomic | 156 | 80 | 53 | 33 | 329 |
| Task Completion Time | 211 | 38 | 13 | 16 | 280 |
| Firm Revenue | 183 | 52 | 29 | 5 | 270 |
| Consumer Welfare | 131 | 77 | 48 | 13 | 269 |
| Inequality Measures | 50 | 141 | 54 | 9 | 254 |
| Worker Satisfaction | 104 | 85 | 25 | 13 | 227 |
| Error Rate | 87 | 112 | 11 | 5 | 215 |
| Automation Exposure | 69 | 69 | 37 | 20 | 198 |
| Wages & Compensation | 102 | 49 | 31 | 11 | 193 |
| Team Performance | 115 | 30 | 30 | 11 | 187 |
| Regulatory Compliance | 88 | 74 | 17 | 7 | 186 |
| Training Effectiveness | 109 | 22 | 14 | 21 | 168 |
| Developer Productivity | 116 | 21 | 15 | 8 | 161 |
| Job Displacement | 12 | 92 | 26 | 1 | 131 |
| Hiring & Recruitment | 57 | 12 | 9 | 5 | 83 |
| Skill Obsolescence | 6 | 59 | 10 | 2 | 77 |
| Social Protection | 43 | 17 | 8 | 2 | 70 |
| Creative Output | 35 | 21 | 9 | 4 | 70 |
| Labor Share of Income | 18 | 23 | 17 | 1 | 59 |
| Worker Turnover | 15 | 16 | — | 4 | 35 |
| Industry | — | — | — | 1 | 1 |
Productivity
Remove filter
AI application significantly reduces the incidence of executive misconduct.
Empirical analysis on Chinese A-share listed firms (2010–2023) using the constructed firm-level AI application index; reported significant negative association between AI application and whether a firm experiences executive misconduct (incidence).
Using Chinese A-share firms listed in Shanghai and Shenzhen from 2010 to 2023, we construct a firm-level AI application index and examine whether and how AI adoption mitigates executive misconduct.
Authors report building a firm-level AI application index and applying it to Chinese A-share listed firms (Shanghai and Shenzhen) over 2010–2023 to study links between AI adoption and executive misconduct (method: panel analysis using firm-year observations).
Adoption of AI can reduce procurement costs by 15.7%.
Field survey data (n=326) and regression analysis; authors report a 15.7% reduction in procurement costs associated with AI adoption.
Adoption of AI can shorten the procurement decision-making cycle by 21.3%.
Field survey data (n=326) analyzed (authors report a 21.3% reduction in procurement decision-making cycle associated with AI adoption); method described as questionnaire surveys and multiple linear regression.
Supplier AI capability positively drives AI adoption in procurement (β = 0.28, p < 0.01).
Same questionnaire survey (n=326) and multiple linear regression analysis; reported coefficient β=0.28 with p<0.01.
Perceived usefulness positively drives AI adoption in procurement (β = 0.32, p < 0.01).
Questionnaire survey of 326 procurement managers/supply chain managers in SMEs (Yangtze River Delta and Pearl River Delta) analyzed using multiple linear regression; reported coefficient β=0.32 with p<0.01.
The paper provides recommendations for designing strategic indicators to drive adoption, foster innovation, and objectively assess whether digital tools are delivering top-line impact.
Descriptive claim about the content of the perspective article (the authors state they provide these recommendations); the excerpt itself summarizes this contribution.
The shift from expert-driven computer-aided drug design (CADD) to semiautonomous AI necessitates a new framework of impact-oriented KPIs.
Stated by the EFMC2 community authors as a normative conclusion in the perspective piece; based on the characterisation of a technological shift rather than on presented empirical tests in the excerpt.
Harnessing AI's potential requires moving beyond measuring technical model performance (e.g., predictive accuracy) to measuring strategic impact.
Authors argue this as a conceptual requirement for realizing AI's benefits in R&D; presented as a recommendation rather than supported by quantified empirical evidence in the excerpt.
Preliminary analyses suggest that 'AI-native' companies may be outpacing traditional peers.
Explicitly stated in the paper as based on preliminary analyses; the excerpt provides no details on the analyses, metrics, or sample sizes.
The broad introduction of AI into the R&D landscape over the last years holds the promise to lift pharmaceutical R&D out of its productivity problem.
Framed as an expectation/promise in the paper; based on recent broad adoption trends of AI in R&D (no specific empirical evaluation or sample size reported in the excerpt).
The visualization preserved human control.
Reported result from the within-subjects experiment (N=32) indicating that using the visualization did not reduce human control/agency in the negotiation process.
In the same within-subjects experiment (N=32), the visualization improved efficiency.
Within-subjects experiment (N=32) reported in the paper; the authors state the visualization improved efficiency (likely measured as time, number of rounds, or steps to reach agreement).
In a within-subjects experiment (N=32), the uncertainty-based visualization improved human outcomes.
Within-subjects user experiment reported in the paper with N=32 participants comparing performance with and without the visualization.
We introduce a novel uncertainty-based visualization driven by Bayesian estimation of agreement probability that shows how the space of mutually acceptable agreements narrows as negotiation progresses, helping users identify promising options.
Design and implementation of a visualization technique described in the paper; the visualization is driven by Bayesian estimation of agreement probability and is presented as a tool to reveal the shrinking feasible agreement space during negotiation.
Generative AI can autonomously produce novel content, including text, images, models, and scenarios.
General technical/descriptive claim stated in the paper's background/introduction; not an empirically tested claim within the provided excerpt.
Generative AI facilitates the synthesis of structured and unstructured information from diverse sources, enabling managers to explore multiple decision pathways, identify potential risks, and optimize strategic choices.
Descriptive/functional claim made in the paper's introduction and conceptual framing; the empirical component (survey + SEM) is described generally but no specific measures or effect sizes for information synthesis or these capabilities are provided in the excerpt.
Generative AI augments human creativity by producing innovative solutions and scenario-planning alternatives that may not emerge through conventional analytical approaches.
Stated in the conceptual/argumentative portion of the paper; may be supported by survey items but no explicit empirical measure or effect size for creativity is provided in the provided text.
Decision quality and strategic agility positively influence organizational performance.
Reported SEM results from the paper linking the constructs (decision quality and strategic agility) to organizational performance using survey data from senior managers and AI adoption specialists; method = SmartPLS.
Generative AI adoption significantly enhances strategic agility.
Same empirical source as above: survey of senior managers/decision-makers/AI adoption specialists; tested via Structural Equation Modeling (SmartPLS) as reported in the paper.
Generative AI adoption significantly enhances decision quality.
Empirical analysis reported in the paper: survey data collected from senior managers, decision-makers, and AI adoption specialists across multiple industries; relationships assessed using Structural Equation Modeling (SmartPLS). No numeric sample size or effect estimate reported in the provided text.
Human-like presentations increased perceived usefulness and agency in certain tasks.
Experimental manipulation of the human-likeness of AI presentation in the study's three tasks; the abstract reports increased perceived usefulness and agency for human-like presentations in some tasks. No sample sizes, task specifics, or effect magnitudes reported in abstract.
A single dissent within a panel reduced pressure to conform.
Experimental manipulation of within-panel consensus (introducing a single dissent) in the study's three tasks; abstract reports that a single dissent lowered conformity pressure. No numerical data provided in abstract.
Accuracy improved for small panels relative to a single AI.
Reported experimental result from the paper's study: participants completed three tasks and received advice from AI panels; panel size was manipulated (small panels vs single AI). The abstract states this accuracy improvement for small panels. (Sample size and exact tasks not reported in abstract.)
Policy should address not only the aftermath of AI labor displacement but also the competitive incentives that drive it.
Normative implication drawn from the model's findings; recommendation in the paper's conclusion based on theoretical results.
Only a Pigouvian automation tax can eliminate the excess automation in the model.
Theoretical welfare analysis demonstrating that a properly set Pigouvian tax that internalizes the demand externality restores the socially optimal level of automation in the model; analytical result, no empirical sample.
The paper proposes a dual-nudge governance architecture leveraging the DHDE to redistribute cross-prefectural flows and reduce economic leakage.
Policy/design proposal presented by the authors as an outcome of the DHDE adaptation and analysis (conceptual/proposed intervention).
The AI-driven decision support system achieves out-of-sample predictive performance of 68% (R^2 = 0.683).
Model performance metric reported in the paper (out-of-sample R^2 value); presumably from held-out validation or cross-validation on the datasets.
The AI-driven decision support system achieves in-sample explanatory power of 81% (R^2 = 0.810).
Model performance metric reported in the paper (in-sample R^2 value); derived from applying the DSS to the supplied datasets.
In production, the system received high satisfaction from both domain experts and developers, with all participants reporting full satisfaction with communication efficiency.
Post-deployment user feedback / satisfaction reports mentioned in paper (no numeric participant count provided).
The automated workflow saved an estimated 979 engineering hours.
Aggregate time-savings estimate reported in paper (derived from per-API time reduction × number of APIs).
The automated workflow reduces per-API development time from approximately 5 hours to under 7 minutes.
Time-per-API comparison reported in paper based on evaluation on spapi (comparison of manual vs automated per-API time).
The automated workflow achieves 93.7% F1 score.
Empirical evaluation on spapi (F1 reported); presumably computed over the evaluated API items/endpoints.
We address this gap through a graph-based workflow optimization approach that progressively replaces manual coordination with LLM-powered services, enabling incremental adoption without disrupting established practices.
Description of proposed method (graph-based workflow + LLM-powered services) and claim of design enabling incremental adoption; supported by subsequent case evaluation.
Organizational size moderates the adoption–efficiency relationship such that larger firms realize proportionally greater efficiency gains from AI adoption.
Reported moderation effect in the PLS-PM analysis testing organizational size as a moderator of the relationship between AI adoption and recruitment efficiency metrics across sampled organizations.
Procedural fairness perceptions positively predict employee experience outcomes, including organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and employer trust.
PLS-PM paths from procedural fairness perceptions to employee experience measures (organizational commitment, job satisfaction, employer trust) using survey data from HR professionals' reports.
Algorithmic transparency is a strong predictor of procedural fairness perceptions.
PLS-PM results linking measured algorithmic transparency to procedural fairness perceptions in the survey data (n=523 respondents).
AI adoption is positively associated with improvements in quality-of-hire.
PLS-PM association between AI adoption and reported quality-of-hire improvement from HR respondents across sampled organizations.
AI adoption is positively associated with reductions in cost-per-hire.
PLS-PM association between AI adoption and cost-per-hire reduction reported in the survey (firm-level outcomes across sampled organizations).
AI adoption is positively associated with reductions in time-to-hire (recruitment time).
PLS-PM association between AI adoption and recruitment efficiency metrics reported in the survey (firm-level outcomes across sampled organizations).
Top management support and HR digital readiness are both positively associated with organizational AI adoption, with top management support demonstrating greater explanatory power.
PLS-PM tests of organizational antecedents predicting organizational AI adoption using survey responses aggregated to organization level (184 organizations referenced).
Perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use significantly predict AI adoption intention, with perceived usefulness exhibiting a stronger effect.
PLS-PM results on relationships between TAM constructs (perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use) and adoption intention using survey data (n=523).
A large portion of the interactive activities' AI market value (26%) involves transferring information.
Descriptive subcategory statistic: within interactive activities, authors report 26% of market value pertains to information transfer tasks.
Interactive activities (which include both information-based and physical activities) account for 48% of AI market value.
Descriptive aggregate: authors define an 'interactive' category spanning info and physical activities and report it holds 48% of AI market value.
A substantial portion of AI market value (36%) is used in activities that involve creating information.
Descriptive aggregate: subcategory within information-based activities—authors report 36% of market value allocated to 'creating information'.
Most of the AI market value is used in information-based activities (72%).
Descriptive aggregate: authors categorize activities into information-based vs physical and report that 72% of estimated AI market value maps to information-based activities.
There is a highly uneven distribution of AI market value across activities: the top 1.6% of activities account for over 60% of AI market value.
Descriptive statistical result from mapping estimated AI market values to the ~20K activities; authors report concentration metrics (top 1.6% share >60%).
We use the data about AI software and robotic systems to generate graphical displays of how the estimated units and market values of all worldwide AI systems used today are distributed across the work activities that these systems help perform.
Analytic/mapping procedure: authors combine classifications of software (13,275) and robots (20.8M) with market-value estimates to create visual distributions across activities.
We classify a worldwide tally of 20.8 million robotic systems using the developed work-activity ontology.
Empirical classification/counting: authors report mapping 20.8 million robotic systems worldwide to the activity ontology.
We classify descriptions of 13,275 AI software applications using the developed work-activity ontology.
Empirical classification: authors state they mapped 13,275 AI software application descriptions to the ontology.