Evidence (7560 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
9875 claims
Filter claims →
Productivity
8807 claims
Filter claims →
Governance
7870 claims
Filter claims →
Human-AI Collaboration
7560 claims
Filtered →
Org Design
4892 claims
Filter claims →
Innovation
4781 claims
Filter claims →
Labor Markets
4004 claims
Filter claims →
Skills & Training
3308 claims
Filter claims →
Inequality
2332 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 | 870 | 233 | 116 | 1066 | 2363 |
| Governance & Regulation | 976 | 451 | 218 | 133 | 1809 |
| Organizational Efficiency | 949 | 224 | 144 | 88 | 1416 |
| Technology Adoption Rate | 764 | 287 | 141 | 122 | 1325 |
| Research Productivity | 501 | 152 | 74 | 362 | 1101 |
| Output Quality | 542 | 216 | 69 | 69 | 896 |
| Decision Quality | 387 | 198 | 94 | 54 | 740 |
| Firm Productivity | 513 | 67 | 101 | 27 | 714 |
| AI Safety & Ethics | 249 | 303 | 73 | 36 | 667 |
| Market Structure | 190 | 192 | 134 | 27 | 548 |
| Task Allocation | 243 | 77 | 91 | 36 | 452 |
| Innovation Output | 291 | 33 | 55 | 20 | 401 |
| Skill Acquisition | 206 | 72 | 65 | 21 | 364 |
| Employment Level | 133 | 63 | 115 | 22 | 335 |
| Fiscal & Macroeconomic | 153 | 79 | 52 | 32 | 323 |
| Task Completion Time | 206 | 37 | 12 | 15 | 272 |
| Firm Revenue | 179 | 52 | 29 | 5 | 266 |
| Consumer Welfare | 130 | 76 | 47 | 13 | 266 |
| Inequality Measures | 48 | 137 | 51 | 6 | 242 |
| Worker Satisfaction | 101 | 81 | 25 | 13 | 220 |
| Error Rate | 84 | 110 | 11 | 5 | 210 |
| Wages & Compensation | 98 | 47 | 30 | 10 | 185 |
| Regulatory Compliance | 88 | 73 | 17 | 7 | 185 |
| Automation Exposure | 66 | 64 | 33 | 16 | 182 |
| Team Performance | 105 | 29 | 30 | 11 | 176 |
| Training Effectiveness | 109 | 22 | 14 | 21 | 168 |
| Developer Productivity | 114 | 21 | 14 | 8 | 158 |
| Job Displacement | 12 | 90 | 24 | 1 | 127 |
| Hiring & Recruitment | 57 | 9 | 9 | 5 | 80 |
| Skill Obsolescence | 6 | 56 | 9 | 1 | 72 |
| Social Protection | 43 | 17 | 8 | 2 | 70 |
| Creative Output | 35 | 21 | 9 | 4 | 70 |
| Labor Share of Income | 18 | 21 | 17 | 1 | 57 |
| Worker Turnover | 15 | 16 | — | 4 | 35 |
| Industry | — | — | — | 1 | 1 |
Human Ai Collab
Remove filter
The research challenges for this vision stem from a broader flexibility–robustness tension that requires moving beyond the on-the-fly paradigm to navigate effectively.
Analytical claim in paper identifying a design trade-off (flexibility vs. robustness) as the core challenge motivating the proposed shift; no empirical demonstration provided.
Current LLM agents are proficient at calling isolated APIs but struggle with the "last mile" of commercial software automation.
Authors' comparative characterization based on literature context and their benchmark motivation; stated in introduction rather than a quantified experiment in the excerpt.
Fine-tuning and reinforcement learning improve in-distribution performance, but generalization to unseen part families remains limited.
Experiments reported in the paper/abstract applying fine-tuning and reinforcement learning to models evaluated on BenchCAD; observed improvements on in-distribution data and limited generalization to unseen families.
Across 10+ frontier models, current systems often recover coarse outer geometry but fail to produce faithful parametric CAD programs.
Empirical evaluation reported in the paper/abstract across more than ten contemporary multimodal / large language models on the BenchCAD dataset; observed pattern that coarse outer geometry is often recovered while faithful parametric program synthesis fails.
The study reframes VTech adoption as legitimacy-seeking rather than efficiency-driven.
Thematic analysis using Rogers' diffusion of innovations and institutional theory, resulting in the institutionally mediated diffusion of innovations (IDOI) framework which emphasizes legitimacy concerns.
Practitioners stress that human judgement remains indispensable, positioning technology as an aid rather than a replacement.
Interview responses from valuers and firm leaders emphasizing the continued role of human judgement; thematic analysis framed by the IDOI model.
Screening and algorithmic targeting can act as complements or substitutes; the paper empirically characterizes when they do so.
Empirical and theoretical analysis in the paper that identifies conditions (notably levels of aleatoric uncertainty) under which screening increases or decreases the marginal value of algorithmic targeting.
Public discussion of generative AI in accounting swings between the allure of full automation and job-displacement anxiety, yet the most immediate reality in organizations is human + AI work.
Paper's background/intro synthesizing recent research and practitioner commentary (2023–2025); conceptual observation rather than empirical test.
Integrating Generative AI into agile development processes has potential benefits and limitations for planning efficiency.
High-level conclusion based on the controlled experiment with GitLab Duo and qualitative participant feedback discussed in the paper.
The novel governance problem is not that AI creates new failure modes, but that AI changes their incidence, observability, and persuasive force enough to require different governance responses.
Normative/analytic claim in the paper; argumentation rather than empirical evidence.
The finding that recurrence and neighborhood statistics are stronger predictors than complaint volume has direct implications for complaint routing given the demographic correlates of those features.
Interpretive implication drawn by the authors from the SHAP results; presented as a logical consequence rather than a separately tested empirical result in the excerpt.
The rapid emergence of agentic AI tools raises new questions that the political science discipline must address.
Epilogue of the report raises agentic AI tools as a rapidly emerging phenomenon and lists questions for the discipline; based on expert judgment and forward-looking analysis rather than empirical measurement in the introduction/epilogue.
AI will affect political science research and teaching.
Report introduction explicitly notes the report investigates implications for political science research and teaching; based on the task force's review and analysis rather than a quantitative study.
AI will affect public opinion and the information ecosystem.
Introductory chapter enumerates public opinion and the information ecosystem as report topics; based on conceptual synthesis and literature review.
AI will affect the labor market.
Report introduction identifies the labor market as an area the task force examines; presented as a conceptual claim without primary-sample estimates in the introduction.
AI will affect international relations.
Introductory chapter lists international relations as a topic the report investigates; claim arises from conceptual analysis and synthesis by task force authors.
AI will affect national security.
Report introduction stating a section addressing national security implications; based on expert assessment and literature review rather than a specific empirical sample.
AI will affect public administration.
Report introduction describing a section focused on how AI will affect public administration; based on expert synthesis rather than reported empirical study.
AI will affect democracy (i.e., democratic processes and institutions).
Report introduction listing a section of the report devoted to democracy and AI; conceptual argumentation rather than reported empirical tests.
AI has the potential to reshape politics and political science, similar to how it is transforming other social phenomena and academic fields.
Introductory chapter of the APSA Presidential Task Force report; conceptual framing and literature synthesis by the task force authors (no primary empirical sample reported).
The trajectory of AI systems is shaped not only by model design, but by the dynamics of human-AI co-evolution.
Conclusion drawn from the minimal model, analytical regimes, and simulation experiments presented in the paper.
Our analysis identifies three regimes: co-evolutionary enhancement, fragile equilibrium, and degenerative convergence.
Model analysis (categorization of dynamical behaviors) presented in the paper.
This feedback can give rise to distinct dynamical regimes.
Analytical results derived from the minimal dynamical model described in the paper.
We introduce a minimal model with three variables -- human cognition, data quality, and model capability.
Model development in the paper (mathematical/minimal dynamical model); presented as a constructed model rather than empirical measurement.
Humans and language models form a coupled dynamical system linked by a feedback loop of usage, generation, and retraining.
Conceptual framing and theoretical proposal in the paper; model formulation rather than empirical data.
Prior work has studied cognitive offloading in humans and model collapse in recursive training, but these effects are typically considered in isolation.
Literature review / related-work statement in paper; references to prior research (qualitative, no sample size stated).
Large language models (LLMs) are reshaping how knowledge is produced, with increasing reliance on AI systems for generation, summarization, and reasoning.
Background/literature observation cited in paper (qualitative claim), no empirical sample or quantified data reported in text provided.
Institutional expertise (such as that created or possessed by universities and corporations) is viewed as in need of liberation or reform so it can be incorporated into the latest artificial intelligence systems.
Analysis of public communications from five annotation organizations and their CEOs indicating calls or framing that institutional knowledge should be freed/restructured to be integrated into AI systems.
Demand for expert-annotated data on the part of leading AI labs has created an expert gig economy with the potential to reshape white collar work and society's understanding of expertise.
Qualitative analysis of public communications (social media feeds and podcast appearances) from five industry data annotation organizations and their CEOs; sample of five organizations and their public-facing leaders.
Human anchors build trust through a broadly effective relational pathway (perceived intimacy), while AI anchors' functional advantage converts into trust only under specific motivational conditions (high utilitarian motivation).
Interpretation of moderated mediation results from randomized experiment (N = 439) showing intimacy-mediated trust for human anchors and responsiveness-mediated trust for AI anchors only under high utilitarian motivation.
Consumer trust in live-streaming commerce is a conditional, motivation-dependent process rather than a uniform preference for either anchor type.
Synthesis of experimental results showing differential mediation/moderation patterns by hedonic and utilitarian motivation in sample N = 439 (moderated mediation analyses).
Perceived responsiveness became a significant pathway favoring AI anchors only when utilitarian motivation was high; at low utilitarian motivation, this pathway reversed direction.
Conditional (moderated) mediation analyses from the experiment (N = 439) including utilitarian motivation as moderator; reported that responsiveness→trust path favored AI anchors at high utilitarian motivation and reversed at low utilitarian motivation.
Across studies, causal modeling reveals that cognitive alignment systematically drives attentional coordination in successful collaboration, while mismatches between effort and attention characterize unproductive regulation.
Synthesis of causal inference results from the three studies using time-series measures (JME, JVA) and episode-based analyses across the pooled dataset (182 dyads total).
Three sovereignty boundaries determine whether AI remains an amplifier within a human-governed system or becomes a de facto control center: irreversible decision authority, physical resource mobilization authority, and self-expansion authority.
Conceptual model element in the paper; identification and definition of three 'sovereignty boundaries' used to analyze governance risks.
The paper formalizes this claim through decision-energy density: the rate-weighted capacity of a node to generate, evaluate, select, and execute consequential decisions.
Formal/modeling claim — the paper defines and uses a formal metric called 'decision-energy density' within its theoretical framework.
AI capabilities can be copied, invoked, embedded in workflows, and scaled across institutions at low marginal cost.
Descriptive claim about AI technology characteristics made in the paper; supported by conceptual argument and examples rather than quantified empirical data.
Earlier high-risk technologies were slowed by capital intensity, physical bottlenecks, organizational inertia, and specialized supply chains.
Historical/analytic claim presented as background context in the paper; supported by conceptual comparison rather than a specific empirical study.
Scientific institutions, distinctively, manufacture legitimate judgment, so they do not merely adapt to AI; they compete with it for the same functional role.
Conceptual/theoretical assertion in the paper describing institutional roles; no empirical data or sample size provided in the excerpt.
No single governance setting dominates across all contexts; moderate governance becomes increasingly competitive as the learner accumulates experience within the governed action space.
Empirical finding reported from experiments with the contextual-bandit learner operating under different governance constraints and learning over time; comparative performance over learning horizon described in the paper. Sample size / trial counts not provided in the excerpt.
This workload-buffering effect (governance improving performance while reducing fatigue) contradicts the usual framing of governance as pure overhead.
Interpretation and comparison of empirical manufacturing results against prior framing in literature (qualitative claim within the paper). No sample size provided.
Governance is not a binary switch but a tunable design variable: tighter constraints predictably convert autonomous AI assignments into supervised collaborations, with domain-specific costs and benefits.
Empirical finding reported from experiments using the HAAS benchmark across the two domains (software engineering and manufacturing); qualitative and/or quantitative comparisons of allocations under varying governance constraints. Paper does not state sample size in the provided text.
AI learns indiscriminately from implicit knowledge, acquiring both beneficial patterns and harmful biases.
Asserted in the paper as a conceptual point about training data and learned patterns; no empirical evaluation or quantified bias measures provided.
Whether the futures these configurations help create remain governable and worth inhabiting will depend on leaders who can see, early enough, where and how consequential decisions are actually being shaped.
Normative/prognostic claim linking future governability to leaders' detection capabilities (conceptual; no empirical test provided in the excerpt).
These configurations will shape how power, responsibility, and trust are distributed in organizational life.
Theoretical/prognostic claim in the paper linking configurations to distribution of power, responsibility, and trust (no empirical quantification in the excerpt).
Fluent users' failures occur alongside greater success on complex tasks.
Combined analysis of task complexity, success outcomes, and failure incidence in the 27K transcripts showing that fluent users both attempt and have greater success on complex tasks even while experiencing more failures.
Fluent users adopt a fundamentally different interactional mode: they iterate collaboratively with the AI, refining goals and critically assessing outputs, whereas novices take a passive stance.
Qualitative and quantitative analysis of the same 27,000 annotated WildChat transcripts, with annotations describing interactional mode and user behavior (iteration, goal refinement, critical assessment vs. passivity).
Augmentation is bounded rather than linear (i.e., human-AI augmentation shows diminishing or negative returns past a balanced zone).
Synthesis of interview themes across 34 cases producing the bounded-augmentation / curvilinear conceptualization.
Mediators such as trust, cohesion and accountability are reshaped when AI-generated contributions enter collaboration.
Thematic evidence from interviews indicating changes in trust, cohesion and accountability dynamics associated with the introduction of AI outputs into team collaboration.
Social (leadership engagement, trust, ownership, mediation and alignment) and technical (automation, creation, reliability, distraction and integration) subsystems combine to enable or erode team effectiveness, summarized in an e-leadership–AI orientation matrix.
Analytic synthesis from thematic coding (Gioia-informed) of interview data producing a conceptual matrix mapping social and technical factors to outcomes.
Analysis identifies a curvilinear pattern of bounded augmentation, where effectiveness peaks in a zone of balanced use but declines under under-use and over-reliance.
Thematic (Gioia-informed) analysis of 34 semi-structured interviews with project managers across five UK industries; pattern emerges from cross-case coding and synthesis.