Build a small evidence record and decide whether a claim is supported, limited, or unresolved.
Check the claim, not the confidence
Begin by splitting an answer into claims that could be checked separately. Numbers, dates, quotations, comparisons, and causal statements deserve particular attention. Choose the checks according to the consequence of being wrong.
Ask what evidence would actually establish each claim. A product feature needs current product documentation. A quotation needs the original passage. A research finding needs the study and its limitations. A search snippet is a route to a source, not a substitute for reading it.
Use a three-part evidence check
- Existence: does the document exist, and do title, author, date, and identifier match?
- Support: does the relevant passage actually support the precise claim?
- Scope: does the source concern the same population, time period, and conditions?
Crossref provides scholarly metadata that can help identify a work and check citation details. A matching metadata record does not establish that the paper supports a claim. Read the source itself.
Worked example: an exaggerated result
Fictional scenario. An AI answer says a writing assistant “cuts work time in half for every team.” The cited report describes a small pilot with volunteers, one task type, and a reduction in drafting time. It does not measure review time or every team.
The citation exists, but the conclusion is too broad. A defensible summary names the pilot, the measured task, and the limits. If you cannot access the underlying report, mark the claim unresolved instead of filling the gap with a guess.
Keep a useful evidence record
For each important claim, record the exact wording, source URL, relevant passage or page, access date, and your verdict. Use three simple verdicts: supported within stated limits, contradicted, or unresolved.
Two pages repeating the same press release are not two independent confirmations. Follow the chain back to the original evidence. Recheck time-sensitive statements when you use them again.
Separate the reference verdict from the claim verdict
A matching reference establishes identity only to the extent checked. A real source can accompany an unsupported claim, so record the two judgments separately.
Limited access may prevent a claim-support decision even when metadata matches. Record exactly which abstract, passage, or section you inspected.
A failed search does not establish fabrication by itself. Check plausible citation errors and access limits before choosing a stronger conclusion.
Choose a responsible final action
A supported claim can be used within the inspected source’s limits. Preserve qualifications that materially change the meaning.
A contradicted claim needs correction or removal. Keep the original wording beside the revision so another reader can follow the decision.
An unresolved claim needs a visible limitation or another inspected source. If the claim is essential, stop the dependent publication step until the gap is resolved.
Try it yourself
Take a short AI-generated answer about a topic you know. Select three factual claims and create an evidence record for each. Rewrite the answer so that its certainty matches the available evidence.
Success looks like: another reader can repeat your checks without asking you what you meant. At least one limitation or unresolved point is stated explicitly when the evidence requires it.
What to carry forward
Build a small evidence record and decide whether a claim is supported, limited, or unresolved.
Show your reasoning with the exercise above. Keep the evidence, the decision, and the remaining uncertainty together.