Verification ledger

The journal’s integrity, audited in one place

Critical AI’s integrity claims are not asserted — they are re-checked, live, on every render. This ledger rolls up every piece: each evidence review’s aggregates re-derived from its codings, each synthesis’s citations re-checked against the reviewed corpus, and each per-paper critique validated against its access-basis severity cap. Machine-readable at /critique/integrity.json.

✓ Journal verifiedAll 62 published pieces pass their integrity checks, with 0 fabricated citations across the journal.

published pieces

0/0

reviews verified

62/62

critiques attested in-app

0/0

synthesis citations resolved

verbatim spans

fabricated citations

Every piece, checked

Type	Piece	Status	What was checked
critique	On the conversational persuasiveness of GPT-4	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Cultural tendencies in generative AI	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	How human–AI feedback loops alter human perceptual, emotional and social judgements	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Comparing the value of perceived human versus AI-generated empathy	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Positioning Political Texts with Large Language Models by Asking and Averaging	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Real-time artificial intelligence sentiment feedback promotes self-moderation in contentious online discussion	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Reducing political polarization through conversations with artificial intelligence	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	AI in education through the learners’ eyes: practical experience, perceptions, and challenges	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Understanding support for AI regulation: A Bayesian network perspective	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Whether and When Could Generative AI Improve College Student Learning Engagement?	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Political ideology shapes support for the use of AI in policy-making	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Artificial intelligence and social media as new arenas of political competition: challenges for democracy	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Mental health in the “era” of artificial intelligence: technostress and the perceived impact on anxiety and depressive disorders—an SEM analysis	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	AI-determined similarity increases likability and trustworthiness of human voices	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Exploring the acceptance of ChatGPT in higher education: a comprehensive quantitative study of university students and faculty	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Investigating the impact of social media images on users' sentiments towards sociopolitical events based on deep artificial intelligence	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	AI meets politics: Examining the effects of different targeting strategies across 15 countries	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Being literate, behaving literate? A mixed-methods approach to adolescents’ algorithm literacy and behavioral strategies on social media	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Beyond disruption and invisibility: Interactional continuity in everyday AI use in India	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	From rule of law to rule of algorithm: Generative Artificial Intelligence's threat to democracy	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Into the black box: Laypeople's folk theories about generative artificial intelligence chatbots	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Making GenAI valuable: Benchmarks, singularities, and the enrichment economy	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	More Versus Better: Artificial Intelligence, Incentives, and the Emerging Crisis in Peer Review	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	The Cybernetic Teammate: A Field Experiment on Generative AI and Teamwork	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	The rise of AI sovereignty: Authoritarian technological imaginaries as a form of reflexive control	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Large Language Models, Small Labor Market Effects	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	AI tutoring outperforms in-class active learning: an RCT introducing a novel research-based design in an authentic educational setting	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Factors influencing the adoption of generative artificial intelligence into classroom teaching by university teachers: An empirical study using SPSS PROCESS macros	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	The (Short-Term) Effects of Large Language Models on Unemployment and Earnings	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Heterogeneous preferences and asymmetric insights for AI use among welfare claimants and non-claimants	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Effect of AI empathy perception on employees' prosocial behavior: mediating role of warmth and moderating role of AI anthropomorphism	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	AI Self-preferencing in Algorithmic Hiring: Empirical Evidence and Insights	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Local US officials' views on the impacts and governance of AI: Evidence from 2022 and 2023 survey waves	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Postgraduate students' perceptions of artificial intelligence integration in research: A cross-sectional study	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Fairness Is More Than Algorithms: Racial Disparities in Time-to-Recidivism	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	When an AI Judges Your Work: The Hidden Costs of Algorithmic Assessment	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Is it harmful or helpful? Examining the causes and consequences of generative AI usage among university students	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Inconsistent advice by ChatGPT influences decision making in various areas	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Student perspectives on the use of generative artificial intelligence technologies in higher education	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Cultural bias and cultural alignment of large language models	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Generative AI enhances individual creativity but reduces the collective diversity of novel content	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Testing theory of mind in large language models and humans	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Algorithmic responsibility in PPC practice: Interpreting black boxes in digital advertising work	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Charismatic machines: On the epistemic power of generative AI within platform convergence	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Crafting computer vision through human eyes: An AI laboratory ethnography	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	From prompt engineering to prompt design: Research strategies for visual generative AI	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Resilience and disempowerment in algorithmic systems	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Working the algorithm: Contextual skills of on-demand gig workers	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Backfiring AI? AI Deployment in Workplace	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	How Costs Influence Preferences for Control in Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI): Human-Guided vs. GenAI-Based Delegated Search	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Artificial intelligence adoption and the demand for managerial expertise	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	When Influencers Delegate Replies: How Social AI Agents Shape User Engagement	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Artificial Collusion: Examining Supracompetitive Pricing by Q-Learning Algorithms	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Generative AI at Work	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (checked sources)
critique	Can ChatGPT Kill User-Generated Q&A Platforms?	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Scaffolding Human–AI Collaboration: A Field Experiment on Behavioral Protocols and Cognitive Reframing	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Generative AI, propaganda, and digital authoritarianism: Comparative insights from six democratically weakened countries	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Made With AI: Consumer Engagement with Social Media Containing AI Disclosures	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	The Impact of AI on Developer Productivity: Evidence from GitHub Copilot	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Refusal as silence: Gendered disparities in Vision-Language Model responses	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	The politics of artificial intelligence alignment: Public reactions to AI moderation in the case of Google’s Gemini	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)
critique	Unraveling Generative AI from a Human Intelligence Perspective: A Battery of Experiments	✓ verified	4 in-app checks pass (spans in app)

Critique calibration

Beyond integrity, the journal measures how close its critiques are to the published human-expert standard. Of 62 real critiques scored against the 68-critique benchmark corpus, 17 are calibrated (mean alignment 0.72, threshold 0.80). Abstract-only critiques score lower by design — the calibration page shows the access-basis gradient. This is a quality signal, not an integrity gate.

Ingestion provenance

The content set is ingested from the AGI Social Scientist by an auto-discovering pipeline: every AGISS review in the outputs is picked up automatically, so the journal tracks the engine without per-review code changes. Last ingested 2026-06-14 — 5 reviews + 1synthesis auto-discovered. Each review’s AGISS report hash anchors its offline re-derivation.

Selection provenance — no cherry-picking

Choosing what to critique is an editorial act, so it is made auditable. Every critiqued paper traces to a monitored top-tier venue or an explicitly-disclosed off-list preprint — there are nosilent (cherry-picked) targets. Each venue’s tier is resolved live from the determination, so a critique never overstates its target’s standing.

35 from monitored venues27 disclosed preprints0 silent off-list9 tiers realigned to the determinationJSON ↗

Verify this yourself

The numbers above are re-derived in this page. But you do not have to trust the page: a standalone verifier (a script, not this site) re-derives the checks below from the source data and, with --live, against external ground truth.

npx tsx scripts/verify-critical-ai.ts --live

What it checks deterministically (offline):

• the zero-fabricated-citations count, corroborated against each critique’s source list (full URL/DOI resolution is the --live step, below);
• every critique’s severity is within its access-basis cap (matching the validator, expert-certified critiques exempt), and the cap table is monotonic;
• the venue determination re-derives (signals = Q1 + top-decile + top-band grade), the integrity gate holds, and every tier is supported;
• every real critique links to a well-formed target DOI;
• every critique’s published content still hashes to the fingerprint committed for its version (no silent substantive edits);
• selection provenance: no silent off-list (cherry-picked) target;
• every headline number in the manifest (all four piece types and the ok flag) re-derives from the raw arrays.

With --live it adds external ground truth: it re-fetches venue metrics from OpenAlex (one per field), resolves every target DOI at doi.org, and compares the deployed /critique/integrity.json field-by-field against the source. The offline checks re-derive from the journal’s published data; the --livechecks confirm it against the outside world — so “independently checkable” is something you can run, not just read.