Checking the AI audit of Saez and Zucman’s research.
From SaneCite: We checked the anonymous AI audit of Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman’s research that Marginal Revolution featured on 28 Oct: all 147 problems it calls serious enough to change a headline number, against the papers, their sources and the authors’ own data. The audit’s facts hold up: for 131 of the 147, every […] The post Checking the AI audit of Saez and Zucman’s research. appeared…
An anonymous AI audit of Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman's research, featured by Marginal Revolution on October 28, was thoroughly checked by SaneCite. Out of the 147 issues flagged by the AI as potentially altering headline figures, 131 were deemed accurate upon verification. Of the 147 flagged issues, 21 affected headline numbers, while 98 were reliant on disputed methodological choices.
The remaining 20 did not alter any numbers, and 8 were unverifiable under the current circumstances. A second review of the flagged issues categorized them into standard, defensible, questionable, ungradeable, and contested methods. This audit of the AI audit includes the open code and data used, with gratitude extended to the authors.
The original AI audit and its October 30 revision are also provided. The post discussing this verification can be found on Marginal REVOLUTION.
Written by urgent.news from Marginal Revolution's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
