methodology
How this library is curated
The same discipline as NOPE's incident and regulation trackers, applied to knowledge artifacts.
What qualifies
An entry must be a durable, citable knowledge artifact — a peer-reviewed paper, preprint, standard, regulator study, government report, lab publication, NGO report, clinical guidance, benchmark, or framework. The test: would a well-run safety team working on human-AI conversation want this document in their shared library, and can we hand a sceptic the primary source?
The scope is deliberately narrow: safety of human-AI conversation and relationships — crisis response, AI companionship and dependency, harmful conversational behavior, minors' safety, and the standards and regulatory research that bind them. General AI-capability benchmarks, x-risk governance, and non-conversational ML fairness are out of scope, however prominent.
News coverage is never an entry: the artifact itself is. Events belong in the incident tracker; legal instruments in the regulation tracker.
Verification
- Every primary source URL is fetched and verified against the artifact itself (title, publisher, date) before inclusion — search-result snippets and press descriptions are not trusted.
- Entries store a Wayback Machine snapshot where obtainable, so citations survive link rot.
- When a preprint is later published, or a standard revised, the old entry is marked superseded and points at its successor — stale versions stay traceable, never silently replaced.
- Automated link-rot and data-quality audits run against the whole library; dates carry stated precision (a month-only publication date is recorded as the 1st and noted, never guessed).
Credibility tiers
Credibility grades the source's epistemic standing, not agreement with its conclusions. A rigorous study with unwelcome findings is still authoritative.
Peer-reviewed venues, standards bodies, regulators, official government publications
Major labs, established NGOs, reputable named-author preprints
Early preprints, credible essays, unreviewed grey literature
Methodology or claims under serious, documented dispute
Corrections
Errors happen; provenance makes them fixable. If an entry misstates a finding, mis-dates a publication, or links the wrong artifact, contact [email protected] — corrections are applied against the primary source, and disputed methodology is marked contested rather than removed.