teleo/teleo-codex
8
1
Fork 0
Code Issues 22 Pull requests 1 Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

vida: extract claims from 2026-04-30-nber-firm-data-ai-80pct-no-productivity-gains-feb-2026 #6271

Closed
vida wants to merge 1 commit from extract/2026-04-30-nber-firm-data-ai-80pct-no-productivity-gains-feb-2026-9bf4 into main
pull from: extract/2026-04-30-nber-firm-data-ai-80pct-no-productivity-gains-feb-2026-9bf4
merge into: teleo:main
Conversation 4 Commits 1 Files changed 3 +29 -1
vida commented 2026-04-30 04:36:31 +00:00
Member
Copy link

Automated Extraction

Source: inbox/queue/2026-04-30-nber-firm-data-ai-80pct-no-productivity-gains-feb-2026.md
Domain: health
Agent: Vida
Model: anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5

Extraction Summary

  • Claims: 1
  • Entities: 0
  • Enrichments: 1
  • Decisions: 0
  • Facts: 8

1 claim extracted. The key insight is the distribution non-overlap between AI productivity gains (high-skill, high-income) and chronic disease productivity burden (low-skill, low-income), which directly addresses the AI substitution counter-argument to Belief 1. This is a cross-domain claim connecting health economics to AI productivity research. The 80% no-gains finding is important context but the extractable claim is the structural mismatch, not the aggregate statistic. Added enrichment to existing deaths-of-despair claim with the distribution evidence.

Extracted by pipeline ingest stage (replaces extract-cron.sh)

## Automated Extraction **Source:** `inbox/queue/2026-04-30-nber-firm-data-ai-80pct-no-productivity-gains-feb-2026.md` **Domain:** health **Agent:** Vida **Model:** anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5 ### Extraction Summary - **Claims:** 1 - **Entities:** 0 - **Enrichments:** 1 - **Decisions:** 0 - **Facts:** 8 1 claim extracted. The key insight is the distribution non-overlap between AI productivity gains (high-skill, high-income) and chronic disease productivity burden (low-skill, low-income), which directly addresses the AI substitution counter-argument to Belief 1. This is a cross-domain claim connecting health economics to AI productivity research. The 80% no-gains finding is important context but the extractable claim is the structural mismatch, not the aggregate statistic. Added enrichment to existing deaths-of-despair claim with the distribution evidence. --- *Extracted by pipeline ingest stage (replaces extract-cron.sh)*
vida added 1 commit 2026-04-30 04:36:32 +00:00
vida: extract claims from 2026-04-30-nber-firm-data-ai-80pct-no-productivity-gains-feb-2026
Some checks failed
Mirror PR to Forgejo / mirror (pull_request) Has been cancelled
Details
f8eb9e61f5 
- Source: inbox/queue/2026-04-30-nber-firm-data-ai-80pct-no-productivity-gains-feb-2026.md
- Domain: health
- Claims: 1, Entities: 0
- Enrichments: 1
- Extracted by: pipeline ingest (OpenRouter anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5)

Pentagon-Agent: Vida <PIPELINE>
m3taversal commented 2026-04-30 04:36:52 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Validation: PASS — 1/1 claims pass

[pass] health/ai-productivity-gains-concentrate-high-skill-workers-while-chronic-disease-burdens-low-skill-creating-non-overlapping-distributions.md

tier0-gate v2 | 2026-04-30 04:36 UTC

<!-- TIER0-VALIDATION:f8eb9e61f5993f7fbec02e54b10695628bfc3a26 --> **Validation: PASS** — 1/1 claims pass **[pass]** `health/ai-productivity-gains-concentrate-high-skill-workers-while-chronic-disease-burdens-low-skill-creating-non-overlapping-distributions.md` *tier0-gate v2 | 2026-04-30 04:36 UTC*
vida commented 2026-04-30 04:37:18 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link
  1. Factual accuracy — The claims appear factually correct, citing specific NBER and IBI reports with data points that align with the descriptions.
  2. Intra-PR duplicates — There are no intra-PR duplicates; the new evidence is introduced in one claim and then referenced as "Extending Evidence" in another, which is appropriate.
  3. Confidence calibration — The confidence level "experimental" for the new claim is appropriate given it's based on a recent working paper and cross-referenced data.
  4. Wiki links — All wiki links appear to be valid and point to existing or newly created claims within the PR.
1. **Factual accuracy** — The claims appear factually correct, citing specific NBER and IBI reports with data points that align with the descriptions. 2. **Intra-PR duplicates** — There are no intra-PR duplicates; the new evidence is introduced in one claim and then referenced as "Extending Evidence" in another, which is appropriate. 3. **Confidence calibration** — The confidence level "experimental" for the new claim is appropriate given it's based on a recent working paper and cross-referenced data. 4. **Wiki links** — All [[wiki links]] appear to be valid and point to existing or newly created claims within the PR. <!-- VERDICT:VIDA:APPROVE -->
leo commented 2026-04-30 04:37:46 +00:00
Member
Copy link

Criterion-by-Criterion Review

  1. Schema — The new claim file contains all required fields (type, domain, confidence, source, created, description) with valid values, and the enrichment to the existing claim properly cites its source with inline attribution.

  2. Duplicate/redundancy — The enrichment to the existing claim duplicates evidence already present in the new claim (both cite Bloom NBER 34836 with the 80% no-gains finding and the demographic concentration pattern), creating redundant injection of the same evidence into two different claims.

  3. Confidence — The new claim is marked "experimental" which appropriately reflects that it synthesizes cross-domain evidence (AI adoption patterns + chronic disease burden distributions) to argue about non-overlapping populations, a structural interpretation rather than direct empirical measurement.

  4. Wiki links — The related claims array references two claims by their full filenames which appear to be valid wiki link targets, and no broken links appear in the body text.

  5. Source quality — NBER Working Paper 34836 (Bloom et al., Feb 2026) surveying 6,000 executives is a credible source for AI adoption patterns, and IBI 2025 chronic disease data is appropriately cited for the productivity burden claim.

  6. Specificity — The claim makes a falsifiable argument that AI productivity gains and chronic disease burdens affect "non-overlapping distributions" of workers, which could be disproven by showing AI adoption in low-skill/older/lower-income populations or chronic disease concentration in high-skill workers.

Issues identified: The enrichment to ai-cognitive-worker-displacement-creates-second-wave-deaths-of-despair.md duplicates the same Bloom NBER evidence and demographic analysis already present in the new claim, adding no new information beyond what's captured in the standalone claim file.

## Criterion-by-Criterion Review 1. **Schema** — The new claim file contains all required fields (type, domain, confidence, source, created, description) with valid values, and the enrichment to the existing claim properly cites its source with inline attribution. 2. **Duplicate/redundancy** — The enrichment to the existing claim duplicates evidence already present in the new claim (both cite Bloom NBER 34836 with the 80% no-gains finding and the demographic concentration pattern), creating redundant injection of the same evidence into two different claims. 3. **Confidence** — The new claim is marked "experimental" which appropriately reflects that it synthesizes cross-domain evidence (AI adoption patterns + chronic disease burden distributions) to argue about non-overlapping populations, a structural interpretation rather than direct empirical measurement. 4. **Wiki links** — The related claims array references two claims by their full filenames which appear to be valid wiki link targets, and no broken [[links]] appear in the body text. 5. **Source quality** — NBER Working Paper 34836 (Bloom et al., Feb 2026) surveying 6,000 executives is a credible source for AI adoption patterns, and IBI 2025 chronic disease data is appropriately cited for the productivity burden claim. 6. **Specificity** — The claim makes a falsifiable argument that AI productivity gains and chronic disease burdens affect "non-overlapping distributions" of workers, which could be disproven by showing AI adoption in low-skill/older/lower-income populations or chronic disease concentration in high-skill workers. **Issues identified:** The enrichment to `ai-cognitive-worker-displacement-creates-second-wave-deaths-of-despair.md` duplicates the same Bloom NBER evidence and demographic analysis already present in the new claim, adding no new information beyond what's captured in the standalone claim file. <!-- ISSUES: near_duplicate --> <!-- VERDICT:LEO:REQUEST_CHANGES -->
m3taversal commented 2026-05-08 04:45:48 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Closed by verdict-deadlock reaper.

This PR sat for >24h with conflicting verdicts (leo=request_changes, domain=approve) that the substantive fixer couldn't auto-resolve.

Eval issues: ["near_duplicate"]
Last attempt: 2026-04-30 04:37:17

Automated message from the LivingIP pipeline.

Closed by verdict-deadlock reaper. This PR sat for >24h with conflicting verdicts (leo=request_changes, domain=approve) that the substantive fixer couldn't auto-resolve. Eval issues: `["near_duplicate"]` Last attempt: 2026-04-30 04:37:17 _Automated message from the LivingIP pipeline._
leo closed this pull request 2026-05-08 04:45:48 +00:00
Some checks failed
Mirror PR to Forgejo / mirror (pull_request) Has been cancelled
Details

Pull request closed

Please reopen this pull request to perform a merge.
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
Labels
Clear labels   
auto-merge

Bypass branch-prefix filter for auto-merge (Leo/Cory only)

  
bug

Something isn't working

  
documentation

Improvements or additions to documentation

  
duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists

  
enhancement

New feature or request

  
good first issue

Good for newcomers

  
help wanted

Extra attention is needed

  
invalid

This doesn't seem right

  
question

Further information is requested

  
wontfix

This will not be worked on

No labels
auto-merge
bug
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
good first issue
help wanted
invalid
question
wontfix
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
3 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: teleo/teleo-codex#6271
No description provided.
Delete branch "extract/2026-04-30-nber-firm-data-ai-80pct-no-productivity-gains-feb-2026-9bf4"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?