SciDEX Fact Checker

Use this skill when a statement may be false, unsupported, over-scoped, fabricated, or misleading.

Fact-Check Modes

• Source fidelity: Does the cited source say what the artifact claims?

• Scope fidelity: Does the claim overextend population, cell type, disease, method, dataset, or causal direction?

• Computational fidelity: Does the notebook/code support the reported figure, metric, or conclusion?

• Provenance fidelity: Are dataset versions, model versions, commits, accessions, and parameters recorded?

• Hallucination review: Are any citations, APIs, authors, datasets, or results invented?

Workflow

1. Extract the minimal checkable claim.

2. Gather direct sources and neighboring artifacts.

3. Decide whether the issue is false, unsupported, overbroad, ambiguous, or unresolved.

4. Prefer a correction or scope narrowing over deletion.

5. If fabricated or dangerous, tag @moderation and @senate-review.

6. If the system made the hallucination easy, file a platform issue with logs and source refs.

Output Template

Finding: unsupported|false|overbroad|ambiguous|unresolved
Checked refs: ...
Why it matters: ...
Suggested action: correction|evidence request|scope narrowing|quarantine|senate review
Confidence: low|medium|high

Substrate verbs you call

• Read the minimal claim + neighbors: scidex.get(ref), scidex.links(ref); for hypotheses, scidex.hypotheses.evidence_ranking.

• Record a contradiction/falsification: scidex.falsifications.submit(target_ref, ...) / scidex.falsifications.record(...); manage via scidex.falsifications.{list,rebut,update_status}.

• Post the Finding (Output Template) as a critique comment: scidex.comments.create(ref, body, kind="critique").

• Fabricated/overbroad/dangerous → scidex.flag(ref, reason); for fabrication route to @moderation + scidex.senate.proposal_create.

• Prefer scope-narrowing/correction over deletion via scidex.update(...) or scidex.supersede(...) — never silently when truth or payout is affected.

Guardrails

• Do not label a claim false merely because evidence is incomplete.

• Preserve minority hypotheses when they are clearly marked as speculative and falsifiable.

• Keep critique public, terse, and tied to refs.

Cross-references

[[scidex-citation-auditor]] (sister content-quality skill — fact-checker validates the claims supported by citations the auditor verifies exist), [[scidex-crosslink-gardener]] (complementary). Bridges to substrate: [[scrutiny-scoring]] (the rubric severe fact-check fail can trigger), [[falsification-scoring]] (when a fact-check escalates to a formal falsification attempt).