{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2025:ZPR56PPDC46UXVXYYLQR6KH3SK","short_pith_number":"pith:ZPR56PPD","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"cbe3df3de3173d4bd6f8c2e11f28fb92b0f6dab989a0b89274735d54520bbb8e","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2502.14870","version":1},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"Why do Experts Disagree on Existential Risk and P(doom)? A Survey of AI Experts","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.AI","cs.HC"],"primary_cat":"cs.CY","authors_text":"Severin Field","submitted_at":"2025-01-25T01:51:29Z","abstract_excerpt":"The development of artificial general intelligence (AGI) is likely to be one of humanity's most consequential technological advancements. Leading AI labs and scientists have called for the global prioritization of AI safety citing existential risks comparable to nuclear war. However, research on catastrophic risks and AI alignment is often met with skepticism, even by experts. Furthermore, online debate over the existential risk of AI has begun to turn tribal (e.g. name-calling such as \"doomer\" or \"accelerationist\"). Until now, no systematic study has explored the patterns of belief and the le"},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2502.14870","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"metadata":{"license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","primary_cat":"cs.CY","submitted_at":"2025-01-25T01:51:29Z","cross_cats_sorted":["cs.AI","cs.HC"],"title_canon_sha256":"be98a1921af2314ad33f34b41a08b1826f5df93cf3b1a004559ca9bfe6b56f88","abstract_canon_sha256":"cc19c2884135a971b8a8445ddad9d5b4e87861aa84faeb3e44842b9209080f4a"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-05T10:17:55.361110Z","signature_b64":"rS/rJ/SGXOZGg/vQFHpOJPyqG0tHw26OXDULKaAE2s/1WQQSJpwkfGJ7pJNkJLo8l1oC3luR6O4E0ugMvTMjCg==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"cbe3df3de3173d4bd6f8c2e11f28fb92b0f6dab989a0b89274735d54520bbb8e","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-05T10:17:55.360646Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-05T10:17:55.360646Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"Why do Experts Disagree on Existential Risk and P(doom)? A Survey of AI Experts","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.AI","cs.HC"],"primary_cat":"cs.CY","authors_text":"Severin Field","submitted_at":"2025-01-25T01:51:29Z","abstract_excerpt":"The development of artificial general intelligence (AGI) is likely to be one of humanity's most consequential technological advancements. Leading AI labs and scientists have called for the global prioritization of AI safety citing existential risks comparable to nuclear war. However, research on catastrophic risks and AI alignment is often met with skepticism, even by experts. Furthermore, online debate over the existential risk of AI has begun to turn tribal (e.g. name-calling such as \"doomer\" or \"accelerationist\"). Until now, no systematic study has explored the patterns of belief and the le"},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2502.14870","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2502.14870/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2502.14870","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:17:55.360704+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2502.14870v1","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:17:55.360704+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2502.14870","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:17:55.360704+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"ZPR56PPDC46U","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:17:55.360704+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"ZPR56PPDC46UXVXY","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:17:55.360704+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"ZPR56PPD","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:17:55.360704+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":1,"internal_anchor_count":0,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2603.10015","citing_title":"The coordination gap in frontier AI safety policies","ref_index":10,"is_internal_anchor":false}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/ZPR56PPDC46UXVXYYLQR6KH3SK","json":"https://pith.science/pith/ZPR56PPDC46UXVXYYLQR6KH3SK.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/ZPR56PPDC46UXVXYYLQR6KH3SK/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/ZPR56PPDC46UXVXYYLQR6KH3SK/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/ZPR56PPD"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/ZPR56PPDC46UXVXYYLQR6KH3SK","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/ZPR56PPDC46UXVXYYLQR6KH3SK.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/ZPR56PPD","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2502.14870&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/ZPR56PPDC46UXVXYYLQR6KH3SK/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/ZPR56PPDC46UXVXYYLQR6KH3SK/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/ZPR56PPDC46UXVXYYLQR6KH3SK/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/ZPR56PPDC46UXVXYYLQR6KH3SK/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/ZPR56PPDC46UXVXYYLQR6KH3SK/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/ZPR56PPDC46UXVXYYLQR6KH3SK/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/ZPR56PPDC46UXVXYYLQR6KH3SK/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-05T10:17:55.360704+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-05T10:17:55.360704+00:00"}