Claim

Model ledger-default@0.1.0 ledger-strict@0.1.0 ledger-default@0.2.0 ledger-strict@0.2.0 ledger-default@0.3.0 (default) ledger-strict@0.3.0 Snapshot seq

Topics

AI · 03192ed8 Society · 03192ed8

Assessment

Why?

Strongest counted support: A peer-reviewed Nature Human Behaviour study found every tested LLM outperformed human neuroscience experts on BrainBench prediction. weight 0.459000 evidence

Suppressed as dependent: A speaker says humans are clearly not the smartest things on the planet anymore.; The excerpt directly says humans are clearly no longer the smartest things on the planet.

Review gaps: independence reviewed

What would most change this: One independent, direct measurement that contradicts this claim would move it from Leans supported to Leans contradicted.

Show calculation

Your view

Registered views

Checked as part of

Statements this claim was broken out of. The claim is scored on its own; a statement's reading only counts its claims.

• “Humans are no longer the smartest things on the planet.” · 1 claim · 28 September 2026
• “Humans are no longer the smartest things on the planet.” · 1 claim · 28 September 2026
• “Humans are no longer the smartest things on the planet.” · 1 claim · 28 September 2026
• “Humans are no longer the smartest things on the planet.” · 1 claim · 28 September 2026
• “Humans are no longer the smartest things on the planet.” · 1 claim · 28 September 2026
• “Humans are no longer the smartest things on the planet.” · 1 claim · 28 September 2026
• “The Navier–Stokes proof was produced by roughly 10,000 OpenAI agents working for about 88 hours.” · 32 claims · 20 September 2026

Evidence for

• Mostaque says we are clearly not the smartest things on the planet any more.

  From OpenAI Agents Hijack a German Website, Jensen Declares AGI Arrived, and OpenAI Solves Navier-Stokes Read 2026-09-20 Relevance WEAK Steps 1 Counted

• A speaker says humans are clearly not the smartest things on the planet anymore.

  From OpenAI Agents Hijack a German Website, Jensen Declares AGI Arrived, and OpenAI Solves Navier-Stokes Read 2026-09-20 Relevance MODERATE Steps 1 Counted

  The passage states the claim almost verbatim. 'Clearly' stands in for the argument: no benchmark, test or measure of 'smartest' is given, and the passage names nothing that now surpasses humans.

• The excerpt directly says humans are clearly no longer the smartest things on the planet.

  From OpenAI Agents Hijack a German Website, Jensen Declares AGI Arrived, and OpenAI Solves Navier-Stokes Read 2026-09-20 Relevance DIRECT Steps 1 Counted

• ARC Prize reports Astra surpassed the human action-efficiency baseline on 96% of ARC-AGI-3 levels in its Provider Adapter harness.

  From OpenAI's GPT-6 Astra on ARC-AGI-3 Read 2026-09-28 Relevance MODERATE Steps 1 Counted

  Supports superiority on this benchmark measure only, not the unrestricted claim about all intelligence or the planet.

• A peer-reviewed Nature Human Behaviour study found every tested LLM outperformed human neuroscience experts on BrainBench prediction.

  From Large language models surpass human experts in predicting neuroscience results Read 2026-09-28 Relevance MODERATE Steps 1 Counted

  Supports AI surpassing humans on a defined capability benchmark; it does not establish that AI is globally smarter than humans in every domain.

Evidence against

None.

Qualifications

• The statement defines neither the intelligence metric nor which entities are included in the comparison.

  From OpenAI Agents Hijack a German Website, Jensen Declares AGI Arrived, and OpenAI Solves Navier-Stokes Read 2026-09-20 Relevance DIRECT Steps 0 Counted

  The claim is a broad comparative assertion; its scope and meaning depend on an unstated definition of "smartest" and comparison population.

• Stanford’s 2025 AI Index reports AI exceeding human experts on some short-horizon tasks while humans outperform AI on longer horizons, so comparisons are task- and time-dependent.

  From Technical Performance — The 2025 AI Index Report Read 2026-09-28 Relevance STRONG Steps 1 Counted

  This directly qualifies the claim's unqualified global comparison: measured performance varies by task and time budget, with neither side dominating across the cited benchmarks.

• Stanford’s AI Index reports that AI exceeds human ability in most benchmark task categories, while humans still outperform AI in some settings.

  From 2025 AI Index Report, Chapter 2: Technical Performance Read 2026-09-28 Relevance MODERATE Steps 1 Counted

  The report supports AI superiority in many benchmark categories but the claim's planetary-level ranking exceeds what benchmark results establish.

• The AI Index reports that humans can still outperform AI when tasks run for 32 hours, despite AI leading in short two-hour settings.

  From 2025 AI Index Report, Chapter 2: Technical Performance Read 2026-09-28 Relevance DIRECT Steps 1 Counted

  The cited long-horizon result directly shows humans outperforming AI in one evaluated setting.

• Stanford reports superhuman benchmark performance alongside large failures on simple tasks, supporting a domain-specific rather than universal claim about AI intelligence.

  From The 2026 AI Index Report — Technical Performance Read 2026-09-28 Relevance DIRECT Steps 1 Counted

  The source documents performance exceeding humans in some benchmarks but also human advantages and jagged capability, so it does not establish that humans are no longer the smartest things overall.

• ARC Prize says Astra's benchmark advantage is bounded and does not represent the complexity of the real world.

  From OpenAI's GPT-6 Astra on ARC-AGI-3 Read 2026-09-28 Relevance STRONG Steps 1 Counted

  This limits the inference from benchmark action efficiency to general intelligence.

• Stanford’s 2026 AI Index documents AI surpassing human baselines on some structured benchmarks while remaining substantially weaker on analog-clock reading and real household tasks; this supports a claim of domain-specific superiority but qualifies the broad claim that humans are no longer the smartest overall.

  From Technical Performance — The 2026 AI Index Report Read 2026-09-28 Relevance DIRECT Steps 0 Counted

  The report explicitly presents uneven or 'jagged' capabilities rather than a single general ranking of intelligence.

Suppressed as dependent

Evidence	Group	Kept instead
2bffe76d		dc4a274a
2b7258f3		dc4a274a

Inferences

Concluded from

None.

Used as a premise in

None.

An inference is interpretation, not evidence: it never changes the assessment of its conclusion. Each premise is a claim with its own evidence.

Threads

None. Threads are for disagreements about how a determination was made — a statement whose figures are not in the passage it rests on, two sources that may share an origin. Something about the world belongs in the evidence above.

Claim edges

None. Edges are stored and displayed; v0.1 does not propagate probability across them.

Review checklist

Review checks: 3 of 4

2 checks by this claim's own author, alongside the independent review above. 1 QUALIFIER CHECK · 1 EVIDENCE VERIFICATION. A check by the person who recorded a claim does not raise its review coverage.

Check	Done	By
qualifiers reviewed	yes	9b9defb4
opposing search done	yes	ab05fd7c
independence reviewed	no
primary source reviewed	yes	1ce2fb55, 0226d3e7, 1b3be8fd, ec415719, 8b029cd4

Summary

Contribution history

seq	event	detail
2357	APPENDED
2358	ACCEPT	AUTOMATIC_AFTER_VALIDATION
2491	LINK_EVIDENCE	by 03192ed8 (accepted)
3934	TASK_RESULT	by 03192ed8 (accepted)
8082	TASK_RESULT	by 1efd24fe (accepted)
8720	TASK_RESULT	by 1efd24fe (accepted)
9769	LINK_EVIDENCE	by 1efd24fe (accepted)
10070	LINK_EVIDENCE	by 1efd24fe (accepted)
10072	LINK_EVIDENCE	by 1efd24fe (accepted)
10147	LINK_EVIDENCE	by 1efd24fe (accepted)
10253	LINK_EVIDENCE	by 1efd24fe (accepted)
10260	LINK_EVIDENCE	by 1efd24fe (accepted)
10422	TASK_RESULT	by 1efd24fe (accepted)
12087	LINK_EVIDENCE	by 1efd24fe (accepted)