Overview
The AI Launch Evidence Scorecard is a free launch diagnostic from ResearchAudio. It presents seven checks and is described as taking two minutes, with no login and answers staying in the browser. The scorecard is intended to give a clear read on whether an AI announcement contains enough evidence to support a real decision. It updates as each check is completed and starts with proof that can be verified.
The seven evidence gates cover access, falsifiability, baseline, operating cost, failure cases, reproducibility, and evidence ownership. For access, it asks whether a working product, API, repository, or documented access path exists today. For falsifiability, it asks whether the launch names a number, condition, or outcome that another team can test. It also checks whether comparisons use the same task, tools, budget, and evaluation conditions, and whether price, latency, compute, token use, or another real constraint is disclosed. Failure cases are documented when the announcement states where the system breaks, degrades, or stays untested. Reproducibility requires methods, prompts, data, code, logs, or test artifacts. Evidence ownership and date require a named team, version, and evaluation date.
The scorecard classifies results from 0–2 as Marketing claim, 3–4 as Promising, under-proven, 5–6 as Decision-ready, and 7 as Evidence-complete. It states that a low score is not a verdict but a list of unanswered questions. ResearchAudio describes its broader Evidence Lab as tracing the claim, the method, the cost, and the missing evidence so engineers and product teams can decide without reading twenty launch threads.
Pricing
Free
Detailed plans have not been confirmed in our catalog. Check the official website for current limits and billing terms.
Visit WebsitePrices and limits may change. Confirm the currency, billing period, seat minimum and usage caps on the official website.
Use Cases
- Teams use the AI Launch Evidence Scorecard to get a clear read on whether an AI announcement contains enough evidence to support a real decision.
- Teams use it to check whether access is real through a working product, API, repository, or documented access path.
- Teams use it to verify that the core claim is falsifiable by naming a number, condition, or outcome another team can test.
- Teams use it to confirm the baseline is named with the same task, tools, budget, and evaluation conditions.
- Teams use it to see whether operating cost is visible through price, latency, compute, token use, or another real constraint.
- Teams use it to check that failure cases are documented where the system breaks, degrades, or stays untested.
- Teams use it to check reproducibility through methods, prompts, data, code, logs, or test artifacts.
- Teams use it to verify that evidence has an owner and date through a named team, version, and evaluation date.
Features
AI assistant
Natural language interface
Workflow automation
Reviews
No reviews yet. Be the first to share your experience!