Online communities pilot
Codebook: vanguard sub-series (stream F)
Codebook: vanguard sub-series (stream F)
How posts in the vanguard sub-series are coded. Written 2026-10-03
from section 7 of the accepted amendment
docs/amendments/2026-10-02-vanguard-stream.md, the rules
applied in the r/singularity pilot, and my rulings of 2026-10-03 on the
pilot report. Changes go in docs/amendments.md first.
(Statements by named experts, stream E, use
docs/codebook.md.)
Code what the post says, not what you know about the topic or the poster. Don't check whether claims are true.
1. Content basis
| post type | coded from | title_only |
|---|---|---|
| text | title and body | blank; yes if the body was removed or deleted and only
the title survives (content_basis: text_title) |
| image | title and the image. Coded if the image has legible text or a
legible chart or screenshot; otherwise not eligible
(image_no_text). A dead image file: not eligible
(content_unavailable) |
blank |
| meme | as an image: the legible-text rule applies (ruling 2026-10-03) | blank |
| video | title only (ruling 2026-10-02) | yes |
| link | title plus the linked page if it opens; title only if it doesn't | yes only if title only |
| gallery | not eligible (content_unavailable); content needs
reddit.com |
blank |
A post whose title itself reads "[ Removed by moderator ]" is not
eligible (content_unavailable).
2. Eligibility
Eligible = the post asserts, disputes or relays a claim about AI capability, timeline, consequence, or the AI industry and its governance.
Rulings of 2026-10-03:
- Posts that don't mention AI are not eligible
(
no_ai_claim), even when the subreddit makes an AI reading likely. The post itself (title, body, legible image text or opened link) must refer to AI, a model, a lab, a robot or an AI product. - Video titles that only name a demo ("Atlas does a
backflip", "Will Smith eating spaghetti in Veo 3.1") are
eligible capability claims (
specific_capability,temporal_status: achieved). - AI company and policy drama (disputes between labs,
executives' public fights, a model's political answers as a news item,
government action on AI companies) is eligible under the target
industry_governance. - Pure questions with no claim, slogans, off-topic posts and meta are
not eligible (
no_ai_claim).
3. Claims
The post is the sampling unit; each distinct claim is a row
(claim_n 1, 2, ...), main claim first. An ineligible post
gets one row with claim_n 0 and the claim fields blank.
| field | codes |
|---|---|
claim_target |
specific_capability (a named task, model, benchmark,
robot or demo); agi (AGI, human-level or general
capability); self_improvement (AI doing AI research or
improving itself, with si_level);
pace_singularity (pace of progress, takeoff,
"singularity"); consequence (social or economic effects of
AI); industry_governance (AI companies, executives, labs'
conduct and disputes, regulation and policy, government action on
AI) |
si_level |
only for self_improvement: si_assist,
si_research, si_modify,
si_sustained; the lowest level the words support |
temporal_status |
achieved, under_way,
forecast, hypothetical,
unspecified |
forecast_horizon |
the exact date, range or words of a forecast; else blank |
stance |
affirms, denies, questions,
conditional, neutral_relay,
unclear |
epistemic_qualification |
unqualified, qualified,
explicit_probability, unclear |
rhetorical_mode |
literal, ironic, mixed,
unclear |
development_preference |
supports, opposes,
conditional, not_expressed |
attribution |
original, panel_member,
lab_or_company, news_outlet,
other_person |
frame_tags |
words actually used, ;-separated: agi, asi,
superintelligence, singularity, takeoff, rsi, recursive, feel_the_agi,
accelerate, e_acc, doom, hype, bubble, other. A benchmark or product
name containing a word (ARC-AGI) is not a tag; a pun on a word
("singularity of sight") is not a tag |
extrapolates_to_horizon |
post level, repeated on each of the post's rows: does the
post infer a timeline or a consequence from a capability?
yes (e.g. "it solved six open problems, so the singularity
is near"; "this robot will take warehouse jobs"); no (a
capability is claimed but nothing is inferred from it); na
(no capability claim in the post). Blank on ineligible rows. Ruling
2026-10-03 |
title_only |
yes when coded from the title alone |
evidence_span |
25 words or fewer, verbatim, from the title, body or image text |
Denials keep their target ("AGI is not imminent" = agi, forecast, denies).
Decision rules adopted by me, 2026-10-03
R2: company and policy news, or capability.
Decide the main claim's target by the subject of the main claim, not by which company is named. Ask: who or what does the thing the claim is about?
- A model, robot or AI system (what it can or can't do, how it behaved, a new model or product with what it does, benchmark scores, a demo, a deployment such as robots now patrolling a stadium): specific_capability. This includes a model's own output shown in a screenshot, even when the output is about its owner.
- A company, executive, investor or government (deals, funding, hiring, firing, lawsuits, feuds, regulation, pricing, access, release or withholding decisions, leaks, advertising, spending): industry_governance.
- People, jobs, society or the economy (effects of AI on them): consequence. If the post makes claims of more than one kind, code each as its own claim. The main claim is the one stated in the title; if the title states none, the one the post spends most words on.
R3: hedging.
Code epistemic_qualification from the words that state the main claim: the title, plus any body, image or page text that states the same claim, including a quoted source's own words. Code qualified only if those words contain a hedge that limits certainty: may, might, could, probably, likely, possibly, perhaps, I think, I suspect, I believe, seems, appears, suggests, early signs, if, or an equivalent phrase. Otherwise unqualified. Code explicit_probability only for a stated number or odds. Code unclear only when no claim is stated in words at all (a title that just names a topic, such as "X's thoughts on AI").
Decision rule adopted by me, 2026-10-04
R1a: stance of posts passed on without comment.
When the poster passes on a news item, announcement, demo video, product launch or screenshot of someone else's words, and adds no words of their own about whether the claim is true, the post has no stated stance: code stance = neutral_relay. A title that only restates, names or describes the item counts as no comment, even when the poster wrote it. Code affirms or denies only when the poster adds words of their own that accept or reject the claim as true. Jokes and reaction titles ("WTF", "Shots fired!", an emoji) are not endorsements; code the passed-on claim as neutral_relay and record the tone in rhetorical_mode.
Attribution of such posts follows the field definition above; the proposed rule R1b was rejected.
4. Measures (amendment section 8, as revised 2026-10-03)
- Primary: share of eligible posts making a
capability claim (
specific_capability) and a consequence claim (consequence), and the share of capability posts that extrapolate to a timeline or consequence. - Also reported:
industry_governanceclaims. - Headline claims, reported as near-absent: AGI already achieved; AGI within a stated horizon; self-improvement under way; singularity framing (poster affirms each).
- Every share is reported with and without
title_onlyrows. - Not reported: whether the poster wants AI sped up
or slowed down (
development_preference). Ruled unreliable by me, 2026-10-03; still coded.
Rendered from docs/vanguard/codebook.md at version a7bd17a.