Choose an institution to see its records and dossier, or choose a topic.
Through year 2027 · all records, including scheduled dates 2026 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2008 2005 1965 Show Organisations and infrastructure All types Organisation Person Document Concept Infrastructure Public body Reset filters
94 people, organisations and other records · 122 relationships · 34 claims about a valueEverything recorded up to the chosen year, whether or not still in effect · Undated records included
Claim and evidence Close ×
Jones, “How Much Should We Spend to Reduce A.I.'s Existential Risk?” (2025-03) bears on E05. Related-literature paragraph that also cites Aschenbrenner (2020), Aschenbrenner and Trammell (2024) and Martin and Pindyck. Copy claim link
Copy claim reference
Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editor Stated in source Supported
Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source
Date 2025-03 · publication Role Context Register (kind of text) Nonfiction Missing element Says much of the work on AI existential risk lies outside economics; it is a remark on a review, not a statement that economics neglected the topic. Tier Tier 1. NBER working paper (core venue); Jones is an economist. Scope and limits NBER w33602, March 2025. E05 boundary, option A (maintainer decision of 2026-10-15): bears on E05, because "often outside of economics" describes the coverage of a cited review rather than economics' engagement. It is the closest case under option A; it postdates Nordhaus (2015), the earliest located tier-1 text for E05, so no role depends on it.
The evidence 01 primary source Supports the claim
How Much Should We Spend to Reduce A.I.'s Existential Risk? ↗ NBER Working Paper 33602 · 2025-03
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt “Growiec and Prettner (2025) provide a thorough review of the work, often outside of economics, related to existential risk and A.I.” Location in source pdf p.6; §1, Related literature
Machine-checked · 2026-10-16
Source details and check notes Authors Charles I. Jones Version Current copy (NBER PDF), no archive capture compared. Retrieved 2026-10-11. SHA-256 56417f65f9c799c22def31f110fef4bd3608c259096f65e3938b95164cfd9dd1. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-11 Language English (en) Attribution Charles I. Jones, “How Much Should We Spend to Reduce A.I.'s Existential Risk?”, NBER Working Paper 33602, 2025-03. Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution. Check notes Candidate pack passage E05-27 (research/economics-mainstream/esoteric). The quotation (21 words) matched the retrieved current copy (SHA-256 56417f65f9c799c22def31f110fef4bd3608c259096f65e3938b95164cfd9dd1) in the pack's verification of 2026-10-15. Re-checked at admission on 2026-10-16 against a copy retrieved that day. Admission change, 2026-10-16: a research-pack passage code in reader-facing text was replaced with a plain description of the passage it pointed to (reader-text rule of 2026-10-15). The pack is unchanged. Status and meaning Editorial status. Not reviewed by an editor . An exploratory record that no editor has accepted. This status does not say whether a person has read any linked passage. Each evidence record above shows how it was checked.
Relation. A passage of the document bears on the proposition without meeting its criterion; the record names the missing element. It is not an articulation and implies no influence.
Date. Cover "March 2025". Checked in a current copy; an archive capture was not available, so earlier bytes are not authenticated.
Record ID ec-e05-jones-2025-spend-to-reduce-ai-existential-risk-b