ScienceToStartup
DevelopersTrends

113 Cherry St #92768

Seattle, WA 98104-2205

Backed by Research Labs
All systems operational

Proof

  • Proof Layer
  • Dashboard
  • Example paper page
  • Signal Canvas
  • Topic proof layer
  • Benchmark scoreboard
  • Public dataset
  • Evidence
  • Workspace
  • Terminal
  • Talent Layer
  • Build Loop

Developers

  • Overview
  • Start Here
  • REST API
  • MCP Server
  • Examples
  • OpenAI Guide
  • API Docs

Trends

  • Live Trends Desk
  • Operator Cycle
  • Founder Brief
  • Benchmark Movers

Resources

  • Resources Hub
  • All Resources
  • Benchmark
  • Database
  • Dataset
  • Calculator
  • Glossary
  • State Reports
  • Industry Index
  • Directory
  • Templates
  • Alternatives
  • Topics

Company

  • Articles
  • Changelog
  • About
  • Careers
  • Enterprise
  • Scout
  • RFPs
  • For Media
  • FAQ
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal
  • Contact
ScienceToStartup

Copyright © 2026 ScienceToStartup. All rights reserved.

Privacy Policy|Legal
  1. Home
  2. Signal Canvas
  3. Measuring the Authority Stack of AI Systems: Empirical Analy
← Back to Paper

Measuring the Authority Stack of AI Systems: Empirical Analysis of 366,120 Forced-Choice Responses Across 8 AI Models

Fresh1d ago
Export BriefOpen in Build LoopConnect with Author
View PDF ↗
Viability
0.0/10

Compared to this week’s papers

Evidence fresh

Use This Via API or MCP

Use Signal Canvas as the narrative proof surface

Signal Canvas is the citation-first public layer for turning one paper into a structured commercialization narrative. Use it to hand off into REST, MCP, Build Loop, and launch-pack execution without losing source lineage.

Signal Canvas APIPaper Proof PageOpen Build LoopLaunch Pack Example

Evidence Receipt

Freshness: 2026-04-14T16:18:46.318822+00:00

Claims: 0

References: 0

Proof: unverified

Freshness: fresh

Source paper: Measuring the Authority Stack of AI Systems: Empirical Analysis of 366,120 Forced-Choice Responses Across 8 AI Models

PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2604.11216v1

Source count: 3

Coverage: 33%

Last proof check: 2026-04-14T16:51:35.718Z

Paper Conversation

Citation-first answers with explicit evidence receipts, disagreement handling, commercialization framing, and next actions.

Paper Mode

Measuring the Authority Stack of AI Systems: Empirical Analysis of 366,120 Forced-Choice Responses Across 8 AI Models

Overall score: 3/10
Lineage: f6c230caf171…
Cmd/Ctrl+K
Search the latest paper corpus with startup-focused AI synthesis.

Canonical Paper Receipt

Last verification: 2026-04-14T16:51:35.718Z

Freshness: fresh

Proof: unverified

Repo: missing

References: 0

Sources: 3

Coverage: 33%

Missingness
  • - repo_url
  • - references
  • - proof_status
  • - paper_extraction_scorecards
Unknowns
  • - proof verification has not been recorded yet

Mode Notes

  • Corpus mode searches the research corpus broadly.
  • Paper mode pins trust state to the canonical paper kernel.
  • Workspace mode blends saved sources, prior evidence queries, and linked papers.

Starting…

Dimensions overall score 3.0

GitHub Code Pulse

No public code linked for this paper yet.

Claim map

Claim extraction is still pending for this paper. Check back after the next analysis run.

Competitive landscape

Competitor map is still being generated for this paper. Enable generation or check back soon.

Keep exploring

Builds On This
AI Integrity: A New Paradigm for Verifiable AI Governance
Score 0.0down
Prior Work
I Can't Believe It's Corrupt: Evaluating Corruption in Multi-Agent Governance Systems
Score 3.0stable
Higher Viability
PRISM Risk Signal Framework: Hierarchy-Based Red Lines for AI Behavioral Risk
Score 4.0up
Higher Viability
Belief in Authority: Impact of Authority in Multi-Agent Evaluation Framework
Score 5.0up
Higher Viability
AI Arms and Influence: Frontier Models Exhibit Sophisticated Reasoning in Simulated Nuclear Crises
Score 4.0up
Higher Viability
AI and Collective Decisions: Strengthening Legitimacy and Losers' Consent
Score 6.0up
Higher Viability
Beyond Benchmark Islands: Toward Representative Trustworthiness Evaluation for Agentic AI
Score 8.0up
Higher Viability
Language Models Exhibit Inconsistent Biases Towards Algorithmic Agents and Human Experts
Score 5.0up

Startup potential card

Startup potential card preview
Share on XLinkedIn

Related Resources

  • What are the challenges of defining and measuring "human values" for AI alignment?(question)
  • What are the best practices for ensuring AI alignment with human values?(question)

BUILDER'S SANDBOX

Build This Paper

Use an AI coding agent to implement this research.

OpenAI Codex
OpenAI CodexAI Agent

Lightweight coding agent in your terminal.

Claude Code
Claude CodeAI Agent

Agentic coding tool for terminal workflows.

AntiGravity IDE
AntiGravity IDEScaffolding

AI agent mindset installer and workflow scaffolder.

Cursor
CursorIDE

AI-first code editor built on VS Code.

VS Code
VS CodeIDE

Free, open-source editor by Microsoft.

Recommended Stack

PyTorchML Framework
FastAPIBackend
TensorFlowML Framework
JAXML Framework
KerasML Framework

Startup Essentials

Render

Deploy Backend

Railway

Full-Stack Deploy

Supabase

Backend & Auth

Vercel

Deploy Frontend

Firebase

Google Backend

Hugging Face Hub

ML Model Hub

Banana.dev

GPU Inference

Antigravity

AI Agent IDE

Estimated $9K - $13K over 6-10 weeks.

MVP Investment

$9K - $13K
6-10 weeks
Engineering
$8,000
GPU Compute
$800
SaaS Stack
$300
Domain & Legal
$100

6mo ROI

0.5-1x

3yr ROI

6-15x

GPU-heavy products have higher costs but premium pricing. Expect break-even by 12mo, then 40%+ margins at scale.

See exactly what it costs to build this -- with 3 comparable funded startups.

7-day free trial. Cancel anytime.

Talent Scout

Find Builders

AI experts on LinkedIn & GitHub

Discover the researchers behind this paper and find similar experts.

7-day free trial. Cancel anytime.