LLM evaluation
LLM fact checking: evaluate what an answer actually supports
Build a claim-level evaluation process that separates retrieval gaps, assessment errors, and missing evidence.
INDEPENDENT GUIDES / EVIDENCE-FIRST THINKING
Less guesswork.
More
evidence.
Make every claim easier to check. Explore fact APIs, LLM verification, and citation workflows built around sources—not just confidence.
Practical guides. Inspectable examples. No black-box promises.
JSON claim → source → assessment
01 / THE CLAIM
“The Atlas demonstration archive opened in 2021.”
{
"claim_id": "demo-001",
"status": "supported",
"evidence": {
"source": "example-release-note",
"passage": "Opened in 2021"
},
"scope": "fictional evidence pack"
}Traceable support. Clearly defined limits.
THE EVIDENCE TOOLKIT
A clearer path from
claim to conclusion.
Choose the part of the workflow you want to understand. Every guide makes room for context, sources, and uncertainty.
01 / EXPLORE
Fact API architecture
Separate information retrieval from an evidence-backed assessment.
CLAIMS → EVIDENCE
02 / EXPLORE
Fact extraction
Turn complex text into atomic claims without losing context.
TEXT → STRUCTURE
03 / EXPLORE
LLM fact checking
Evaluate what an AI answer supports, omits, or gets wrong.
ANSWERS → ASSESSMENTS
04 / EXPLORE
Citation checker
Check the work, the reference, and the passage that matters.
REFERENCES → SUPPORT
05 / EXPLORE
Academic evidence
Read journal articles beyond the abstract and the headline.
RESEARCH → CONTEXT
06 / EXPLORE
Source watch
Connect corrections and updates to the claims that depend on them.
UPDATES → ACTION
Independent educational resources—not a live fact-checking API or an automated guarantee of truth.What FactAPI.com covers ↗
THE METHOD / 4 CONNECTED STEPS
Don’t stop at
“sounds right.”
A useful fact-checking workflow leaves a trail you can follow. Our proposed method starts with a precise statement and ends with an assessment you can inspect—not just a badge.
Read our evidence principles01
Extract the exact claim
Preserve who, what, when, and every qualifier that changes the question.
02
Find inspectable evidence
Locate a relevant passage. A familiar source name is not enough.
03
Assess the relationship
Distinguish support, contradiction, and evidence that cannot resolve the claim.
04
Keep the trail connected
Record the scope and source version, then review meaningful changes.
THE QUESTIONABLE SHORTCUT
“The model is confident, so it must be correct.”
THE BETTER QUESTION
“Which source supports this exact claim—and what does it leave unresolved?”
A CLOSER LOOK / LOCAL EXAMPLES
One source.
Three different outcomes.
Change the claim, not the evidence. These fixed examples show why support, contradiction, and missing information belong in different categories.
Inspect the JSON examplesILLUSTRATIVE DATA ONLY. Atlas is fictional.
No statement is submitted for verification.
The claim
The Atlas demonstration archive opened in 2021.
“The Atlas demonstration archive opened in 2021. It accepts JSON exports.”Supported
The stated opening year matches the supplied example passage. This assessment applies only to this fictional evidence pack.
LOCAL, FICTIONAL EXAMPLE · No live checks or external requests.
THE EVIDENCE JOURNAL
Better questions.
Stronger source habits.
Citation quality
Citation checker: verify identity, accuracy, and support
Go beyond working links to inspect bibliographic identity, source passages, quotations, and the meaning of a citation.
Research integrity
Source watch: monitor corrections, updates, and retractions
Design a source-monitoring process that turns scholarly updates into reviewable actions for dependent claims.
USEFUL DISTINCTIONS
Start with
the right question.
Clear boundaries make better tools.
Here is what the site does—and does not do.
What is a fact API?
The term can refer to structured data, published fact-check retrieval, or claim assessment. Our Fact API guide separates these jobs so a returned record is not mistaken for a completed verification.
Does FactAPI.com provide a live fact-checking service?
No. FactAPI.com is an independent resource library with practical guides and downloadable local examples. There are no accounts, API keys, paid plans, or live verification endpoints on this site.
Can an LLM check its own answers?
A model can propose an assessment, but its confidence is not independent evidence. Our LLM workflow connects claims to passages and keeps unresolved cases visible for review.
Is a real citation enough to support a claim?
No. Citation identity and claim support are different checks. The citation-checker guide explains how to inspect the passage, context, and scope of a reference.
Is FactAPI.com affiliated with Snopes?
No. References to Snopes are independent editorial discussion. We do not claim an official Snopes API or a data partnership. Read the online fact-checking guide for careful use of published reviews.
What does a source watch monitor?
Our proposed workflow connects source changes, correction notices, and retractions with the claims that depend on them. The source-watch guide describes the design; this site does not run live monitoring or send alerts.
Follow the claim. Find the evidence.
Go from a better question to a clearer evidence trail—one fieldnote at a time.