Check an AI answer: a worked exercise with an answer key

Suppose you ask an AI assistant to turn a short announcement into an email. The result sounds professional. Before sending it, you still need to check what it says against what you supplied. This exercise gives you a complete source, an intentionally flawed answer, a corrected version and a worksheet you can reuse.

Example status: the workshop, organization, announcement and AI-style answer below are fictional. The flawed answer was written for this exercise; it is not the output of a measured test of any named model.

1. Start with the source, not the answer

Read this fictional notice before looking at the summary:

River Studio will run two introductory spreadsheet workshops in November. There are 24 places in each workshop. A ticket costs $40. Students with a valid student card receive 25% off. Registration closes on 3 November at 17:00 UTC. The notice does not specify a venue or the workshop dates. Contact the organizer for those details.

The task is to summarize the notice for someone deciding whether to register. A useful summary must preserve the price, eligibility condition and deadline. It should also make the missing schedule and venue explicit, since those gaps affect the reader's decision.

2. Find the problems before opening the answer key

River Studio's free online workshops begin on 3 November. There are 24 places in total. All students pay $15 after the 25% discount. Registration is open throughout November, and every participant receives a certificate.

Write each claim on a separate line. Mark it supported, contradicted or not stated. Check quantities yourself. Do not decide that the answer is reliable merely because it has the right organization name and mentions a discount.

3. Repair the answer without inventing the missing details

A source-grounded version could read:

River Studio is offering two introductory spreadsheet workshops in November, with 24 places in each. Tickets cost $40, or $30 for students with a valid student card. Register by 3 November at 17:00 UTC. Workshop dates and venue are not specified in the notice, so confirm them with the organizer before registering.

This version is not trying to sound more certain than the source. It keeps the missing information visible. It also distinguishes a computed price from a quoted price: $30 is derived from the stated fee and discount. In a real task, preserve the source link or document version so another person can repeat the check.

4. Use a prompt that makes checking easier

When you provide source material, ask for an auditable answer rather than a confident one:

Use only the source below. Summarize it for someone deciding what to do next.
Separate:
1. Facts stated in the source.
2. Calculations, with the formula and inputs.
3. Missing information that affects the decision.
Do not fill gaps from common practice. Preserve dates, time zones and eligibility conditions.
Then list each factual claim and the source sentence supporting it.

SOURCE:
[paste the material you have permission to use]

The claim list is an aid, not proof. An assistant can misquote a source or assign the wrong sentence to a claim. Open the material and compare it yourself. For an external link, check that the page exists and supports the exact assertion, rather than merely discussing the same topic. If you cannot inspect the source, label the claim unverified.

5. Keep a small review worksheet

For your own work, add columns for source URL or filename, date checked, reviewer and unresolved question. A row with no evidence should not quietly become an accepted fact during editing. When the source changes, revisit the affected rows instead of assuming an old answer remains current.

6. Decide whether the answer is ready to use

For this exercise, all claims in the repaired summary can be traced to the notice or a shown calculation. In a real case, the notice itself may be outdated or wrong. Source agreement therefore answers one question—“does the summary match this source?”—but not every question about truth or suitability. Important decisions may require a current primary source, a second check or a qualified person.

Try the method with a non-confidential announcement you already understand. Compare the assistant's first answer and your corrected version. Record what changed and why. That record is more useful than a general impression that an answer “looked good.”

Next, explore the AI directory with a specific task in mind, or read our editorial policy. To suggest a correction to this guide, send the relevant passage through Contact.