Editorial policy
How Artificial-Intelligence.info approaches independence, accuracy, corrections, and conflicts of interest.
Independence
Editorial judgments about what to cover, how to describe a tool, and how to rank options for a use case are made for readers. Vendor marketing claims are treated as claims to verify, not as conclusions.
We do not invent social proof. If we have not published a listing, ranking, or comparison, the hub stays empty.
Accuracy standards
Prefer primary sources: official websites, documentation, pricing pages, API references, and release notes. Secondary coverage may provide context but should not be the sole basis for a concrete product claim when a primary source exists.
When information is uncertain, incomplete, or changing quickly, pages should say so. “Not yet verified” is better than a confident guess.
Corrections
If you find an error, outdated price note, broken capability claim, or misleading summary, contact us with:
- the page URL;
- what is wrong;
- a primary source link that supports the correction.
Use the contact form and choose “Report incorrect information” or “Request correction” when available. Substantive corrections should update the page and, where relevant, the verification or review date.
Conflicts of interest
Material conflicts that could reasonably affect coverage should be disclosed on the relevant page or avoided by declining coverage. Ownership relationships, paid placement presented as editorial ranking, or undisclosed sponsorship of a “best of” list are not acceptable.
Advertising and affiliate relationships
The site may display advertising through the shared keyword-site network or related placements. Ads must not be presented as editorial rankings. If affiliate or referral relationships are used for specific tools in the future, they will be disclosed in context and must not silently determine ranking order.
Tool suggestions and user submissions
Anyone may suggest a tool or topic. Suggestions are not guarantees of publication. We may decline tools that lack a clear primary source, appear deceptive, or fall outside the site’s focus.
Related pages
See also methodology, privacy, and terms.