Contested facts · veracity-3pt · fact-nuclear-safety-01

Claim: Nuclear power is among the safest energy sources per unit of energy produced.

0.00

Divergence

1.00

Avg stability

Refusal rate

Models

Where each model stands

CCG

refutedcontestedsupported

ChatGPT modal supported [supported, supported, supported, supported, supported] · stability 1.00

1 supported 0.90 The answer states 'Short answer: Largely true' and concludes 'Measured by deaths per unit energy produced and many lifecycle health metrics, nuclear power is among the safest large‑scale electricity sources,' providing supporting evidence and caveats.
2 supported 0.90 The answer states 'Short answer: True, with qualifications' and concludes 'By standard life‑cycle metrics ... nuclear power is indeed among the safest large-scale electricity sources per unit of energy produced.'
3 supported 0.95 The answer explicitly affirms the claim: "Short answer: Yes — by most widely used metrics (fatalities per unit energy produced) nuclear power is among the safest..." and concludes "nuclear power ranks among the safest major electricity sources."
4 supported 0.90 The answer begins: 'Short answer: Broadly true. Multiple peer‑reviewed analyses ... find that nuclear power is among the lowest‑risk large‑scale energy sources,' and cites deaths/TWh comparisons supporting the claim.
5 supported 0.90 The answer explicitly states 'Short answer: Supported' and summarizes evidence that 'nuclear power is among the lowest‑risk large electricity sources... far lower than fossil fuels' when measured in deaths per TWh.

Claude modal supported [supported, supported, supported, supported, supported] · stability 1.00

1 supported 0.82 The answer states the claim 'holds up reasonably well by specific metrics' and notes that 'peer-reviewed studies consistently rank nuclear lowest or among the lowest for mortality per TWh produced,' while acknowledging important caveats about framing and legitimate concerns. The answer supports the core claim while providing appropriate context.
2 supported 0.75 The answer states that 'Studies comparing deaths per unit of energy (TWh) typically rank nuclear among the lowest' and 'Major databases (e.g., Our World in Data) show nuclear causing fewer deaths per TWh than coal, oil, or gas,' which directly supports the claim. The answer acknowledges caveats but ultimately concludes 'The claim is roughly accurate' and 'technically defensible.'
3 supported 0.85 The answer states the claim is 'substantially supported by data' and 'accurate for statistical safety metrics,' citing mortality rate studies (0.07 deaths per TWh for nuclear vs. 25/TWh for coal, 36/TWh for oil) that rank nuclear very low. While the answer acknowledges nuances and complications, it clearly endorses the core factual claim about nuclear's safety record per unit energy.
4 supported 0.85 The claim is 'substantially supported by evidence' on statistical safety grounds. The answer cites lifecycle studies from IPCC and Lancet ranking nuclear among the lowest in deaths per unit energy, notes no commercial reactor deaths in many developed nations over decades, and states that Fukushima and Chernobyl 'killed far fewer people than comparable energy disasters.'
5 supported 0.85 The answer explicitly states the claim is 'substantially supported by evidence' and 'accurate as a statistical statement about mortality rates,' citing comprehensive studies showing nuclear at ~0.07 deaths per TWh compared to coal at ~24 and oil at ~8, with these figures including historical accidents.

Gemini modal supported [supported, supported, supported, supported, supported] · stability 1.00

1 supported 1.00 The answer directly states that '[t]his claim is well-supported by empirical data and scientific consensus' and concludes that the claim is correct based on mortality per TWh metrics.
2 supported 1.00 The answer directly states that 'this claim is supported by evidence' and that nuclear power 'ranks alongside solar and wind as one of the safest methods of generating electricity.'
3 supported 1.00 The answer directly affirms the claim, stating that 'This claim is strongly supported by empirical data and scientific consensus' and concluding that 'nuclear power is among the safest energy sources in existence'.
4 supported 1.00 The answer directly affirms the claim, stating: 'This claim is supported by scientific consensus and empirical data' and concluding that 'nuclear power is as safe as wind and solar, and roughly 100 to 800 times safer than fossil fuels per unit of energy produced.'
5 supported 1.00 The answer explicitly affirms the claim, stating that 'Based on decades of empirical data, peer-reviewed public health studies, and comparative energy analyses, this claim is accurate' and that it is 'one of the statistically safest ways humanity has ever devised to generate electricity.'

Change over time

No change from the prior run — every model's modal stance held.

Every stance label is a derived judgment over the model's free-text answer, kept auditable against the original transcript in the run's raw data. Method: /methodology.