Data & API

Name: Seth Material Research Dataset
Creator: Future Mind Institute
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Version v0.67-2026-09-05-19:18: 16 domains, 4199 claims (789 reviewed, 654 fundable). Publisher: Future Mind Institute.

Downloads

claims.csv — all claims (bilingual text, sources, scores, status, experiment, paper title)
claims.jsonl — all claims with every field including evidence, one JSON object per line
references.bib — BibTeX of all verified references; the note field lists related claim ids
snapshot.json — full snapshot: domains, claims, references, agenda

Read-only API

No authentication; JSON; up to 500 items per call. Please do not poll at high frequency.

GET /api/research/claims?status=untested&domain=4&min_test=3&fundable=1&limit=100&offset=0
GET /api/research/claims?slug=ee-units
GET /api/research/references?q=photon&year=2025&limit=100

status ∈ supported / contested / untested / contradicted; domain = domain id (see the overview); q searches the Chinese claim text. Items carry both Chinese and machine-translated English fields (text_en, adjudicating_experiment_en, overturns_en).

How to cite

Future Mind Institute (2026). Seth Material Research Agenda: sourced claims, literature reviews and agenda draft (v0.67-2026-09-05-19:18) [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22484474

To cite a single claim use its page URL (e.g. /en/research/claims/ee-units-3). The dataset is archived on Zenodo: concept DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22484474 (always resolves to the latest version); v0.67 version DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22484475.

License and provenance

Dossiers, claim paraphrases, literature reviews and the agenda draft are AI-generated, code-gated derivative works released under CC BY 4.0, attribution Future Mind Institute.
The Seth Material itself remains in copyright; this site quotes it only at citation length. "book §session" markers are source pointers, not reproductions.
Reference metadata comes from Crossref; papers belong to their publishers.
Nothing here represents scientific consensus. Status labels reflect the reviewing model's reading of the literature it found and may be incomplete.