0 reviewers on the registry, 0 reviews recorded. The line at the foot of each explainer page comes from this page’s data and nowhere else.
Read this first
No outside expert has reviewed any page on this site. Every page that carries a review line says “Reviewed by: not yet”, and that is accurate. The pages are drafted by AI, checked by scripts and by fresh AI sessions, and approved by the editor, as How we check sets out. This page is where a human review will be recorded when one happens. The build refuses a review line that is not in this registry, and it refuses a registry entry that cannot say who agreed, when, and what they declared.
The reviewers
No reviewers yet.
The reviews
No reviews yet.
What a review covers
Facts and numbers. every figure and citation on the page checked against the source it cites.
Concepts. the explanations are correct, and nothing important is missing or misleading.
Full review. facts and numbers, concepts, and the page as a whole.
Verdict. a Ledger verdict read against its frozen criteria and its cited sources.
Every review ends with one of these outcomes:
No changes needed.
Changes were made because of the review, and the review says which.
The reviewer and the editor disagreed, and the disagreement is stated.
The rules
Only a person who has agreed to be named can be on this list. The date they agreed, how, and any interest they declared are recorded with them.
The editor enters reviewers by hand. The tool that does it refuses to run unless a person is typing at a terminal, so an AI session cannot add one.
A review is attached to one page, at one version of its text. If the text changes afterwards, the page says it has changed since the review.
A review states what was checked and what the outcome was. 'Looks fine' is not accepted as a summary.
A reviewer may withdraw at any time. They are then shown as withdrawn, with the date, and reviews dated after that are refused.
A review is a reading by one person, not an endorsement of the site, and not a guarantee that the page is right.
The review line appears on the 26 explainer pages that carry the “Sources and AI” card. The numbered lesson and topic pages, the games and the research notes do not carry it yet, so a review of one of those would be recorded here and not shown on the page. A Ledger verdict can name a reviewer too, and that name must be on this registry (see How a verdict gets written).
Review a page
We are looking for people who know one of these areas well enough to say whether a page is right:
Quantum hardware: superconducting, trapped-ion, neutral-atom or photonic devices and their benchmarks.
Quantum algorithms and complexity: Grover, Shor, QAOA, and what is known about advantage.
Cryptography: post-quantum standards, migration timelines, and the Bitcoin and TLS material.
Machine learning for quantum: neural decoders and the claims made about them.
Forecasting and statistics: how the Ledger scores claims and the Standing scores forecasts.
Physics or computer-science teaching: whether a page teaches what it says it does.
What we ask. About an hour per page. We send the page and the sources it cites. You mark what is wrong, unclear or missing, and what you would check against.
What you get. Your name, affiliation and the scope you reviewed are shown on the page and on this one, with the date. We do not pay reviewers. We will not use your name for anything else.
If you would rather not be named. You can decline to be named. Then the review is useful to us but cannot be shown, and the page will still say 'not yet'.
To offer, write to the desk with the pages or topics you would take, and anything you want declared beside your name: employer, a stake in a company the site covers, a paper of your own the page cites. Nothing is listed until you have agreed in writing to the wording that will appear.