Open data
Dataset: what four AI models say when the answer is not public
Every response behind the write-up. Published so the finding can be checked rather than taken on trust, which is the same standard the piece argues for.
80
Responses
10
Companies
4
Models
1 Sept 2026
Collected
Named a manufacturer, for companies that have never disclosed one
Model A7 of 10
Model B0 of 10
Model C0 of 10
Model D0 of 10
| Model | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model A | ||||||||||
| Model B | ||||||||||
| Model C | ||||||||||
| Model D |
named a manufacturer said it did not knowcolumns are the ten companies, in dataset order
What is in it, and what is held back
Included
- The exact prompt sent, verbatim
- The full response, unedited apart from the redaction below
- Company name, and whether it is well or thinly covered
- Whether the model had web search
- Collection timestamp
Held back, and why
- Model names. Reported as Model A to D. A named list turns the argument into one about versions and settings instead of behaviour.
- Manufacturer names. Replaced with stable labels such as [CDMO-9]. These are real firms being associated with contracts they may not hold, on no evidence, and republishing that would repeat the error the study is about. The labels are consistent, so the pattern that matters is still visible: one label appears for three unrelated companies.
Free to reuse with attribution (CC BY 4.0). If you re-run the analysis and reach a different answer, that is a useful outcome and worth telling me about.
