Updated September 2026 for Nousfarer.
A polished explanation can still contain a false claim, a missing prerequisite, or a misleading account of a debate. Noosaga uses AI to draft the lessons in Nousfarer, so you need ways to question them, and we need ways to correct them.
Trust has to rest on what can be checked.
What gets checked
Before an institute gets its lessons, its framework is checked: does it exist, is it known by that name, and does it belong in this field? A matching Wikipedia article is the starting point for that check. Specialized claims need more specialized sources.
Automated checks then catch mechanical problems: broken links, malformed articles, a quiz whose answer key points at the wrong option. Automated reviewers can also flag passages that look wrong or confusing.
None of this proves an explanation is right. An automated reviewer can miss the same mistake the writer made, and two generated texts can agree because they share an error. The check that matters is a person reading the exact article and every question and answer. Not every lesson in Nousfarer has had that reading yet, and we won’t pretend otherwise.
Question what you meet in an institute
Every institute gives you three things to test: the framework introduction, the concept scrolls, and the Sphinx’s trial questions. As you read, ask:
- Is this framework described under the same name in textbooks or encyclopedias?
- Does the introduction say what the approach covers and where it stops?
- Are important alternatives or disagreements missing?
- Does each concept scroll prepare you for the rooms that follow it?
- Does each trial question test what the scroll actually taught, and is only one answer defensible?
- Can you trace an important claim to a source that supports it?
If the introduction, the scroll, and the trial agree, that helps you find your way. It doesn’t settle whether they are right. For that you still need textbooks, papers, primary sources, or expert references.
How a mistake gets corrected
If something looks wrong, email axel@noosaga.com with the planet, the institute, the concept, and the exact passage or question. A supporting source helps, but you don’t need to write a replacement.
Reports and automated reviewers flag problems. A proposed correction needs human approval before it changes the Atlas, and the corrected text needs to be read again. When a fix lands, the lesson changes for every player who visits that institute.
What the game can and can’t tell you
Nousfarer helps you find the shape of a subject and choose where to study next. A planet’s trail shows a field’s history; it can’t settle whether a theory is true. The trials give you practice; passing them doesn’t prove you have mastered a field.
The standard we aim for is practical: make the basis and limits of the content visible, make corrections easy to request, and improve the lesson when someone finds a defect.
Trust & Provenance in the field guide covers all of this in more detail.