Humanities Annotator
Evaluate model output on history, philosophy, literature, law and ethics, where the right answer is contested rather than checkable.
Humanities evaluation is harder to automate than STEM precisely because correctness is not a lookup. The work is judging whether a model has represented a debate fairly, whether it has smuggled in a position while claiming neutrality, whether its citations are real, and whether a confident summary is actually the scholarly consensus or one school's account of it.
Fabricated citations are a specific and recurring failure this work exists to catch. So is false balance, where a model presents a settled question as open.
Corpshore runs annotation, evaluation and data collection for AI teams across 18+ countries in 35+ languages. Work is assigned by qualification and availability, not by location, and every task shows its rate before you reserve it.
What you would be doing
- Assess factual accuracy and the fairness of contested framings
- Verify that citations, quotations and attributions are real
- Flag confident claims that outrun the evidence
- Write reference answers that hold their nerve on genuinely disputed questions
What we need from you
- A degree, or equivalent depth, in a humanities or social science subject
- Ability to argue from evidence rather than impression
- A reliable internet connection and a device you can work on comfortably
- Ability to follow a written rubric precisely, including its edge cases
- Willingness to have your work reviewed, and to act on that review
Helpful, not required
- Postgraduate research
- Published or editorial writing
- A specialist period, region or thinker
- Previous annotation, transcription, moderation or research experience
- Comfort with spreadsheets or annotation tooling
- A subject you know unusually well, whatever it is
Similar roles
Apply once, get matched to what fits
One application covers every role you qualify for. A person reads it.
Apply now