Independent Research Study — Not Client Work

The effect of AI-era search on research questions

A study of my own search-validation logs. Across ten benchmarks I wrote and solved, I recorded every query I ran and whether it handed me the answer. This page reports what those 39 searches actually returned, and what it means for how a research question has to be built when answers are one query away.

Benchmarks studied
10
Searches logged
39
Searches exposing the answer
19 (49%)
Data source
My own published logs
Contact researcher

Section 01

Research question

One question, asked of my own working records rather than of the literature.

How often does an ordinary web search, of the kind an AI browsing agent would also run, return the answer to a research question outright — and what distinguishes the questions that survive it from the questions that do not?

Section 02

Method

Nothing here was reconstructed after the fact; the logs were written while the work happened.
  1. 01Ten benchmark questions were written first, each with one short, objectively verifiable answer.
  2. 02Every search run while building each benchmark was logged at the time: the query, where it was run, what came back, and whether the answer was exposed.
  3. 03A search was marked exposed when the answer was visible in the results without opening a source, and partially exposed when the result narrowed the field to a small candidate set.
  4. 04The counts on this page are taken directly from those published logs. Each benchmark page shows its own log, and the log can be exported.

Section 03

The dataset

Every row links to the benchmark it came from, where the full query-by-query log is published.
Searches logged and searches exposing the answer, by benchmark
BenchmarkDomainSearches loggedAnswer exposedCase study
AIBRC-001 (Ghana)Public records and administrative history5Yes3Open
AIBRC-001Nineteenth-century communications history4Yes2Open
AIBRC-002Space exploration and mission records3Yes2Open
AIBRC-003Law reports and court records3Yes2Open
AIBRC-004United States Supreme Court records3Yes1Open
AIBRC-005International politics and treaty records4Yes2Open
AIBRC-006Computing and network history4Yes2Open
AIBRC-007Art history and museum records4Yes1Open
AIBRC-008Science and publication records4Yes2Open
AIBRC-009Economic history and central banking records5Yes2Open
TotalAll ten domains3919 (49%)

Section 04

Findings

Each finding is a statement about this dataset only.

Finding 01

19 of 39 recorded searches (49%) returned the answer, or enough of it to guess, on the first page of results.

Finding 02

Every one of the ten benchmarks contained at least one query that shortened the work. No question in this set was fully resistant to a single well-phrased search.

Finding 03

The queries that gave the answer away were the ones quoting a unique identifier — an instrument number, a case name, a mission name. Identifiers are indexed, so they act as lookup keys rather than clues.

Finding 04

Queries built from a combination of ordinary attributes — a region, a year, a population figure — returned candidate sets rather than answers, and required an official source to resolve.

Finding 05

Where a question turned on a distinction rather than a fact — a signing date versus an entry-into-force date, a founding statute versus an opening day — search results routinely returned the wrong one of the pair with confidence.

Finding 06

The distinction cases were only settled by opening the issuing body's own record. Summaries agreed with each other and were still wrong about which date answered the question asked.

Section 05

What follows from it

For benchmark design

Unique identifiers belong in the answer key, not the question. A question survives contact with search when it requires assembling several ordinary attributes and then confirming them against an official record.

For research practice

The risk is not that search fails to answer; it is that it answers confidently with the adjacent fact. Distinction questions need the issuing body's own document before the answer is written down.

For anyone commissioning research

A finding is only as good as the record behind it. Ask which body issued the document, and ask to see the search log — including the searches that made the work easier.

Section 06

Limitations

Stated plainly, because the study is small and self-collected.
  • This is a self-collected sample of 39 searches on ten questions I wrote myself. It is not a controlled experiment and the questions are not a random sample of research tasks.
  • The searches were run and judged by one researcher. Exposure was recorded by my own reading of the results page, not by a scored rubric.
  • No AI system was tested or benchmarked here. This study measures what ordinary web search returned for my queries — it makes no claim about the performance of any particular AI model or product.
  • Results pages change over time and by location, so re-running the same queries may not reproduce the same counts.

Section 07

Where the underlying evidence lives

The study rests on the benchmark records, and those rest on official sources.

Section 08

Work with me

If you need a question answered from the record rather than from summaries, send it over with any deadline and I will tell you what can and cannot be established.