# Contested concept: correlated

_**What you are reading**: one contested-concept page in Deliberus's deliberation graph. Deliberus maps human reasoning — including claims that are contested, mistaken, or extreme — so that disagreement can be examined precisely. A claim's presence here is not an endorsement: the graph records that someone argued it, how it connects to other reasoning, and how far scrutiny has gotten. The metadata on this page describes the state of that scrutiny, not the truth of the claim._

---

- **Contestedness**: criterion
- **Diagnosis**: The author names correlation between the links as half of what the real disagreement is about, alongside the probability of each link. Independent links multiply toward a small number; correlated ones do not. Nothing in the diagram settles which they are, and he does not claim to.
- **Canonical**: `/concept/correlated` (data: `/concept/correlated.json`)

## Senses in use
- **the links fail independently, so the chain multiplies toward a small probability** — used in 1 claim(s)
- **the links fail together, so the chain is no weaker than its weakest step** — used in 1 claim(s)

## Claims using this term
- [The real disagreement about AI catastrophe is not whether a mechanism exists, but how much probability to assign to each link and how corre…](/claim/claim_doom_crux.md) _(sense: the links fail together, so the chain is no weaker than its weakest step)_
- [The characteristic failure of doom arguments is treating a possibility as though it were a high probability.](/claim/claim_doom_doom_failure.md) _(sense: the links fail independently, so the chain multiplies toward a small probability)_