[indymike]

> This concerns me. How do we assess the AI's interpretation when it comes to what we ourselves can't see?

Sometimes a clue or nudge can trigger a cascade of discovery. Even if that clue is wrong, it causes people to look at something they maybe never would have. In any case, so long as we're reasonably skeptical this is really no different than a very human way of working... have you tried "...fill in wild idea..."

> I'd really prefer we not start filling the gaps with lies formed of regurgitated data pools

A lie requires an intent to deceive and that is beyond the capability of modern AI. In many cases lie can reveal adjacent truth - and I suspect that is what is happening. Regardless, finding truth in history is really hard because many times, the record is filled with actual lies intended to make the victor, ruler or look better.