Skip to content

Latest commit

Β 

History

213 Commits

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date
Β 
Β 
Β 
Β 
Β 
Β 
Β 
Β 
Β 
Β 

Repository files navigation

EFFICA

One issue. Many perspectives. Your judgment.

Compare coverage of the same event side by side.
Explore the context through AI analysis and reader perspectives.

Codex Community Hackathon : 3rd Place

Next.js 16 TypeScript 5 FastAPI MariaDB 10.6+ OpenAI API

Explore EFFICA β†—

About | Compare Coverage | Perspective Map | Reader Participation | Team

EFFICA home: newspaper masthead, lead issue, and coverage from three news sources

A starting point for discovering different perspectives on the same issue.


A wider view of the news

The same event can read differently depending on which facts lead the story and whose voices are included. Those differences can be difficult to notice when we keep returning to familiar sources.

EFFICA is a news comparison platform that connects coverage from different sources around a shared issue. Readers can examine common facts, compare what each article emphasizes, and explore the context it leaves out. AI helps surface those differences, while readers consult the evidence and original reporting to form their own judgments.

The name comes from Political Efficacy: the sense that we can understand political and social issues and make informed judgments for ourselves. That is the experience EFFICA aims to support.

01 / Read the same event side by side

Choose two to four articles from different sources covering one issue. Start with the facts they share, then explore each article's framing and AI analysis in the same view.

EFFICA coverage comparison: article summaries, political bias, sensationalism, and analysis confidence from three news sources shown side by side

Start with shared facts. See where the coverage diverges.

See what is emphasized and what is left out. Look beyond differences in headlines to understand what each article gives weight to. Follow the available evidence and links to original reporting to examine the context behind the analysis.

Compare AI analysis with reader assessments. Each is labeled separately, making it possible to see where interpretations agree and where they differ.

02 / Explore perspectives in three dimensions

The Perspective Map places the articles selected for an issue comparison in a shared 3D space. Explore similar coverage and articles that stand apart, then select a numbered point to inspect its analysis.

EFFICA perspective map: three articles in an issue comparison, with numbered source markers and the selected article's political bias, sensationalism, and analysis confidence

From the overall distribution to an individual article, connected through a single selection.

Map dimension What it shows
Horizontal / Political bias Where an article's claims and emphasis fall along a left-to-right political spectrum
Height / Sensationalism How provocative or emotionally charged the headline and wording are
Depth / Analysis confidence How stable the AI assessment is given the available evidence

Rotate the map or switch between front, top, and side views to explore the distribution. Colors identify news sources, and numbered points correspond to the article list. Select a point or an article to inspect its scores and open the detailed analysis.

03 / Bring your own judgment

Readers can contribute assessments as well as explore the analysis. Read the original reporting, record your judgment, and reflect on your reading and comparison activity.

  • Understand why an article was recommended. Each recommendation explains its purpose, such as offering a nearby perspective or complementary coverage of the same issue.
  • Compare your stated perspective with your reading activity. Survey responses and perspectives inferred from activity are presented separately.
  • Reflect on how your understanding changes. Review the articles you have read and the sources you have encountered. Track your confidence in understanding political issues and optionally create a card to share your perspective profile.

Make the evidence and its limits visible

Explain what the scores mean. Political bias describes the direction of an article's perspective. Sensationalism describes the intensity of its language. Neither determines factual accuracy or article quality. Analysis confidence is distinct from source credibility or the probability that a claim is true.

Show the evidence available to readers. Readers can check whether supporting evidence is public and review the history of score revisions. EFFICA displays the status when analysis is still being prepared or does not meet its publication criteria.

Create room for different perspectives. Exploration can begin with articles close to a familiar viewpoint and continue toward other sources and complementary coverage. The final interpretation belongs to the reader.

Team EFFICA

Name Role
Johnny SeokHyun Bae Build, Team Lead
Junho Kim Build
Ayoung Kwak Insight

Read more perspectives. See more of the story.

Compare news coverage with EFFICA β†—

About

πŸ† 3rd Place @openai Codex Community Hackathon : A Project to Enhance Political Efficacy in South Korea

Resources

Stars

1 star

Watchers

0 watching

Forks

Releases

Packages

Contributors

Languages