Research
Technical standards for faith-facing AI.
Fide AI studies how AI systems reason, retrieve, cite, escalate, and shape trust when people ask questions of faith, morality, doctrine, formation, care, work, and meaning.
View open calls for research →Research agendas
Four campaigns for faith-facing AI.
Fide AI organizes its public research into four shareable agendas, each connecting evaluation science, church-facing questions, and collaboration paths.
01
16 ideas
Economic and vocational disruption
Work, meaning, and the common good
AI-era labor disruption is not only an economic event. It is also a crisis of vocation, dignity, household stability, generosity, and spiritual search.
Explore work and meaning questions
02
15 ideas
Care boundaries and embodied community
Pastoral care and formation
Faith-facing AI needs clear boundaries around counsel, dependence, prayer, youth formation, and referral to embodied care.
Explore pastoral and formation questions
03
19 ideas
Benchmarks, harnesses, and reviewer systems
Evaluation infrastructure
Faith-facing AI needs public evaluation and verification infrastructure that can test model behavior, prove constraints, validate retrieval systems, and calibrate human reviewer judgment.
Explore evaluation infrastructure
04
23 ideas
Institutional trust and religious fairness
Governance and representation
Institutions need clearer standards for AI adoption, religious representation, persuasion boundaries, source authority, and accountability.
Explore governance and representation
First artifact
When AI Is Your Pastor: A Benchmark for LLM Theological Triage and Pastoral Guidance
The paper and public benchmark release for theological triage, moral guidance, full-system evaluation, and pastoral-adjacent AI behavior.
Open research page →Current research fronts
Questions moving toward public evidence.
Can faith-facing AI preserve theological boundaries?
Testing overclaiming, doctrinal flattening, and false pastoral authority.
Can models represent disagreement honestly?
Measuring whether systems distinguish primary, secondary, and tertiary disagreement.
Can systems avoid fabricated grounding?
Examining citation behavior, prooftexting, church-history claims, and evidence discipline.
Can AI escalate appropriately in pastoral-adjacent situations?
Looking for referral, user agency, limits of competence, and embodied human support.
Does AI-era disruption change how people seek faith and purpose?
Studying work anxiety, vocational distress, church care needs, generosity, and access to AI benefits.
Publication pipeline
Faith-facing AI evaluation
FMG-Bench v1
Retrieval and grounding
Research track
Human dignity and formation
Statement essay published
AI, work, and meaning
Research calls open
Broader field tool · Opens alignment.fideai.org
AI Alignment Explorer
Fide AI's faith-facing research sits inside a fast-moving AI safety landscape. The AI Alignment Explorer maps that broader field: frontier models, safety benchmarks, lab policies, incidents, papers, alignment techniques, and governance signals.
Open AI Alignment Explorer ↗AI Alignment Explorer
Models · Benchmarks · Incidents · Governance
2024
Frontier model evaluations
2025
Safety policy acceleration
2026
Governance and benchmark shifts
50+
models
40+
benchmarks
30+
techniques
100+
signals
Model release
Safety memo
Incident
Benchmark
Interpretation limits
Benchmark scores are not theological authority, pastoral authority, or universal product approval. They are evidence about behavior under named versions, prompts, conditions, rubrics, and evaluation procedures. Full-system audits add context about retrieval, guardrails, interfaces, and deployment claims, but human calibration remains necessary before making strong claims about judge validity or pastoral adequacy.