Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence
I have no connection to Horvitz; I created the article b/c the sources include what I presume to be independent analysis, and my reading of  was that any amount of unattributed analysis by the independent publication makes the coverage non-trivial; if I'm wrong, then the article can be deleted but I'll probably ask at the  page for a modification to be more clear. For example, the nytimes 2014 source states "The project, hosted by the university, is unusual not just because of its duration but because it seeks to track the effects of these technologies as they reshape the roles played by human beings in a broad range of endeavors." The csmonitor source states "As it turns out, there are already groups dedicated to tackling these ethical concerns." Of course, for all I know these "insights" may have been fed to them by the organization, but that's true of any article. I don't know what level of non-triviality is usually required to pass 
— User:Rolf, 14:46, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:ORGDEPTH||WP:ORGDEPTH||WP:ORGDEPTH (Wikipedia:Notability)