similar sites

Browse

AI Report Tools

Sites similar to priorprobability.com

Priorprobability alternatives & similar sites

prior probability | Hey, where did you get your priors? — 18 websites ranked by shared content topics, category and on-page relevance.

Each result shows its full tech stack, contacts and AI-policy — not just a name · Browse all sites in Education →

Domain	Match	Title	Country/Lang	Category	AI files	Contact	AI-protection
anthonystamilio.com ↗	62 match 2 shared topics	Anthony Stamilio – Public Historian & PhD Candidate @ Loyola University Chicago	en	education WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
kc-johnson.com ↗	62 match 2 shared topics	KC Johnson \| I am a professor of history at Brooklyn College, where I teach courses in 20th century U.S. politics, foreign relations, and constitutional history. Feel free to email me at kcjohnson9@gmail.com.	en	education WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
hendersonhistorian.com ↗	61 match 2 shared topics	Henderson Historian	en	education	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
eleutherian-college.org ↗	60 match 2 shared topics	Welcome to Eleutherian College - Eleutherian College	United States~ en	education WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	email phone	none
csudigitalhumanities.org ↗	60 match 2 shared topics	Center for Public History + Digital Humanities at Cleveland State University	en	education WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
battle1066.com ↗	60 match 2 shared topics	Battle of Hastings 1066. The Overview	en	education	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	partial · 8
kateburlingham.com ↗	60 match 2 shared topics	Kate M. Burlingham – Associate Professor, California State University, Fullerton	en	education WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
archaeolink.com ↗	60 match 2 shared topics	lesson plans and other reviewed resources for classes	en	education WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
farinaking.com ↗	60 match 2 shared topics	Farina King, Ph.D. \| Indigenous Studies & U.S. History	en	education WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
digitalhistorylab.com ↗	60 match 2 shared topics	Digital History Lab – Teaching and learning history with digital resources	en	education WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
historyofwomenphilosophers.org ↗	60 match 2 shared topics	History of Women Philosophers and Scientists	en	education WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
cthistorycenter.org ↗	60 match 2 shared topics	Connecticut Center for History & Civic Learning	en	education	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
bahsociety.org ↗	60 match 2 shared topics	Cultural Heritage Education - Social Studies Initiatives	en	education WordPress WooCommerce	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
barakkushner.net ↗	60 match 2 shared topics	Barak Kushner (バラク・クシュナー) (顧若鵬) - Biography	en	education	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
eustory.net ↗	60 match 2 shared topics	Home - EUSTORY	en	education WordPress	robots llmsaihumans	emailphone	none
eustory.org ↗	60 match 2 shared topics	Home - EUSTORY	en	education WordPress	robots llmsaihumans	emailphone	none
anniepulliamdar.com ↗	60 match 2 shared topics	Annie Pulliam Chapter of Daughters of the American Revolution	en	education	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
aoshs.com ↗	60 match 2 shared topics	American Overseas Schools Historical Society - American Overseas Schools Historical Society	en	education WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none

How the match score works

Each match is a 0–100 similarity score — the higher it is, the more two sites resemble one another. It’s computed automatically from our own crawl data (never from what a site says about itself) by combining several independent signals, so a high score means several of them point the same way:

shared topics how many of the same fine‑grained content topics (IAB sub‑categories) both sites cover — the main signal.
same category whether they sit in the same business / industry category.
content & title how closely their titles and page descriptions line up in wording and meaning.

No single signal decides the result — they’re blended together. Treat the score as a way to rank candidates rather than an absolute percentage; the chips on each result show which signals contributed.