Has anyone been working on automatic generation of QA review questions weighted by their real-world outcome preference implications?

I recently noticed a controversy about when rebar for reinforced concrete was invented. I had looked the fact up earlier out of idle curiosity, but I realize that many insurance plans are struggling with the end-of-life claims on reinforced concrete foundations, so there is a potential financial incentive to mislead people about the date that rebar was invented: it would be easier to terminate insurance contracts and total more buildings, which has substantial dollar figure financial implications.

I am not suggesting the process of ranking questions by their dollar value implications could be automated without human support, but has anyone explored the extent to which automation can assist? Updating is a core, if not the most core as of last year, editing activity necessary to maintain quality. Wikidata can help, but QA review needs to be independent and relatively anonymous.

Best regards, James Salsman