The word “useful” does not even appear in the OP:
*"Polygraph reliability
The Wikipedia article on the subject notes that many courts permit polygraph evidence under at least some conditions, but also observes that, “In 1991, two thirds of the scientific community who have the requisite background to evaluate polygraph procedures considered polygraphy to be pseudoscience.”
That was in 1991, over 25 years ago.
Is there a more solid consensus now, one way or the other?
What I have always understood is the used under the correct standards, polygraph results are better than pure chance but not anywhere close to perfectly reliable.
But that’s a wide gap. What’s the straight dope?"*
And i showed cites that do show the Polygraph- when used under the correct standards- the results are better than pure chance but not anywhere close to perfectly reliable.