Unverified50% confidenceFactExact time
In the first group of 20 files, 11 compiled on the first pass, and 9 failed.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Short-term (~14 days)
Relevance
10/12/2026
First Seen
Valid until: 10/26/2026
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedRetesting with the same 20 files, 18 compiled directly; after one more iteration letting the sessions receive compiler error messages, it reached 19.73% similarUnverifiedOf the 962 responses, 51 failed, distributed as 26 truncations, 13 boundary errors, 12 paraphrases, and 0 corrections.67% similarUnverifiedA hand-crafted library of 22 calculators achieved perfect accuracy on the 440 cases it supported, but abstained on the remaining cases, yielding an overall coverage rate of only 40.0%.65% similarUnverifiedThis benchmark uses 10 original short documents of 200 to 250 words each, with 18 planted anomalies, 37 scoring entries in total (18 dirty and 19 clean), testing 13 models with 74 prompts per model.64% similarUnverifiedIn few-shot scenarios (e.g., approximately 20 samples per class), multi-class subdivision should be abandoned, all defects should be collapsed into a binary classification problem (defective/non-defective), and specific classification should be left to manual post-processing.64% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1011182API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1011182MCP
get_claim(id=1011182)