Unverified50% confidenceFactExact time
Label usage is highly concentrated: 109 authors contributed half of the Fully Autonomous articles, 165 authors contributed half of the AI-Assisted articles, while unlabeled articles required 1,422 authors to reach half.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Medium-term (~90 days)
Relevance
10/15/2026
First Seen
Valid until: 1/13/2027
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedAfter the labels launched, of 304,071 articles in total, 95.9% (291,657) had no label, 0.3% (881) were Hand Written, 2.6% (7,886) were AI-Assisted, and 1.2% (3,647) were Fully Autonomous, meaning about 1 in every 25 articles carried a label.78% similarUnverifiedThe author re-rated the 112 items based on the code's actual capabilities: 29 ✅, 64 🟡, 19 ⬜, versus the published status of 43/52/17, with 16 items rated by the author lower than the coverage status the tool publicly claims.72% similarUnverified根据斯坦福大学《AI指数报告》等研究，顶级AI学术会议的女性作者比例长期低于20%64% similarUnverifiedIn real systematic review data, the number of excluded articles far exceeds the number of included articles, with the ultimately included literature often accounting for only 1%–5% of the total.62% similarUnverifiedPart of the reason for the rising share of labeled articles is that the denominator shrank: over the same period total weekly articles fell from about 50,000 to about 30,000, and the researchers do not know the specific reason.60% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1033331API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1033331MCP
get_claim(id=1033331)