Unverified50% confidenceFactExact time
The author acknowledges that fine-tuned v3 failed two preset thresholds: safety recall of 62% is below the 90% target, and F1 on the "whether the crisis has passed" question fell by 0.08, exceeding the 0.02 limit.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Medium-term (~90 days)
Relevance
10/18/2026
First Seen
Valid until: 1/16/2027
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedAn F1-score between 0.73 and 0.77 indicates that LLMs still exhibit errors in causal judgment, with considerable room for improvement.69% similarUnverifiedAn F1 of around 0.79 means there is still a considerable margin for misclassification, positioning the tool more as an assistive screening aid than a final arbiter.66% similarUnverifiedAbsolute alerting based on a '3x threshold' has a blind spot: slow, gradual prompt changes will not trigger a spike, and the baseline will drift accordingly; the solution is to anchor the baseline to a fixed reference point, such as the cost at the last deployment or model version change.62% similarUnverifiedExplicitly marking risk boundaries at the execution engine layer is more reliable than repeatedly emphasizing caution in prompts, and can reduce the probability of security failures caused by prompt drift60% similarUnverifiedThe existing a priori estimates for the three-dimensional Navier-Stokes problem are in a supercritical regime, and the known conserved quantities are insufficient to control the behavior of solutions at small scales.59% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1062482API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1062482MCP
get_claim(id=1062482)