Unverified50% confidenceBenchmarkExact time
On an open set of 76 synthetic emergency cases, adding Gemma's reading of the course notes raised agreement with expected results from 72% with rules alone to 97%, reduced missed judgments from 21 of 42 cases to 1, produced 0 false positives among 34 cases that should have stayed quiet, with a median model-step latency of 1.87 seconds.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Medium-term (~90 days)
Relevance
10/18/2026
First Seen
Valid until: 1/16/2027
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedAt a significance level of ε=0.09, 63% of nodules received a definitive single-label prediction, while the remaining 37% of cases were referred to clinicians for judgment.71% similarUnverifiedIn 11 of the 12 models, between 87.5% and 100% of capitulation cases stopped at the exact wrong number provided by the user, meaning capitulation typically involves switching sides entirely.67% similarUnverifiedIn a comparative test on 29 real blunders, the bare Gemma model mentioned illegal moves not on the board 7 out of 29 times.67% similarUnverifiedIn the experiments, the task resolution rate was 17% for zero-shot generation, 27% for generic self-correction, 23% for error-only feedback, and 90% for diagnostic counterexample feedback (A-CEGIS).66% 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%.66% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1064184API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1064184MCP
get_claim(id=1064184)