Unverified50% confidenceBenchmarkExact time
On 32 held-out cases, qwen2.5:7b's own incorrect "covered" rate was 41.7%, which drops to 4.8% after SoloOps gating, and it passes all five thresholds.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Medium-term (~90 days)
Relevance
10/19/2026
First Seen
Valid until: 1/17/2027
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedIn the first round of tests (23 synthetic cases × 3 runs), qwen2.5:1.5b achieved only a 30% correct-judgment rate and qwen2.5:7b only 46%, both failing; qwen2.5:7b incorrectly judged "covered" in 14% of cases.72% similarUnverifiedExperience internalization fine-tuning improved Qwen3-8B-27B's one-shot score from 37.07 to 48.22, while reducing generated tokens from 6.41 million to 570,000 (an 11-fold reduction).67% similarUnverifiedWhen run on Qwen3.6-35B-A3B with a 50% expert pruning ratio, SlimWise increases decoding throughput by up to 1.81x with minimal accuracy loss.67% similarUnverifiedQwen Next scored only 6/108 (5.56%) in testing due to format reliability issues (17 invalid_json responses, with only 6 entries scorable) rather than insufficient comprehension.66% similarUnverifiedTaking Qwen3-32B as an example, DoubtLess achieves a 31% reduction in CoT length on seven benchmarks with accuracy remaining unchanged.66% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1069627API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1069627MCP
get_claim(id=1069627)