Unverified50% confidenceCautionExact time
In use case X01, two confirmed requirements contradict each other (one says guests can check out, the other says an account is required); qwen2.5:7b correctly cited one of the real citations, but still judged "covered" in all 3 runs, and verbatim verification cannot identify the conflict between the two real citations.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Long-term
Relevance
10/19/2026
First Seen
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedThe paper proposes that a citation may actually exist yet still constitute a flawed warrant, because the jurisdiction is wrong, it is outdated, or it simply does not support the conclusion.63% similarUnverifiedCross-validation by multiple independent checkers cannot solve the mis-translation problem, because the target proposition may be substituted.60% similarUnverifiedTranscription may confuse names, drop negations, or turn tentative suggestions into seemingly definite statements, so in scenarios demanding high precision (such as legal records, medical discussions, financial commitments), unverified transcripts should not be treated as authoritative.60% similarUnverifiedWhen validating citations, the citations given by the model should be compared against the set of document IDs actually placed in the context, and anything with no citations or with hallucinated documents must not be sent.59% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1069629API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1069629MCP
get_claim(id=1069629)