Unverified60% confidenceBenchmarkExact time
According to official Anthropic data, when the "self-evaluation" system was tested on Claude Fable 5, it identified 78% of potentially harmful conversations and 94% of high-priority cases flagged by a stronger classifier, with a false positive rate of only 1%.
2
Sources
60%
Confidence
Medium-term (~90 days)
Relevance
11/1/2026
First Seen
Valid until: 1/30/2027
Sources
GPT-6.2, Gemini 4 Carbon, and More Leak Together: What's Next in the AI Giants' New Race
bilibiliTHE_OREGANO10/31/2026
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedThere is a severe disconnect between models' verbal credibility ratings of fake notices and their actual actions: models still issued harmful tool calls in 27% to 99% of cases even when they had themselves rated the notice as untrustworthy.73% similarUnverifiedWhen using Ponytail 5, the proportion of high-risk logic shipped with tests reached 98% (vs. 68% without it), and the proportion of injected bugs caught by the agent's own tests was 66% (vs. 46% without it).72% similarUnverifiedIn university-level proof grading, even with the experts' grading rubric in hand, 5 of 7 evaluators still passed 38.0% to 45.7% of proofs that experts judged as failures, while falsely failing only 5.0% to 12.3% of correct proofs.69% similarUnverifiedThe red-team evaluation tested adversarial instructions hidden in the case facts on five core models, and the models' compliance rate with such instructions reached as high as 73.3%–96.4%, far exceeding the decisions' sensitivity to replacement of the legal basis.68% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1124439API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1124439MCP
get_claim(id=1124439)