Unverified50% confidenceFactExact time
The normalization discrepancy in the paper was severe enough that one conclusion appeared to directly contradict a known theorem.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Medium-term (~90 days)
Relevance
8/10/2026
First Seen
Valid until: 11/8/2026
Sources
ChatGPT发现黎曼猜想论文错误，作者确认：AI审计学术论文的新范式
Related Claims
Unverified同一问题换一种表达方式，模型可能给出截然相反的结论，即提示词敏感性（Prompt Sensitivity）69% similarVerifiedA 2024 paper concluded that having a model self-correct its reasoning sometimes changes correct answers to incorrect ones.68% similarUnverifiedCritics argue that Loeb is too inclined to attribute unexplained phenomena to extraterrestrial intelligence, which may undermine the committee's scientific credibility.68% similarUnverified设计判断力这类偏主观的能力很难通过统一基准测试量化67% similarUnverifiedAcademia refers to the phenomenon of models preferring to fabricate rather than admit ignorance as 'sycophancy'.67% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/725256API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/725256MCP
get_claim(id=725256)