Unverified50% confidenceOpinionExact time
The paper argues that in legal contexts, declining to answer or signaling uncertainty is often more responsible than forcing a seemingly complete answer, which contrasts with the current tendency of LLMs to always provide an answer.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Long-term
Relevance
9/17/2026
First Seen
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedThe probability of reviewers proactively raising their scores after a rebuttal is generally not high.70% similarUnverifiedLLM给出的是最安全的答案而非最好的答案，有价值的思考往往需要主动偏离AI的默认建议70% similarUnverifiedThe poster is uncertain whether prompt injection leading to privilege escalation is a case that has actually occurred or remains at the theoretical level.68% similarUnverified承认不知道并展示如何推理，远胜于强行编造标准答案，面试官更看重结构化解决问题能力而非记忆力67% similarUnverifiedThe two core problems of unfaithful LLM explanations are incompleteness (omitting factors that actually influence the answer) and implausibility (mentioning factors that do not truly affect the decision).67% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/928530API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/928530MCP
get_claim(id=928530)