Unverified50% confidenceBenchmarkExact time
The traditional expert codebook revision approach achieved an LLM annotation accuracy of only 57.8%.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Long-term
Relevance
9/24/2026
First Seen
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedThe rationale annotation approach outperforms the traditional expert codebook revision approach by approximately 7 percentage points.71% similarUnverifiedJCE所谓的'可靠'实际只有约60%的准确率，因误差累积连续5步后整体成功率仅剩约7.8%70% similarUnverified研究表明人类评估者在判断LLM输出的事实准确性时，正确率往往只有50%-70%70% similarUnverifiedMedIQ多智能体系统最终达到57%准确率，摘要智能体带来约5%提升，而拥有全部前置信息的Oracle上限为66%67% similarUnverified人工代码审查平均只能发现约60%的缺陷64% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/946149API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/946149MCP
get_claim(id=946149)