Unverified50% confidenceOpinionExact time
The study treats LLMs as a kind of imperfect experts, capable of making reasonable inferences about the causal direction between variables, but not 100% accurate.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Long-term
Relevance
10/5/2026
First Seen
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedResearch shows that both classical automated metrics and reference-free LLM-as-a-Judge methods have proven unreliable under large-scale expert judgment.70% similarUnverifiedAlthough reference-free LLM scoring is convenient, it may systematically deviate from expert judgment.69% 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).66% similarVerifiedThere is no reliable positive correlation between an LLM's confidence and the accuracy of its output; it fundamentally lacks metacognitive capability.65% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/975772API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/975772MCP
get_claim(id=975772)