Unverified50% confidenceFactExact time
The paper's core argument distinguishes two types of inconsistency: annotation noise and meaningful ambiguity.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Long-term
Relevance
10/9/2026
First Seen
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedThere is a granularity asymmetry between the language of papers and the language of code66% similarUnverifiedGloVe的核心洞察是词与词之间的语义关系藏在共现概率的比值里，该比值能消除对两个词都相关或都不相关的噪声词干扰65% similarUnverifiedWhen multiple large language models strongly disagree in their annotations of the same document, it often indicates that the codebook rules at that point are ambiguous, equivocal, or insufficiently covered.64% similarVerifiedText generated by large language models tends to have low perplexity, with word choices that are overly consistent with probabilistic expectations, lacking the unexpectedness of human writing.64% similarUnverifiedWhisper still has a non-trivial error rate with technical terminology, legal language, and scenarios involving multiple overlapping speakers.63% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/990462API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/990462MCP
get_claim(id=990462)