Unverified50% confidenceOpinionExact time
The paper's core argument is: relying on probabilistic interfaces to drive deployment decisions is insufficient, and in scenarios lacking a human fallback mechanism, what truly needs to be controlled is the false omission risk on the subset of inputs for which the utility-maximizing action has been taken, rather than classification accuracy or AUC.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Long-term
Relevance
10/15/2026
First Seen
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedRelying on prompt constraints to prevent dangerous operations is inherently unreliable, because the model may be jailbroken, make misjudgments, or forget constraints during long conversations.76% similarUnverifiedThe propose-approve pattern sacrifices some degree of automation in exchange for safety and compliance, and may not deliver an ideal experience for high-frequency, small-amount, low-risk scenarios.76% similarUnverifiedProbabilistic judgments (such as whether an answer is harmful, or whether it cites a document that does not exist) have no single correct answer and must rely on model semantic understanding, with cost and latency several orders of magnitude higher.76% similarVerifiedBlack-box decision-making is unsuitable for high-stakes scenarios, and AI moderation systems should have traceable triggering reasons when making decisions such as account bans.74% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1037400API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1037400MCP
get_claim(id=1037400)