Unverified50% confidenceFactExact time
The reproduction process exposed that two entries in the public test set have expected answers that penalize reasonable replies, and that Tīrtha's scorer is a self-rewritten version of Berkeley's; the authors said they will re-score using the official checker.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Medium-term (~90 days)
Relevance
10/19/2026
First Seen
Valid until: 1/17/2027
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedHigh-confidence negative reviews are harder to overturn through rebuttal because the reviewer believes they fully understand the paper.69% similarUnverifiedCritics point out that reusing review comments may lead to the problem of "one bad review, repeated suffering across multiple venues."68% similarUnverifiedThe author proposes that fixing human confidence calibration requires two artifacts (a number stated before the outcome is known, and a determination of the outcome) and one habit (a ledger).66% similarUnverifiedSome commenters point out that rather than having the reviewer reason through the logic line by line, it is better to let test coverage take on correctness verification, with review focusing on places the tests do not cover.66% similarUnverifiedIt is the norm for reviewers not to respond during the rebuttal stage, and the content of the authors' response will enter the AC's decision-making purview.66% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1064724API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1064724MCP
get_claim(id=1064724)