Unverified50% confidenceOpinionExact time
The coverage collapse is a systematic problem rather than random error, meaning the risk of decisions based on these intervals is significantly underestimated.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Long-term
Relevance
10/19/2026
First Seen
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedSystematic magnitude errors are more insidious and more dangerous than random errors, because the answers appear numerically plausible in structure yet deviate by an order of magnitude.76% similarUnverifiedWhen designing security protocols, overestimating risks is far better than underestimating them.76% similarUnverifiedEstimation of usage risk itself depends on assumptions about the distribution of external rules; when the set of rules is completely unknown, worst-case optimization may be overly conservative, causing a substantial drop in experimental design efficiency.75% similarUnverifiedIgnoring error correlation causes the combined variance to be underestimated, and the underestimation factor grows with group size; this factor accurately predicts the degree of coverage failure.74% similarUnverifiedGeneral-purpose large language models exhibit inconsistency in security judgments, and the same risky operation may bypass their security mechanisms simply by being rephrased or provided with a justifying context74% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1068322API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1068322MCP
get_claim(id=1068322)