SocArXiv
metadata only
Agreement Without Accuracy: Six Systematic Defects an LLM Annotation Study Could Not See in Its Own Reliability Statistics
Researchers who use large language models as annotators are commonly asked to demonstrate reliability, and test–retest agreement under a fixed seed is the cheapest evidence. We report a study in which it was systematically misleading. Annotating 1,902 student UML class specifications under a fixed s
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Agreement Without Accuracy: Six Systematic Defects an LLM Annotation Study Could Not See in Its Own Reliability Statistics#1092099
- Evaluating Open-Weight Large Language Models for Structured Depression Assessment from Clinical Interviews#928511
- Bridging the Data Gap: LLM-Driven Synthetic Data Generation for Low-Resource Natural Language Inference#1120844
- SWORD: Wikidata-based Distortions Reveal Hidden Cross-Lingual Inconsistencies in LLM Factual Error Rejection#987106
- .tmu: A Low-Entropy Tree-Structured Representation for LLM-Assisted Scientific Writing#985003
Record · ID 1092546
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive