this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2025
-10 points (37.5% liked)

Technology

77084 readers
1086 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
-10
[Research] At least 80 million inconsistent facts on Wikipedia – can AI help find them? (en.wikipedia.org)
submitted 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) by King@blackneon.net to c/technology@lemmy.world
11 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

At least 80 million (3.3%) of Wikipedia's facts are inconsistent, LLMs may help finding them

A paper titled "Detecting Corpus-Level Knowledge Inconsistencies in Wikipedia with Large Language Models",^[1]^ presented earlier this month at the EMNLP conference, examines

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] artyom@piefed.social 6 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

That's why you have to manually review them. The biggest problem with LLMs is abuse. People just print their outputs without ever checking their validity.

[–] msage@programming.dev 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Is it faster than doing it all by yourself?

[–] artyom@piefed.social 5 points 5 days ago

Doing what? Manually reviewing the entirety of Wikipedia? Absolutely.