- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.zip
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.zip
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]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2025-12-01/Recent_research#cite_note-1) presented earlier this month at the EMNLP conference, examines
You must log in or register to comment.
I watch a YT channel that talks and researches History on Wales, and on that somewhat narrow topic alone, he has found some ridiculous mistakes on Wikipedia. There are tons but few people are aware as they may lack the suffiency in knowledge or background to know how wrong they are. AI will surely make that problem worse. I have caught ChatGTP to be wrong numerous times on some topics within my wheelhouse. When I tell it is wrong it “apologizes,” corrects itself and just adds what I told it. Well, if it had found the data before, then why does it have to wait until it is corrected? If kids use this for school, they are so fucked.
Who wants to put glue on their pizza?
My knee jerk is no, because fuck ai, but LLMs are literally made to parse vast amounts of data quickly. The analysis and corrections needs to be done manually, but finding these errors are literally what they were originally made to do
It can probably help make 160million
No.
I know everyone on Lemmy hates LLMs, but analysing large amounts of text to fond inconsistencies is actually something they’re good at. Not correcting them, of course, that can be left to humans. Just finding them.
