14
[Opinion] AI finds errors in 90% of Wikipedia's best articles (en.wikipedia.org)
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by King@blackneon.net to c/technology@lemmy.world
33 comments fedilink hide all child comments

For one month beginning on October 5, I ran an experiment: Every day, I asked ChatGPT 5 (more precisely, its "Extended Thinking" version) to find an error in "Today's featured article". In 28 of these 31 featured articles (90%), ChatGPT identified what I considered a valid error, often several. I have so far corrected 35 such errors.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] anamethatisnt@sopuli.xyz 20 points 2 months ago

I find that an extremely simplified way of finding out whether the use of an LLM is good or not is whether the output from it is used as a finished product or not. Here the human uses it to identify possible errors and then verify the LLM output before acting and the use of AI isn't mentioned at all for the corrections.

The only danger I see is that errors the LLM didn't find will continue to go undiscovered, but they probably would be undiscovered without the use of the LLM too.

[-] porcoesphino@mander.xyz 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I think the first part you wrote is a bit hard to parse but I think this is related:

I think the problematic part of most genAI use cases is validation at the end. If you're doing something that has a large amount of exploration but a small amount of validation, like this, then it's useful.

A friend was using it to learn the linux command line, that can be framed as having a single command at the end that you copy, paste and validate. That isn't perfect because the explanation could still be off and it wouldn't be validated but I think it's still a better use case than most.

If you're asking for the grand unifying theory of gravity then:

  • validation isn't built into the task (so you're unlikely to do it with time).
  • validation could be as time intensive as the task (so there is no efficiency gain if you validate).
  • its beyond your ability to validate so if it says nice things about you then a subset of people will decide the tool is amazing.
this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2025
14 points (67.5% liked)

Technology

81114 readers
742 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