I work on a research-paper explainer, and I keep seeing the same failure mode: the summary reads well, but falls apart as soon as I try to trace a claim back to the PDF. The quick test I use now is one paper I already know. I ask for four things: the main claim in one sentence the exact page, section, table, or equation behind it the strongest limitation the authors actually mention “not found” if the evidence isn’t there I score that before prose quality. I also test tables and equations separately, because sometimes the model is fine and the PDF extraction is what broke. Not a benchmark, obviously. It just catches confident nonsense fast. What failure do you run into most: wrong citations, skipped methods, broken equations, or conclusions that go way beyond the paper? submitted by /u/Early_Bike_7691
Originally posted by u/Early_Bike_7691 on r/ArtificialInteligence
You must log in or # to comment.