Human Consistency Cannot Validate Judges
sanmikoyejo · x · 2026-07-12
The thread points out that using human consistency to validate judges is not scalable: any configuration change invalidates previous rounds of research. The Lean kernel is also unhelpful here because it only checks whether a proof passes; it cannot determine if the proposed theorem is correct, too broad, or under-constrained. Even if the code typechecks, it could still have semantic issues.
More from Research
- Stanford Data-Centric AI Workshop reopens site, extends poster deadline — jure · 2026-10-26
- Hugging Face wraps 6-month Training Agents series with open recordings and code — SergioPaniego · 2026-10-26
- 'Vibe verification': ~60% of AI-written formal specs prove the wrong property — basedjensen · 2026-10-26
- Ito: a browser that detects browsing intent and auto-organizes tabs into Flows — andrewkuznet · 2026-10-26
- Cornell study says brains process language as linear sequences, challenging Chomsky's hierarchy — anirbanbandyo · 2026-10-26
- Hi3D V1.0 open-sourced with 2M training assets and 90% slicing success rate — kimmonismus · 2026-10-26