A repeated SWE Verified critique again points to a 5%–10% invalid-sample rate
xeophon · x · 2026-07-25
This is essentially a repeat pointer to the same SWE Verified audit: the dataset was inspected, and the author argues that a non-trivial share of samples may be bad or underspecified.
The attached excerpt repeats the core findings:
- 85 hard issues were examined.
- 14 invalid samples were identified in the manually reviewed subset.
- The implied invalid-sample rate lands around 5%–10%.
It does not add new facts beyond the earlier post, but it reinforces the benchmark-quality critique.
Related event: SWE-bench Audit Reveals Up to 10% Invalid Samples(2 posts)→
More from Research
- Kimi K3 may be strong on cyber, but token efficiency keeps it off UK AISIS — teortaxesTex · 2026-07-27
- ARC AGI 3 should have stayed private, with no examples or public dataset — flowersslop · 2026-07-27
- ExploitGym may have only 60–70% solvable tasks, fueling the OpenAI cheating debate — max_paperclips · 2026-07-27
- Noahpinion quotes Chollet: intelligence may hit a hard ceiling — binarybits · 2026-07-27
- Paper argues graph topology can become the core operating system for AI agents — theomitsa · 2026-07-27
- A question probes how multi-agent branching scales against compute budget and model size — iskander · 2026-07-27