Private preview. Not published and not indexed.

Claim LD06-SL-C04 (v1.0)

Re-annotating 5,700 questions across all 57 subjects of MMLU, a widely used knowledge benchmark, researchers estimated that 6.49% of its questions contain errors, 57% of those analysed in the Virology subset, and that the errors change how models rank.

Research opportunities this claim motivates

What this claim leaves open for research. Each is a hypothesis about a gap, not a finding.

Provenance and status

Claim type
ESTIMATE (as printed: “ESTIMATE”)
Publication status
ELIGIBLE (PREPRINT) (as printed: “ELIGIBLE WITH PREPRINT QUALIFIER”)
Verification state
CONTENT_VERIFIED_PRIMARY (PREPRINT) (as printed: “CONTENT VERIFIED PREPRINT”; verified by: UNKNOWN)
Does not license
Error rates for other benchmarks
Source (field 6, as printed)
Gema, Leang, Hong et al., “Are We Done with MMLU?,” arXiv:2406.04127 (v3), January 2025
Source type (field 7)
PREPRINT (as printed: “Preprint”)
Institutional position
Independent academic (University of Edinburgh-led)
Maturity (claim evidence / publication maturity)
EMERGING (as printed: “EMERGING”)
Recorded date
2026-10-15
Currentness / correction
This is the current version. No correction or concern relation is recorded on its Sources.

Version

Current version v1.0, resolved through the explicit current pointer CLAIM--LD06-SL-C04.

Versions:v1.0 · current

Pinned Sources (field 6, version-specific)

All 25 canonical Claim fields (raw values and normalized values)
#Canonical fieldCanonical value (verbatim)Normalized (Claim Value Vocabulary v1.0.2)
1CLAIM IDLD06-SL-C04—
2PUBLIC-FACING CLAIMRe-annotating 5,700 questions across all 57 subjects of MMLU, a widely used knowledge benchmark, researchers estimated that 6.49% of its questions contain errors, 57% of those analysed in the Virology subset, and that the errors change how models rank.—
3CLAIM TYPEESTIMATEbase_types: ESTIMATE
4RESEARCH STRANDA — Benchmark validity and measurement—
5MATURITYEMERGINGstates: EMERGING
6SOURCEGema, Leang, Hong et al., “Are We Done with MMLU?,” arXiv:2406.04127 (v3), January 2025source_ids: SRC-SL-GEMA-ET-AL-ARXIV-2406-04127
7SOURCE TYPEPreprintclasses: PREPRINT
8INSTITUTIONAL POSITIONIndependent academic (University of Edinburgh-led)—
9SCOPEMMLU, 57 subjects—
10DESIGNError-annotation protocol applied by human annotators to a stratified sample—
11SAMPLE / DATASET5,700 questions (100 per subject)—
12MODEL / TOOL / VERSIONSeveral open and proprietary language models, for the ranking comparison—
13COMPARATORThe original MMLU answer keys—
14MAIN RESULTEstimated 6.49% of MMLU questions erroneous; 57% of analysed Virology questions erroneous; significant discrepancies with originally reported model performance and changes in rankings—
15INFERENTIAL TARGETError prevalence in one benchmark and its effect on comparisons between models—
16DOES NOT LICENSEError rates for other benchmarks—
17VERIFICATION STATECONTENT VERIFIED PREPRINTstate: CONTENT_VERIFIED_PRIMARY · qualifiers: PREPRINT · verified_by: UNKNOWN
18LIMITATIONSSample-based estimate; annotation is itself a judgement; publication venue not confirmed—
19CONTRADICTORY / SUPPORTING SOURCESConsistent with LD06-SL-C03—
20GEOGRAPHY / LANGUAGENot checked / English—
21DISTRIBUTIONAL LEDGERErrors are concentrated in some subjects—
22R01 / FIELD-MAP LINKSLD-06, D4b—
23WHAT WOULD CHANGE THIS CLAIM?A full re-annotation, or independent replication of the error rate—
24PUBLICATION STATUSELIGIBLE WITH PREPRINT QUALIFIERstate: ELIGIBLE · qualifiers: PREPRINT
25RECORDED DATE2026-10-15—

Field 22 references resolved against Field Map v0.2: LD-06 (LIVING_DEBATE); D4b (SUB_AREA)

Cited by Living Debate versions

Research-of-record provenance

Materialized by sociolens-materializer 0.6.0 at 2026-09-28T20:00:00.000Z; normalization contract SocioLens — Claim Value Vocabulary v1.0.2 — Pre-Spike Materialization Contract (v1.0.2). Content seal SHA-256 519e196ce5f4a64b45a064c0c77789b2e148060fd9018adefd11cebb06621f50.

Repository-authored inputs (not Drive exports)

  • SocioLens claim — LD06-SL-C04 v1.0 (v1.0) — written in the SocioLens repository by Project Lead (Claude, AI) on 2026-10-15; no Drive identity exists. Authority: AGENTS.md "Authority" (the Project Lead decides research content within the research-integrity rules) and the Owner's choice in the SocioLens project chat on 15 October 2026 to build the LD-06 debate; a new Claim, first version, written from the project's LD-06 source notes, checked against full texts or official abstracts. Block “ENTRY 04 — LD06-SL-C04” SHA-256 09b7d38c3bd2db7371dd1e4ce3ec3cc2fd773580f476af3e20adde91938e35f0; fixture fixtures/authored/claims/LD06-SL-C04--v1.0.

Builder decisions (not Drive data)

  • VERSION = v1.0 — basis: Claim version taken from the repository-authored claim fixture version (SocioLens claim — LD06-SL-C04 v1.0); the first version of a new Claim of the LD-06 debate
  • CURRENT_POINTER = true — basis: repository-authored claim "SocioLens claim — LD06-SL-C04 v1.0" (Project Lead (Claude, AI), 2026-10-15); basis: AGENTS.md "Authority" (the Project Lead decides research content within the research-integrity rules) and the Owner's choice in the SocioLens project chat on 15 October 2026 to build the LD-06 debate; a new Claim, first version, written from the project's LD-06 source notes, checked against full texts or official abstracts
  • FIELD_6_SOURCE_REFERENCE = SRC-SL-GEMA-ET-AL-ARXIV-2406-04127--v1.0 — basis: field 6 of ENTRY 04 — LD06-SL-C04 cites "Gema, Leang, Hong et al., “Are We Done with MMLU?,” arXiv:2406.04127 (v3), January 2025"; the only field-6 segment of this ClaimVersion's repository-authored ledger block.
  • SOURCE_PROVENANCE_PIN = SRC-SL-GEMA-ET-AL-ARXIV-2406-04127--v1.0 — basis: explicit version-pinned public provenance of this ClaimVersion (Amendment v1.2 §6): the pinned field-6 Source record "Gema, Leang, Hong et al., “Are We Done with MMLU?,” arXiv:2406.04127 (v3), January 2025".