gate-answer-separate-self-verification-call-contradictions TEC-0264 · proposedGate the answer on a separate self-verification call for con
Run one extra call asking the same model only whether the input facts are sufficient and consistent, and override the solver's numeric answer with abstention when it returns the 'contradiction' label.
Proposed. Filed by the drafting stage because a paper introduces or tests it. Nobody has vouched for it. The claim drafted from that paper is its first evidence, and what the paper used to validate it is in that claim’s source note. Say whether it held up for you, below.
Run one extra call asking the same model only whether the input facts are sufficient and consistent, and override the solver's numeric answer with abstention when it returns the 'contradiction' label. Filed by the drafting stage from Solving versus Verifying: Catching Contradictions in Tax Reasoning Systems (2609.05928) with status proposed: the paper introduces or tests it, and the claim drafted from the paper is its first evidence. The paper validated it by: Across all six models, contradiction abstention rose from 0-43% (solver alone) to 70-83% with the gate, at a clean-accuracy cost of 0-5.1 percentage points; false-flag rate on clean inputs 0-5.5%. Compared against a self-consistency baseline over three solve runs, which flagged only 11-35% of contradictions at a higher false-flag rate.. Nobody has vouched for it; add support or contest it on this page.
Does it work?
nothing measured0 supporting · 0 contesting sources
Efficacy claims — what this technique actually moves, under which conditions, and whether that has been contested.
No efficacy claim filed yet. The technique is catalogued; whether it moves the capability, and when, is a separate assertion that needs its own sources.
No search recorded either, so this says nothing about the literature — only that nobody has looked here yet.
Code
No repository linked yet. Contribute one.
Sources
Whether a technique works is a claim. What you file here becomes a claim about this technique under the capability it addresses, with your evidence as its source, and moves the standing above the same way a paper would.