Minerval

← run 0b35cae0

Run step

Step 15: assistant

2026-11-14 02:38:04 UTC · previous step · next step

Calls record_claim_instance

{
  "url": "https://arxiv.org/pdf/2503.14499",
  "title": "Measuring AI Ability to Complete Long Software Tasks",
  "stance": "mentions",
  "context": "Section 3.2.1 compares 50% and 80% horizons; doubling times are similar (207 vs 204 days) but levels differ substantially.",
  "speaker": "METR (Kwa et al.)",
  "claim_id": "50758adb-ea92-4663-adb8-70d8985d4ebd",
  "source_date": "2025-03",
  "source_kind": "preprint",
  "verbatim_text": "However, models' 80% time horizons are 4-6x shorter, suggesting that even models that sometimes succeed on difficult and diverse tasks cannot reliably perform tasks of moderate length."
}

Calls set_claim_importance

{
  "claim_id": "50758adb-ea92-4663-adb8-70d8985d4ebd",
  "reasoning": "A methodological point inside the live debate over AI timelines that rely on METR horizons; partly conceded by METR itself, so moderately contested.",
  "importance": 0.4,
  "contestation": 0.35
}

Calls log_stewardship_decision

{
  "claim_id": "50758adb-ea92-4663-adb8-70d8985d4ebd",
  "reasoning": "First pass. Added for/against arguments, linked unreliability-of-long-p50 subclaim as support, related links to doubling-trend and run-variance claims, recorded METR paper as a mention. Assessed supported (0.72), credence omitted as evaluative. Importance 0.4, contestation 0.35.",
  "action_taken": "structured_and_assessed"
}

Calls answer_messages

{
  "answers": [
    {
      "note": "Structured with two arguments and assessed as supported.",
      "message": "m1",
      "outcome": "changed"
    },
    {
      "note": "Assess pass done: supported, confidence 0.72.",
      "message": "m2",
      "outcome": "changed"
    }
  ]
}