Overall human-LLM judge agreement rate for coherency is 91.7% across 120 pairwise judgments

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

• Overall human-LLM judge agreement rate is 91% (109/120 and 173/190) across two human ratersfinding0.911
  Validates LLM judge quality for trait expression scoring
• Overall human-LLM judge agreement rate for trait expression is 92.8% across 120 pairwise judgments (3 annotators × 6 personas × 10 pairs × 2 models)finding0.882
  Validates the LLM-as-a-Judge evaluation protocol for trait scoring
• LLM judge (GPT-4.1-mini) achieves 94.7% agreement with human judges across 300 pairwise comparisons for evil, sycophancy, hallucinationfinding0.838
  Validates the automated trait expression scoring pipeline
• Would human raters and cross-judge replication corroborate the LLM-as-judge assessments of coherence and trait expression?question0.812
  Methodological concern raised about potential bias and circularity of model-based classifiers
• Overall correlation between accuracy and contra-positive coherence across all models is 0.41 on Leap-of-Thought.finding0.769
  Quantitative result showing weaker relationship between accuracy and contra-positive coherence.
• Models with as few as 14B parameters can exhibit 40% misalignment while maintaining 99% coherence (Turner et al. 2025 result)finding0.764
  Concurrent work result showing emergent misalignment occurs in small models
• Agreeableness-Conscientiousness Big Two correlation is observed in 10 of 13 LLMs; N-C correlation is rarest (1 LLM)finding0.763
  Most and least common Big Two covariance pattern in LLM OCEAN MDS injections
• Kendall's τ = 0.76 (p<.001) for Conscientiousness dimension LLM scoring vs human judgmentfinding0.762
  Validates GPT-4o scoring reliability for Conscientiousness personality dimension