The dataset viewer is not available for this subset.
Exception: SplitsNotFoundError
Message: The split names could not be parsed from the dataset config.
Traceback: Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/local/lib/python3.14/site-packages/datasets/inspect.py", line 286, in get_dataset_config_info
for split_generator in builder._split_generators(
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^
StreamingDownloadManager(base_path=builder.base_path, download_config=download_config)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
)
^
File "/usr/local/lib/python3.14/site-packages/datasets/packaged_modules/harbor/harbor.py", line 171, in _split_generators
raise DataFilesNotFoundError("No task.toml or instruction.md files found")
datasets.exceptions.DataFilesNotFoundError: No task.toml or instruction.md files found
The above exception was the direct cause of the following exception:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/src/services/worker/src/worker/job_runners/config/split_names.py", line 68, in compute_split_names_from_streaming_response
for split in get_dataset_split_names(
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^
path=dataset,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
config_name=config,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
token=hf_token,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
)
^
File "/usr/local/lib/python3.14/site-packages/datasets/inspect.py", line 340, in get_dataset_split_names
info = get_dataset_config_info(
path,
...<6 lines>...
**config_kwargs,
)
File "/usr/local/lib/python3.14/site-packages/datasets/inspect.py", line 291, in get_dataset_config_info
raise SplitsNotFoundError("The split names could not be parsed from the dataset config.") from err
datasets.inspect.SplitsNotFoundError: The split names could not be parsed from the dataset config.Need help to make the dataset viewer work? Make sure to review how to configure the dataset viewer, and open a discussion for direct support.
Abbas Hamidavi
Department of Computer Engineering, Mashhad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mashhad, Iran · ORCID 0009-0001-7342-7844
Judged Wrong, Answered the Same: Data and Materials
This dataset is also available as a GitHub repository with the same curated materials: https://github.com/AVABBAS/judged-wrong-answered-the-same
Data and materials for the article:
Hamidavi, A. Judged Wrong, Answered the Same: Judgment–Revision Decoupling in Iterative LLM Self-Review. Submitted to AI and Society, November 2026. Preprint: Research Square, rs-10463884. The same materials are also deposited on the Open Science Framework: osf.io/bef52.
📖 About the study
Three frontier models (GPT-5.4, Claude 4.6 Sonnet, and Gemini 3.1 Pro) solved one arithmetic word problem and then reviewed their own preceding output seven times in succession (63 review rounds in total), each time stating an explicit judgment of the work and a final answer. In 9 of the 63 rounds a model judged its own solution "partially wrong" and then restated the identical answer in the same response: the evaluative act was performed in full, and the number it condemned was repeated without change. A companion elicitation study is reported alongside: 36 further solutions to ten classic trap problems under two generation protocols, in which no model produced a wrong initial answer.
🗂️ Contents
| Folder | Contents |
|---|---|
transcripts/ |
The complete conversational transcripts for the three models (plain-text renderings of the archived PDFs in the OSF deposit). |
codebooks/ |
The three per-model codebooks (plain-text renderings of the archived PDFs). |
coding-data/ |
The archived inter-rater reliability report, and the recount and correction note described below. |
elicitation/ |
The complete elicitation-study materials: both pilot prompt sets, the per-model pilot solution logs, the reserve solutions, the compiled materials file, and the deposit's own readme. |
🔍 A note on the archived reliability report
The archived inter-rater reliability report in
coding-data/predates a full recount of the transcripts. Its headline agreement figures (100 percent agreement, kappa of 1.0) do not survive that recount and are explicitly disavowed in the article. The report is preserved here as part of the study record; the recount and correction note in the same folder gives the verified judgment and answer counts re-extracted mechanically from the transcripts, and those are the counts the article reports.
📚 Citation
Please cite the article. Citation metadata is provided in CITATION.cff.
@article{hamidavi2026judged,
author = {Hamidavi, Abbas},
title = {Judged Wrong, Answered the Same: Judgment--Revision
Decoupling in Iterative LLM Self-Review},
journal = {AI and Society},
year = {2026},
note = {Manuscript submitted. Preprint: Research Square
rs-10463884}
}
🔗 Access to the article
- Preprint (Research Square, open access): researchsquare.com/article/rs-10463884
- OSF deposit: osf.io/bef52
- Journal: submitted to AI and Society; the publisher link will be added here if the article is published.
⚖️ Licence
The contents of this repository are released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence (CC BY 4.0, see LICENSE).
The transcripts are outputs of publicly available AI systems, generated for this study. They contain no personal data.
- Downloads last month
- 82