Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Data, code and manuscript for the paper Suggestible Judges Show Asymmetric Deference to Negative Labels in Large Language Model Adjudication. Three LLM judges (Claude Opus 4.7, GPT-5.5, Gemini 3.5 Flash) adjudicated annotator disagreements on SEC 10-K knowledge-graph edges with and without annotator labels in the prompt, including a randomly assigned synthetic label. The archive contains every per-pair verdict log, the disagreement pairs with both annotators' labels, the experiment harness, all analysis scripts, and the LaTeX source and compiled manuscript. Code is MIT-licensed; text and data are CC BY 4.0; ChaosNLI items keep their CC BY-NC 4.0 license. The full annotation sets, which are the evaluation data of a separate manuscript, are withheld; aggregate counts are included.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Singh et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: