I disagree. How can you say the expectation of accuracy is much higher when the creators literally tell you to not expect accuracy? That's a problem with your e

I disagree. How can you say the expectation of accuracy is much higher when the creators literally tell you to not expect accuracy? That's a problem with your expectations, not the programs problem. Imagine a program that had some kind of concept of "interesting and novel mathematical proofs", and it could spit them out. But, 99.9% of the proofs were actually logically inconsistent or true but extremely uninteresting. Would that still be an interesting exploratory tool? I think so.