> the process have no higher an error rate than human reporting, and that the errors should be no harder to correct/appeal. I would actually ask that the error

> the process have no higher an error rate than human reporting, and that the errors should be no harder to correct/appeal. I would actually ask that the errors be easier to correct, not just no harder. Even if the error rate is lower, automated systems will detect a larger number of errors and therefore are likely to create a larger number of false positives. If we're going to automate the creation of false positives we need to equivalently automate their correction.