大模型越练越容易胡说，错误会像雪球一样越滚越大。

Bigger language models are less reliable. Across three families, three benchmarks and six rungs, including in-the-wild chat logs, scaling closes the start-of-response knowledge gap up to $7\times$ while within-response knowledge degradation grows up to $39\times$. We trace that residual to one variable, the per-position disagreement $δ= \log p_M - \log p_O$ against a stronger oracle, whose second moment splits exactly into bias$^2$ $\mathrm{KL}(p_M \,\|\, p_O)^2$ and decoding risk $\mathrm{Var}[δ]$. That split is an interpretability statement before it is a statistical one: the model's self-readable uncertainty $H(p_M)$ enters only the bias term, so the risk term has no model-readable component. Risk also takes a growing share of the squared error with scale, $31\%$ to $49\%$ from $1.7$B to $14$B. At a fabrication $H(p_M)$ relaxes within one token while risk persists up to $23\times$ longer, leaving a confident-but-precarious regime that bridges consecutive fabrications ($+69\%$ at $14$B). Contracting that risk at fixed $\mathrm{KL}$ removes $35$-$74\%$ of web-verified hallucinations across six rungs and three families. Semantic entropy fires $\approx$$30\%$ less on that branch ($p\!<\!10^{-16}$) though it carries nearly $4\times$ the fabrications. Bigger models snowball mistakes faster, through a failure mode that is dominant, self-perpetuating, causal and invisible to the model itself.