Something screwy here. Seems pretty good otherwise
I've actually seen this particular question before. It's hard to figure out why some questions get bad or wrong answers. This question also doesn't have a proper reference.
I think it's difficult to get the initial result perfect 100% of the time. So far, my solution to this is an upvote/downvote system. This lets me either hide downvoted questions, or improve them. Right now a user who downvoted can report an issue, and I will generate new variations of the question. If either of the variations receive enough upvotes, the question will be updated.
I'm not sure how much energy Trivai requires, or if it's even remotely comparable, but you might be happy to know that all generated questions are stored in a database.
I would guess that humans produce "perfect" results 95+% of the time. In my own tests, Trivai gets "good" results, ~90% of the time.