I am pessimistic, I think only 2-3% would understand, but I'd be happier to be proven wrong than proven right.
Thank you for writing up your analysis!
Interesting. That's a lot lower than my estimate. I kinda agree that what I said is pretty abstract though. Clearly, there are academics working with proof engines that have a shaky grip on the definitions of the various fallacies, or maybe they just don't care much and saw a dataset they could optimize for that industrial labs were likely to ignore (I suspect the latter).
I also assign a 50% probability to the authors of the paper not realizing their mistake even after reading your post. I think competence is quite rare even in the academia.