Not true. Things can work with hacks. Your standards might consider it unacceptable to have hacks. So you can have a “make it right” stage.

In ML, often it does work to a degree even if it's not 100% correct. So getting it working at all is all about hacking b/c most ideas are bad and don't work. Then you'll find wins by incrementally correcting issues with the math / data / floating point precision / etc.

Depends on your definition of "right" and "work". It could be a big ball of mud that always returns exactly the required response (so it 'works'), but be hellish hard change and very picky about dependencies and environment (so it's not 'right').

Nope, it's right, but it's not pretty.