#评测/基准

User: For a design agency, complete 3D SVG iconography of 100+ icons. Ling-3.1-flash: 1,000+ shapes GPT-5.6 Sol: under 200 Ling-3.1-flash is the new model from @AntLingAGI, and we found three massive strengths from their model in our blind votes: detailed SVGs, animated SVGs, and entire mobile apps. Full film below! Try out http://designarena.ai.

Introducing Microsoft-Decision-1, our new model for fast decision-making. It delivers top performance on structured decision tasks, outperforming both LLMs and other decision models in latency and quality. We’re already testing it across Microsoft for everything from incident response and quality control to scientific discovery.

New ARC Prize 2026 - ARC-AGI-2 High Score 88.06% by @tufalabs The $150K Bonus Prize, on top of the guaranteed prizes, will be split among all teams scoring over 85%

认识一下 Mistral Large 4，又名 Le Chonk。 • 1T 参数，原生多模态。49B 激活。 在综合基准测试中，它是来自美国或欧洲的最佳开放权重模型。 • 在关键工作负载上达到最先进水平，包括网络防御、制造业和金融，并且在视觉定位方面超越了闭源前沿模型。 • 端到端在欧洲打造，并可通过我们自己的 Mistral Cloud 基础设施从欧洲部署。 • 今天即可通过 API 向所有人开放。正与网络安全合作伙伴私下合作。 开放权重版本将于十月底发布。

New Research: We are releasing ExplorationBench, a benchmark for measuring how AI systems explore. Scientific discovery begins where known problems end: a system has to frame hypotheses, design experiments, and learn from the results. Evaluating this is hard. Genuinely new answers cannot be checked quickly, and in familiar domains a model can simply recall what it has seen. Addressing this challenge, researchers from Tencent Hy, Fudan University, and Tsinghua University built verifiable Alien Worlds. Their rules are executable, so every answer is checked exactly, and they conflict with familiar knowledge, so recall alone cannot solve the tasks. 🔹 Two sandboxes: AlienCode (31 hidden rule changes, 70 tasks) and AlienLogic (24 patched inference rules, 70 theorems) 🔹 A flawed manual, four rounds of self-designed probes, and closed-book tests after every round 🔹 Every answer graded by an interpreter or a proof checker, with no LLM judge What we found across 10 frontier AI systems: 1️⃣ Getting feedback is more effective than thinking alone. No AlienCode run starts above 15.7%; after four rounds the best reaches 89.0%, while the same turns without feedback stay at 0.5–11.0%. 2️⃣ Designing the experiments matters. Replaying a system's own best probes gives it exactly the same evidence, yet in AlienCode 9 of 10 systems do worse than when they chose the probes themselves. 3️⃣ Knowing a rule is not using it. Even when every required rule is stated correctly, tasks are solved only 73.4% of the time. 4️⃣ One score hides a lot. The same system under the same budget ended anywhere from 5.7% to 79.0%, and rankings barely transfer between the two worlds. CL-bench asked whether models can learn from context. ExplorationBench asks whether they can discover the rules themselves. 📄 Paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.30199 🌐 Website & leaderboard: https://explorationbench.com 📝 Blog: https://explorationbench.com/blog/ 💻 Code (coming soon): https://github.com/Tencent-Hunyuan/ExplorationBench

We gave 8 SoTA video world models a physics exam. Top score: 57.76 / 100. One revealing result: free-fall video passed the consistency screen. Their average composite score was just 26.61/100. Physics is still undefeated. Today we introduce World Models' Last Exam in Physics — 40 controlled tasks, 9 physical categories, measured against real physical laws. Full breakdown ⬇️ Github: https://github.com/Einsia/phys-last-exam Project: https://lab.einsia.ai/phys-last-exam Paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.08791

What began as a UC Berkeley research project is becoming the infrastructure the world relies on to understand and advance AI. Today, @arena announced a $200 million Series B at a $3.1 billion valuation and launched the Arena AI Alignment Index, a new way to measure how AI agents behave in the real world. We at @felicis first backed Arena at the seed and led its Series A because @ml_angelopoulos, @infwinston, and @istoica05 understood the ground truth in AI: you can’t improve what you can’t measure. Congratulations to the entire Arena team on this milestone and the important work ahead! Read Arena’s announcement: https://arena.ai/blog/series-b And learn how Anastasios and Wei-Lin turned a weekend research project into AI’s trusted evaluation platform: http://felicis.link/2Eouv0v

隆重推出 Claude Haiku 5.5：我们迄今为止发布的最便宜、最快、最强大的小型模型。 平均而言，它的运行成本比 Claude Haiku 4.5 低约 75%。

Today we are announcing Harvey LAB-AA v1.1 in collaboration with Harvey. This updates our scoring methodology for the Legal Agent Benchmark (LAB) to add a hallucination check and require correct responses to not include material misstatements. LAB-AA v1.1's new headline metric, Hallucination-Gated All-Pass Rate, only credits a task when the deliverables satisfy every rubric criterion and contain no material hallucinations. We define a material hallucination as one that would mislead a reader on a substantive point, such as a wrong contractually required date, while a minor hallucination is a real error that is unlikely to meaningfully affect the legal interpretation of a deliverable. Minor hallucinations are reported separately and do not affect the headline score. Grok 4.7 (xhigh) leads at 9.4% Hallucination-Gated All-Pass Rate, and >60% of otherwise passing results across the models tested at launch contain a material hallucination. This is the first step in enhancing the methodology for Harvey LAB-AA. In future updates, we’re working with Harvey to better account for the full set of factors lawyers value, including usability features like style and tone. Key takeaways: ➤ Top of the leaderboard: Grok 4.7 (xhigh) from @SpaceXAI leads at 9.4% Hallucination-Gated All-Pass Rate, narrowly ahead of Muse Spark 1.3 (max) from @AIatMeta at 8.9% and GPT-6 Astra (max) from @OpenAI at 8.6% ➤ Hallucinations reshape the leaderboard: without the hallucination gate, Muse Spark 1.3 (max) would lead clearly with a 26.7% all-pass rate, but two thirds of those passes contain one or more material hallucinations, resulting in a Hallucination-Gated All-Pass Rate of 8.9%. GPT-6 Astra (max) retains almost all of its passes after the hallucination gate (8.9% to 8.6%) and moves from joint 10th to 3rd ➤ The GPT-6 model family is the most grounded: GPT-6 Astra (max) averages 0.03 material hallucinations per task (4 across all 120 tasks) and GPT-6 Sol (max) averages 0.07. When comparing six checker models on a 20-task subset, GPT-6 Astra had zero material hallucinations under every checker, including Claude Opus 5.5 (high). By comparison, Gemini 3.8 Flash (high) averages 13.96 material hallucinations per task. ➤ Top-scoring models aren’t the most expensive: Grok 4.7 (xhigh) takes the top spot on the leaderboard at a cost of ~$9.50 per task, under half the cost of Claude Fable 5.1 (max with fallback) at ~$21.70, the most expensive model. Muse Spark 1.3 (max) represents strong performance for its cost, landing in second for ~$4.20 per task Thank you to @nikogrupen and @ItsJulioPereyra from @harvey for their work on Harvey LAB and collaboration.

Today we are announcing Harvey LAB-AA v1.1 in collaboration with Harvey. This updates our scoring methodology for the Legal Agent Benchmark (LAB) to add a hallucination check and require correct responses to not include material misstatements. LAB-AA v1.1's new headline metric, Hallucination-Gated All-Pass Rate, only credits a task when the deliverables satisfy every rubric criterion and contain no material hallucinations. We define a material hallucination as one that would mislead a reader on a substantive point, such as a wrong contractually required date, while a minor hallucination is a real error that is unlikely to meaningfully affect the legal interpretation of a deliverable. Minor hallucinations are reported separately and do not affect the headline score. Grok 4.7 (xhigh) leads at 9.4% Hallucination-Gated All-Pass Rate, and >60% of otherwise passing results across the models tested at launch contain a material hallucination. This is the first step in enhancing the methodology for Harvey LAB-AA. In future updates, we’re working with Harvey to better account for the full set of factors lawyers value, including usability features like style and tone. Key takeaways: ➤ Top of the leaderboard: Grok 4.7 (xhigh) from @SpaceXAI leads at 9.4% Hallucination-Gated All-Pass Rate, narrowly ahead of Muse Spark 1.3 (max) from @AIatMeta at 8.9% and GPT-6 Astra (max) from @OpenAI at 8.6% ➤ Hallucinations reshape the leaderboard: without the hallucination gate, Muse Spark 1.3 (max) would lead clearly with a 26.7% all-pass rate, but two thirds of those passes contain one or more material hallucinations, resulting in a Hallucination-Gated All-Pass Rate of 8.9%. GPT-6 Astra (max) retains almost all of its passes after the hallucination gate (8.9% to 8.6%) and moves from joint 10th to 3rd ➤ The GPT-6 model family is the most grounded: GPT-6 Astra (max) averages 0.03 material hallucinations per task (4 across all 120 tasks) and GPT-6 Sol (max) averages 0.07. When comparing six checker models on a 20-task subset, GPT-6 Astra had zero material hallucinations under every checker, including Claude Opus 5.5 (high). By comparison, Gemini 3.8 Flash (high) averages 13.96 material hallucinations per task. ➤ Top-scoring models aren’t the most expensive: Grok 4.7 (xhigh) takes the top spot on the leaderboard at a cost of ~$9.50 per task, under half the cost of Claude Fable 5.1 (max with fallback) at ~$21.70, the most expensive model. Muse Spark 1.3 (max) represents strong performance for its cost, landing in second for ~$4.20 per task Thank you to @nikogrupen and @ItsJulioPereyra from @harvey for their work on Harvey LAB and collaboration.

@perplexity_ai’s Decider V1.1 ranked #1 on http://decisionbench.ai with lowest cost! 949 shared text cases: 93.9% accuracy · 534 ms median · $0.016 / 1k decisions Thanks @AravSrinivas & perplexity team for building - looks really good, we're going to try it for our product use cases Our latest results live on https://decisionbench.ai https://x.com/rohanatlan/status/2103188107143307541

隆重推出 Claude Haiku 5.5：我们迄今为止发布的最便宜、最快、最强大的小型模型。 平均而言，它的运行成本比 Claude Haiku 4.5 低约 75%。