Skip to content
Slow Variables
Ask

Diffusion / bucket 1

Methods

Stock
Capabilities and methods — what the frontier can do on benchmarks and in the lab.
Speed limit
None inherent; capability can move fast. The paper's claim is that this stock is not the bottleneck.
Valve measured
invention to product

Indicators

Frontier-lab revenue run-rates
concentrating
$50.0Bas of 2026-09-30
Open-weights gap to the closed frontier (ECI points)
unclearEvaluator reads stable since 2026-10-31; reason pending
10.2 indexas of 2026-10-17
METR 50% time horizon
faster than normal
17.4 has of 2026-04-07
METR 80% time horizon
faster than normal
3.1 has of 2026-04-07
50%/80% horizon ratio
consistent with normalstale since 2026-03-05
6.34×as of 2026-03-05
Hardware price-performance growth (doubling time)
consistent with normal
1331 daysas of 2026-08-02
ARC-AGI-2 best score
emerging
95.0%as of 2026-09-03

Capability signposts

Dated readings of what the best models can do, with no status of their own: no normal pace for them can be defended yet. They test the claims about what happens next rather than moving any reading on this page.

How far along each capability test the best model isbest score so far on each test · each dot links to the row that set it
  1. FrontierMath Tier 4
    exceptionally hard research-level mathematics problems; Epoch runs it
    100.0% 2026-09-29
  2. ARC-AGI-2
    reasoning about new patterns from a few examples, on grid puzzles; results compiled by Epoch
    95.0% 2026-09-03
  3. APEX-Agents
    long professional tasks in banking, consulting and corporate law, in simulated workplaces; results compiled by Epoch
    82.4% 2026-09-30
  4. HAL accuracy
    the share of tasks solved in HAL's own runs of each agent; HAL runs it
    80.0% 2026-05-19
  5. SciCode
    research-coding problems from across the natural sciences; Artificial Analysis's scores, compiled by Epoch
    66.9% 2026-09-22
  6. FrontierSWE
    very long software-engineering projects, each with a budget of many hours; results compiled by Epoch
    65.5% 2026-09-03
  7. GDPval
    well-specified tasks from real occupations, scored by how often graders prefer the model's work to a professional's; results compiled by Epoch
    No model released after 2025-12-11 has been scored on it.
    49.7% 2025-12-11
  8. PostTrainBench
    an agent post-training a small base model within a fixed compute budget; results compiled by Epoch
    41.8% 2026-06-09
  9. CritPt
    open-ended research-level physics problems; Artificial Analysis's scores, compiled by Epoch
    36.0% 2026-10-28
  10. CL-bench
    learning new knowledge from context within one task and applying it, not memory across sessions; results compiled by Epoch
    27.9% 2026-03-05
  11. Remote Labor Index
    real paid freelance projects, completed end to end; results compiled by Epoch
    21.3% 2026-09-22
the recordfaded: no model released in the last 300 days has been scored on this test
measuredreported

Each score is on its own test's scale. Most are the share of tasks solved; GDPval's is how often graders prefer the model's work to a professional's; FrontierSWE's is partial credit on each task, averaged over five runs; PostTrainBench's is the average score of the models the agent post-trained, across several benchmarks. The tests measure different things, so read each row against its own scale, not against the others. A record close to a perfect score leaves that test little room to show further progress. Scores sit at model release dates, often from runs with no limit on compute.

Benjamin Jones, an economist who studies where scientific progress comes from, argues that a high share of tasks solved is not a measure of progress in research: research needs every one of its steps done, so the steps a model still fails set the pace, however many others it solves. AI 2027's forecasters expect the remaining steps to fall to the models themselves.

Derived (benchmark_frontier) from: Epoch AI benchmarks and Capabilities Index; HAL AI Agent Reliability Tracker (reliability scores by agent). Epoch AI, Benchmarking Hub and Epoch Capabilities Index (CC BY 4.0). HAL: Holistic Agent Leaderboard, AI Agent Reliability Tracker, Princeton University.

The numbers
testrecordsetnewest scored releasewhose figure
FrontierMath Tier 4100.0%2026-09-292026-10-29Epoch runs it
ARC-AGI-295.0%2026-09-032026-10-17results compiled by Epoch
APEX-Agents82.4%2026-09-302026-10-26results compiled by Epoch
HAL accuracy80.0%2026-05-192026-05-19HAL runs it
SciCode66.9%2026-09-222026-10-28Artificial Analysis's scores, compiled by Epoch
FrontierSWE65.5%2026-09-032026-10-07results compiled by Epoch
GDPval49.7%2025-12-112025-12-11results compiled by Epoch
PostTrainBench41.8%2026-06-092026-07-24results compiled by Epoch
CritPt36.0%2026-10-282026-10-28Artificial Analysis's scores, compiled by Epoch
CL-bench27.9%2026-03-052026-03-31results compiled by Epoch
Remote Labor Index21.3%2026-09-222026-09-30results compiled by Epoch
How accuracy and reliability have moved across model releasesHAL's own runs of the same agents, by model release · compare the slopes, not the heights · each dot links to its row
score, 0 to 1
Claude 3 Haiku · accuracy 16.7% · released 2024-03-13Claude 3 Haiku · reliability 0.69 · released 2024-03-13GPT-4 Turbo · accuracy 44.2% · released 2024-04-09GPT-4 Turbo · reliability 0.74 · released 2024-04-09GPT-4o Mini · accuracy 27.9% · released 2024-07-18GPT-4o Mini · reliability 0.72 · released 2024-07-18Claude 3.5 Haiku · accuracy 27.6% · released 2024-10-22Claude 3.5 Haiku · reliability 0.76 · released 2024-10-22O1 · accuracy 50.3% · released 2024-12-05O1 · reliability 0.80 · released 2024-12-05Gemini 2.5 Flash · accuracy 52.8% · released 2025-03-25Gemini 2.5 Flash · reliability 0.73 · released 2025-03-25Gemini 2.5 Pro · accuracy 62.2% · released 2025-04-17Gemini 2.5 Pro · reliability 0.80 · released 2025-04-17Claude Sonnet 4 · accuracy 66.5% · released 2025-05-22Claude Sonnet 4 · reliability 0.84 · released 2025-05-22Claude Opus 4.5 · accuracy 74.6% · released 2025-11-24Claude Opus 4.5 · reliability 0.87 · released 2025-11-24GPT-5.2 · accuracy 46.7% · released 2025-12-11GPT-5.2 · reliability 0.76 · released 2025-12-11GPT-5.2 (medium) · accuracy 49.9% · released 2025-12-11GPT-5.2 (medium) · reliability 0.77 · released 2025-12-11Gemini 3.1 Pro · accuracy 79.1% · released 2026-02-19Gemini 3.1 Pro · reliability 0.84 · released 2026-02-19Claude Opus 4.7 · accuracy 79.0% · released 2026-04-16Claude Opus 4.7 · reliability 0.86 · released 2026-04-16GPT-5.5 · accuracy 71.1% · released 2026-04-23GPT-5.5 · reliability 0.84 · released 2026-04-23Gemini 3.5 Flash · accuracy 80.0% · released 2026-05-19Gemini 3.5 Flash · reliability 0.85 · released 2026-05-19
accuracy: share of tasks solvedoverall reliability: HAL's index, from 0 to 1, of consistency, predictability and robustnessstraight-line trend
measured

HAL, a team at Princeton that runs agents on its own benchmarks, scores each agent two ways from the same runs. Accuracy is the share of tasks solved; overall reliability is HAL's index, from 0 to 1, averaging how consistently, predictably and robustly the agent behaves (safety is scored separately). Both run from 0 to 1 but measure different things, so compare how steeply each line climbs, not how high it sits. Across these agents the trend in reliability is +5.9 pts a year and in accuracy is +22.5 pts a year, where a point is a hundredth of that range; the lines are straight-line fits by this site to HAL's rows.

Derived (hal_trend_per_year) from: HAL AI Agent Reliability Tracker (reliability scores by agent). HAL: Holistic Agent Leaderboard, AI Agent Reliability Tracker, Princeton University.

The numbers
agentreleasedmeasurescore
trend in reliability, fitted to the 15 reliability rows belowto 2026-05-19reliability+5.9 pts a year
trend in accuracy, fitted to the 15 accuracy rows belowto 2026-05-19accuracy+22.5 pts a year
Gemini 3.5 Flash2026-05-19reliability0.85
Gemini 3.5 Flash2026-05-19accuracy80.0%
GPT-5.52026-04-23reliability0.84
GPT-5.52026-04-23accuracy71.1%
Claude Opus 4.72026-04-16reliability0.86
Claude Opus 4.72026-04-16accuracy79.0%
Gemini 3.1 Pro2026-02-19reliability0.84
Gemini 3.1 Pro2026-02-19accuracy79.1%
GPT-5.2 (medium)2025-12-11reliability0.77
GPT-5.2 (medium)2025-12-11accuracy49.9%
GPT-5.22025-12-11reliability0.76
GPT-5.22025-12-11accuracy46.7%
Claude Opus 4.52025-11-24reliability0.87
Claude Opus 4.52025-11-24accuracy74.6%
Claude Sonnet 42025-05-22reliability0.84
Claude Sonnet 42025-05-22accuracy66.5%
Gemini 2.5 Pro2025-04-17reliability0.80
Gemini 2.5 Pro2025-04-17accuracy62.2%
Gemini 2.5 Flash2025-03-25reliability0.73
Gemini 2.5 Flash2025-03-25accuracy52.8%
O12024-12-05reliability0.80
O12024-12-05accuracy50.3%
Claude 3.5 Haiku2024-10-22reliability0.76
Claude 3.5 Haiku2024-10-22accuracy27.6%
GPT-4o Mini2024-07-18reliability0.72
GPT-4o Mini2024-07-18accuracy27.9%
GPT-4 Turbo2024-04-09reliability0.74
GPT-4 Turbo2024-04-09accuracy44.2%
Claude 3 Haiku2024-03-13reliability0.69
Claude 3 Haiku2024-03-13accuracy16.7%

Crosswalk to the capture lens

  • Model (same valve) — Capability growth is the model layer's product; inference price at fixed capability ⇄ price-per-token pass-through; open-weights lag ⇄ open-vs-closed gap.
  • Compute & physical (input to) — Compute growth and hardware perf-per-dollar feed the methods stock.
  • Training input (input to) — The public text stock and other training inputs bound how fast the methods stock can grow.