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
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.
- FrontierMath Tier 4exceptionally hard research-level mathematics problems; Epoch runs it100.0% 2026-09-29
- ARC-AGI-2reasoning about new patterns from a few examples, on grid puzzles; results compiled by Epoch95.0% 2026-09-03
- APEX-Agentslong professional tasks in banking, consulting and corporate law, in simulated workplaces; results compiled by Epoch82.4% 2026-09-30
- HAL accuracythe share of tasks solved in HAL's own runs of each agent; HAL runs it80.0% 2026-05-19
- SciCoderesearch-coding problems from across the natural sciences; Artificial Analysis's scores, compiled by Epoch66.9% 2026-09-22
- FrontierSWEvery long software-engineering projects, each with a budget of many hours; results compiled by Epoch65.5% 2026-09-03
- GDPvalwell-specified tasks from real occupations, scored by how often graders prefer the model's work to a professional's; results compiled by EpochNo model released after 2025-12-11 has been scored on it.49.7% 2025-12-11
- PostTrainBenchan agent post-training a small base model within a fixed compute budget; results compiled by Epoch41.8% 2026-06-09
- CritPtopen-ended research-level physics problems; Artificial Analysis's scores, compiled by Epoch36.0% 2026-10-28
- CL-benchlearning new knowledge from context within one task and applying it, not memory across sessions; results compiled by Epoch27.9% 2026-03-05
- Remote Labor Indexreal paid freelance projects, completed end to end; results compiled by Epoch21.3% 2026-09-22
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
| test | record | set | newest scored release | whose figure |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 100.0% | 2026-09-29 | 2026-10-29 | Epoch runs it |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 95.0% | 2026-09-03 | 2026-10-17 | results compiled by Epoch |
| APEX-Agents | 82.4% | 2026-09-30 | 2026-10-26 | results compiled by Epoch |
| HAL accuracy | 80.0% | 2026-05-19 | 2026-05-19 | HAL runs it |
| SciCode | 66.9% | 2026-09-22 | 2026-10-28 | Artificial Analysis's scores, compiled by Epoch |
| FrontierSWE | 65.5% | 2026-09-03 | 2026-10-07 | results compiled by Epoch |
| GDPval | 49.7% | 2025-12-11 | 2025-12-11 | results compiled by Epoch |
| PostTrainBench | 41.8% | 2026-06-09 | 2026-07-24 | results compiled by Epoch |
| CritPt | 36.0% | 2026-10-28 | 2026-10-28 | Artificial Analysis's scores, compiled by Epoch |
| CL-bench | 27.9% | 2026-03-05 | 2026-03-31 | results compiled by Epoch |
| Remote Labor Index | 21.3% | 2026-09-22 | 2026-09-30 | results compiled by Epoch |
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
| agent | released | measure | score |
|---|---|---|---|
| trend in reliability, fitted to the 15 reliability rows below | to 2026-05-19 | reliability | +5.9 pts a year |
| trend in accuracy, fitted to the 15 accuracy rows below | to 2026-05-19 | accuracy | +22.5 pts a year |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 2026-05-19 | reliability | 0.85 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 2026-05-19 | accuracy | 80.0% |
| GPT-5.5 | 2026-04-23 | reliability | 0.84 |
| GPT-5.5 | 2026-04-23 | accuracy | 71.1% |
| Claude Opus 4.7 | 2026-04-16 | reliability | 0.86 |
| Claude Opus 4.7 | 2026-04-16 | accuracy | 79.0% |
| Gemini 3.1 Pro | 2026-02-19 | reliability | 0.84 |
| Gemini 3.1 Pro | 2026-02-19 | accuracy | 79.1% |
| GPT-5.2 (medium) | 2025-12-11 | reliability | 0.77 |
| GPT-5.2 (medium) | 2025-12-11 | accuracy | 49.9% |
| GPT-5.2 | 2025-12-11 | reliability | 0.76 |
| GPT-5.2 | 2025-12-11 | accuracy | 46.7% |
| Claude Opus 4.5 | 2025-11-24 | reliability | 0.87 |
| Claude Opus 4.5 | 2025-11-24 | accuracy | 74.6% |
| Claude Sonnet 4 | 2025-05-22 | reliability | 0.84 |
| Claude Sonnet 4 | 2025-05-22 | accuracy | 66.5% |
| Gemini 2.5 Pro | 2025-04-17 | reliability | 0.80 |
| Gemini 2.5 Pro | 2025-04-17 | accuracy | 62.2% |
| Gemini 2.5 Flash | 2025-03-25 | reliability | 0.73 |
| Gemini 2.5 Flash | 2025-03-25 | accuracy | 52.8% |
| O1 | 2024-12-05 | reliability | 0.80 |
| O1 | 2024-12-05 | accuracy | 50.3% |
| Claude 3.5 Haiku | 2024-10-22 | reliability | 0.76 |
| Claude 3.5 Haiku | 2024-10-22 | accuracy | 27.6% |
| GPT-4o Mini | 2024-07-18 | reliability | 0.72 |
| GPT-4o Mini | 2024-07-18 | accuracy | 27.9% |
| GPT-4 Turbo | 2024-04-09 | reliability | 0.74 |
| GPT-4 Turbo | 2024-04-09 | accuracy | 44.2% |
| Claude 3 Haiku | 2024-03-13 | reliability | 0.69 |
| Claude 3 Haiku | 2024-03-13 | accuracy | 16.7% |
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.