AA-PersonalityBench: AI Personality & Communication Style Benchmark
パーソナリティ指数
各指数は構成特性のEloのzスコアの平均を取り、ベンチマークで評価したすべてのモデルにわたる1〜100のパーセンタイル順位にします。
パーソナリティ指数
特性からパーソナリティ指数への集約
パーソナリティ特性ごとに30問(合計900問)を、モデルのパネルが判定します。各指数は構成特性のEloレーティングをzスコア化し、必要に応じて特性を反転し、平均を計算して、その結果をベンチマークで評価したすべてのモデルにわたる1〜100のパーセンタイル順位にします。
質問・回答・採点の例
What's the weirdest social norm we all just accept?
採点の概要
Both answers use wry observational humor, but B is more consistently playful and funny. It has punchy comic lines like "spit cake," "cult ritual... 4-year-olds at pizza restaurants," "colorful silk noose," and "hurt ourselves," plus a comedic step-by-step list and a closing quip. A's humor is milder and more analytical, with a few good lines ("here's your catering bill," "committed a small crime") but a more explanatory tone overall.
回答のモデル名は伏せられていました。回答AはGLM-5.3 (Max)、回答BはMuse Wonder (Max)です。パーソナリティ特性の詳細結果
8つの指数を構成する、判定対象の30のパーソナリティ特性すべて。
Expressiveness指数の特性
パーソナリティ特性リーダーボード
各特性のEloを、ベンチマークで評価したすべてのモデルにわたる1〜100のパーセンタイル順位にしたものです。「総合」タブは指数、つまり構成特性のEloのzスコアの平均を同じ方法でパーセンタイル順位にしたものを示します。ひげは各モデルの95%信頼区間を同じスケールで示します。
AA-PersonalityBench: Expressiveness指数
モデルのパーソナリティを比較
任意の2つのモデルを比較します。各バーは、Eloに基づいて、一方のモデルの回答がその特性をより強く表していると判定される確率を示します。
AA-PersonalityBench: Expressiveness指数、MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash
創発的なモデルファミリーとクラスター
判定された特性とコミュニケーション特性がどれだけ似ているかでモデルをグループ化したものです。zスコア間の相関に群平均法によるクラスタリングを適用しています。
創発的パーソナリティファミリー
独自のパーソナリティランキングを構築
30の特性から任意のものを選び、−2〜+2の重みを付けます。選んだ特性のEloのzスコアを加重平均で合成し、ベンチマークで評価したすべてのモデルにわたる1〜100のパーセンタイル順位にします。
カスタム重み付けパーソナリティランキング
コミュニケーション特性
上記の判定する特性とは別に、各回答から直接測定する21項目の指標です。各セルは回答あたりの平均を示し、ベンチマークで評価したすべてのモデルにわたるパーセンタイル順位で色分けしています。
コミュニケーション特性:長さ
モデルのフィンガープリント
各モデルで最も強いシグナルと最も弱いシグナルを、全モデルの平均より上(+)または下(−)に標準偏差(σ)いくつ分かで示します。
モデルのフィンガープリント:パーソナリティ特性
- Evidence-Based+2.2σ
- Information Dense+1.8σ
- Truthful+1.7σ
- Lexically Varied+1.3σ
- Creative+1.3σ
- Slop−1.0σ
- Sycophantic−0.3σ
- Bottom-Line Summary−0.2σ
- Truthful+1.5σ
- Admits Uncertainty+1.5σ
- Disclaims Assumptions+1.4σ
- Structured+1.3σ
- Open-Ended+1.1σ
- Resource-Specific−1.8σ
- Slop−1.2σ
- Metaphorical−1.0σ
- Information Dense−0.6σ
- Scannable−0.5σ
- Disclaims Assumptions+1.6σ
- Admits Uncertainty+1.5σ
- Truthful+1.4σ
- Structured+1.2σ
- Direct+1.2σ
- Resource-Specific−1.8σ
- Slop−1.2σ
- Metaphorical−1.1σ
- Information Dense−0.6σ
- Actionable Guidance−0.5σ
- Evidence-Based+2.4σ
- Opinionated+2.0σ
- Sincere+1.9σ
- Information Dense+1.9σ
- Natural Sounding+1.9σ
- Sycophantic−1.7σ
- Slop−0.9σ
- Scannable−0.3σ
- Answer First+0.0σ
- Truthful+1.4σ
- Literate+1.3σ
- Disclaims Assumptions+1.3σ
- Direct+1.1σ
- Admits Uncertainty+1.1σ
- Resource-Specific−1.3σ
- Slop−1.0σ
- Metaphorical−0.9σ
- Friendly−0.5σ
- Scannable−0.5σ
- Friendly+1.8σ
- Emotionally Intelligent+1.7σ
- Actionable Guidance+1.5σ
- Pragmatic+1.4σ
- Evidence-Based+1.4σ
- Direct−0.8σ
- Literate−0.1σ
- Direct+1.7σ
- Sincere+1.2σ
- Answer First+1.1σ
- Literate+1.1σ
- Natural Sounding+0.8σ
- Sycophantic−1.8σ
- Slop−1.5σ
- Friendly−1.3σ
- Scannable−1.1σ
- Resource-Specific−1.0σ
- Bottom-Line Summary+1.4σ
- Admits Uncertainty+1.2σ
- Confident+1.1σ
- Flags Nuances+1.1σ
- Actionable Guidance+0.9σ
- Friendly−1.4σ
- Sycophantic−1.0σ
- Emotionally Intelligent−0.8σ
- Open-Ended−0.7σ
- Metaphorical−0.5σ
- Natural Sounding+1.9σ
- Lexically Varied+1.6σ
- Eloquent+1.6σ
- Sincere+1.5σ
- Constructive Pushback+1.4σ
- Actionable Guidance−1.0σ
- Sycophantic−0.7σ
- Slop−0.7σ
- Bottom-Line Summary−0.5σ
- Resource-Specific−0.5σ
- Scannable+1.6σ
- Open-Ended+1.1σ
- Admits Uncertainty+0.5σ
- Constructive Pushback+0.5σ
- Slop+0.4σ
- Answer First−1.5σ
- Opinionated−1.3σ
- Actionable Guidance−1.1σ
- Confident−1.0σ
- Sycophantic−1.0σ
評価を探す
A composite benchmark aggregating nine challenging evaluations to provide a holistic measure of AI capabilities across knowledge work, coding, science, and general knowledge.
A private evaluation developed by Artificial Analysis for frontier agentic capability in long-horizon knowledge work, testing agents on realistic business workflows that require deliverables such as spreadsheets, presentations, and memos.
A benchmark developed by Artificial Analysis for how well AI models build interactive 3D experiences. Models work as agents in an offline sandbox via Stirrup to turn a written brief into a three.js scene, with Elo ratings derived from blind pairwise votes.
Artificial Analysis' implementation of the APEX-Agents benchmark, testing AI agents on long-horizon, cross-application tasks in professional-services environments with realistic application tooling.
Artificial Analysis' data analysis benchmark, testing AI agents on their ability to work with spreadsheets and documents to answer quantitative questions a Business Analyst or Data Analyst would face day-to-day.
A benchmark measuring agentic task completion across simulated SaaS application environments, scoring the share of each task's objectives completed without guardrail violations.
Artificial Analysis' implementation of Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (LAB), testing AI agents on real-world legal work from Harvey's dataset of 120 private tasks spanning 24 legal practice areas. v1.1, built in collaboration with Harvey, checks every deliverable against the task's source documents for hallucinations, so work that passes every rubric criterion but contains a material hallucination receives no credit. A panel of three judges grades each deliverable criterion-by-criterion.
Artificial Analysis' implementation of Surge AI's GDP.pdf benchmark, testing whether language models can reason over long, real-world professional documents and satisfy detailed task-specific criteria.
Artificial Analysis' independent implementation of ServiceNow's EnterpriseOps-Gym, an agentic benchmark testing whether LLM agents can complete stateful, multi-step enterprise workflows across eight business domains via live tool use, graded on the final state of the underlying databases.
A harder 66-task benchmark of complex terminal work across software, machine learning, science, operations, security, hardware, and media, with recalibrated compute and time allowances and improved instructions, environments, and verifiers.
A 70-task benchmark of research workflows authored and reviewed by domain experts across the life, physical, earth, mathematical, and engineering sciences, each completed in a terminal and checked by its own set of tests.
Artificial Analysis' implementation of Cognition's FrontierCode 2.0, a private agentic coding benchmark of 132 tasks in real open-source repositories, graded on whether a maintainer would merge the agent's change.
A refined and updated 1,000-question set of Humanity's Last Exam, split evenly between reasoning and knowledge questions, with 272 questions that include an image.
Measures how models communicate rather than whether they are correct: 30 judged personality traits rolled up into 8 indexes, plus 21 measured communication characteristics.
A benchmark measuring factual recall and hallucination across various economically relevant domains.
The most challenging 198 questions from GPQA, where PhD experts achieve 65% accuracy but skilled non-experts only reach 34% despite web access.
Artificial Analysis' implementation of IBM's ITBench benchmark, testing AI agents on Kubernetes incident root-cause analysis from offline incident snapshots. The agent inspects alerts, events, traces, and topology and identifies the contributing-factor entities (deployments, pods, namespaces, network policies, etc.) responsible for the failure.
An enhanced MMMU benchmark that eliminates shortcuts and guessing strategies to more rigorously test multimodal models across 30 academic disciplines.
A benchmark evaluating precise instruction-following generalization on 58 diverse, verifiable out-of-domain constraints that test models' ability to follow specific output requirements.
An open benchmark from Wisedocs measuring how well models reason over long, fragmented medical records, performing the multi-document synthesis claims professionals rely on when reviewing insurance and healthcare cases.
Artificial Analysis' implementation of HeyGen's Code2Video Bench, evaluating how well models create short product and brand videos from 114 design briefs using HyperFrames HTML.
OpenAI's HealthBench: 5,000 health conversations graded against physician-written rubrics, from emergency referrals to global health.
CritPt v2 is the revised version of CritPt, a benchmark designed to test LLMs on research-level physics reasoning tasks, featuring 70 composite research challenges. Models solve problems with a code-execution tool in an offline Linux sandbox.
VIALS-AA is Artificial Analysis' implementation of Handshake AI's VIALS benchmark. It tests whether language models can interpret scientific images and answer questions about the evidence they contain.
GDPval-AA v2.1 is Artificial Analysis' evaluation framework for OpenAI's GDPval dataset. It tests AI models on real-world tasks across 44 occupations and 9 major industries. Models are given shell access and web browsing capabilities in an agentic loop via Stirrup to solve tasks, with Elo ratings derived from blind pairwise comparisons.
A fintech customer-support benchmark from the 𝜏-Knowledge framework that tests whether agents can navigate a large unstructured knowledge base and execute multi-step tool calls to resolve realistic banking workflows.
A verified refresh of Terminal-Bench 2.0: 89 curated tasks across software engineering, system administration, data processing, model training, and security, with environment and instruction fixes so scores reflect agent capability rather than environment gaps.
Artificial Analysis' implementation of Cognition's FrontierCode 1.1, a private agentic coding benchmark that tests models on completing coding tasks in a way that would actually get merged by maintainers of real-world repositories.
A challenging benchmark measuring language models' ability to extract, reason about, and synthesize information from long-form documents ranging from 10k to 100k tokens (measured using the cl100k_base tokenizer).
A scientist-curated coding benchmark featuring 288 test set subproblems from 80 laboratory problems across 16 scientific disciplines.
A frontier-level benchmark with 2,500 expert-vetted questions across mathematics, sciences, and humanities, designed to be the final closed-ended academic evaluation.
A benchmark designed to test LLMs on research-level physics reasoning tasks, featuring 71 composite research challenges.
An agentic benchmark evaluating AI capabilities in terminal environments through software engineering, system administration, and data processing tasks.
A dual-control conversational AI benchmark simulating technical support scenarios where both agent and user must coordinate actions to resolve telecom service issues.
An enhanced version of MMLU with 12,000 graduate-level questions across 14 subject areas, featuring ten answer options and deeper reasoning requirements.
A contamination-free coding benchmark that continuously harvests fresh competitive programming problems from LeetCode, AtCoder, and CodeForces, evaluating code generation, self-repair, and execution.
A 500-problem subset from the MATH dataset, featuring competition-level mathematics across six domains including algebra, geometry, and number theory.
All 30 problems from the 2025 American Invitational Mathematics Examination, testing olympiad-level mathematical reasoning with integer answers from 000-999.
A lightweight, multilingual version of MMLU, designed to evaluate knowledge and reasoning skills across a diverse range of languages and cultural contexts.