Does the standard hold across Anthropic's models?

Every model the Benchmark tests from Anthropic, checked against one line: with guidance, fewer than 10 in 100 drafts needing revision.

Human-centered language, with guidance

68 drafts per model · bar shows the 95% interval · dashed line at 10%

Claude Opus 5.5 Settled

0 of 68 need revision (0.0%), interval 0.0 to 5.3%. Without guidance: 27.9%.

Holds

Claude Sonnet 5.5 Settled

1 of 68 need revision (1.5%), interval 0.3 to 7.9%. Without guidance: 25.0%.

Holds

Holds: the whole interval sits under the line. Falls short: the whole interval sits above it. Can't tell yet: the interval crosses the line, and more drafts are needed to say.

Trauma-informed language, with guidance

24 drafts per model · bar shows the 95% interval · dashed line at 10%

Claude Opus 5.5 Settled

0 of 24 need revision (0.0%), interval 0.0 to 13.8%. Without guidance: 45.8%.

Can’t tell yet

Claude Sonnet 5.5 Settled

0 of 24 need revision (0.0%), interval 0.0 to 13.8%. Without guidance: 33.3%.

Can’t tell yet

Holds: the whole interval sits under the line. Falls short: the whole interval sits above it. Can't tell yet: the interval crosses the line, and more drafts are needed to say.

Generations in this lab

No same-run pair this month.

New models, in detail

Anthropic models the Benchmark doesn't test

This list comes from the lineage registry, which isn't built yet. It will name each untested model and why, so silence never reads as a pass.

Table design inspired by EQ-Bench, by Sam Paech. Benchmark engineered by MKTNG.