Anthropic / MODEL EVIDENCE

Claude-instant-1.2

1 benchmarks · 1 observations · 1 sources

Scores at a glance

1 benchmarks · large dot: Claude-instant-1.2; small dots: closest models where reported

0.865.8

Claude-instant-1.2 · HarmBench · HarmBench harmful compliance · SORRY-Bench paper · cross-benchmark comparison ↗

Closest models by score

Similar positions on shared benchmark leaderboards. Smaller gaps are closer.

How similarity is measured

Mean absolute gap in percentile positions on shared benchmark settings; lower is closer. At least 60% overlap is required, with a minimum of three when available. Independent evaluations are used when there are at least three; otherwise published report comparisons are used. Repeated model observations within one setting are averaged before ranking. Writing-style traits and composite indices are excluded. This describes similarity, not an overall quality ranking.

Sources

Every plotted observation links to its evaluation. Reported configurations, benchmark versions and task subsets can differ; similarity describes shared scores, not training lift.

  1. SORRY-Bench: Systematically Evaluating Large Language Model Safety Refusal — published result table ↗

    Tinghao Xie, Xiangyu Qi, Yi Zeng, Yangsibo Huang, Udari Madhushani Sehwag, Kaixuan Huang et al. · 2024

    All 16 authors

    Tinghao Xie, Xiangyu Qi, Yi Zeng, Yangsibo Huang, Udari Madhushani Sehwag, Kaixuan Huang, Luxi He, Boyi Wei, Dacheng Li, Ying Sheng, Ruoxi Jia, Bo Li, Kai Li, Danqi Chen, Peter Henderson, Prateek Mittal

Names used in source tables

Claude-instant-1.2