News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Claude Opus 4.6 by behnamoh on Thursday February 05, 2026 @01:35PM (#46903089)
Can we please stop with this nonsense benchmark?
Re:Claude Opus 4.6 by smokel on Thursday February 05, 2026 @02:25PM (#46903862)
I'll bite. The benchmark is actually pretty good. It shows in an extremely comprehensible way how far LLMs have come. Someone not in the know has a hard time understanding what 65.4% means on "Terminal-Bench 2.0". Comparing some crappy pelicans on bicycles is a lot easier.
Re:Claude Opus 4.6 by blibble on Thursday February 05, 2026 @03:50PM (#46905093)
it ceases to be a useful benchmark of general ability when you post it publicly for them to train against
Re:Claude Opus 4.6 by quinnjh on Thursday February 05, 2026 @02:26PM (#46903879)
the field is advancing so fast it's hard to do real science as their will be a new SOTA by the time you're ready to publish results. i think this is a combination of that and people having a laugh.

Would you mind sharing which benchmarks you think are useful measures for multimodal reasoning?

Re:Claude Opus 4.6 by techpression on Thursday February 05, 2026 @03:50PM (#46905088)
A benchmark only tests what the benchmark is doing, the goal is to make that task correlate with actually valuable things. Graphic benchmarks is a good example, extremely hard to know what you will get in a game by looking at 3D Mark scores, it varies by a lot. Making a SVG of a single thing doesn’t help much unless that applies to all SVG tasks.