SWE-bench Pro

How each maker reported it

• Claude Opus 5.5 Table 8.1.A, p.174

  Claude results use adaptive thinking at max effort, averaged over five trials (Terminal-Bench 4.0 at xhigh). Competitor figures come from the developers' own published results.

• Claude Sonnet 5.5 Table 8.1.A, p.109

  Claude results use adaptive thinking at max effort with default sampling, averaged over five trials. Competitor figures come from the developers' own published system cards or leaderboards.

• Claude Fable 5.1 Table 8.1.A, p.167

  Fable 5.1 and Mythos 5.1 share weights, so column 0 covers both (likewise Fable 5 / Mythos 5). Claude results use adaptive thinking at max effort, averaged over five trials. Terminal-Bench 4.0 values are from §8.6, p.171 (Mythos 5.1: 60.9%; GPT-5.6 Sol from the public leaderboard). Competitor figures come from the developers' own published results or leaderboards.

• Claude Opus 5 Table 8.1.A, p.148–149

  Claude Opus 5 results use adaptive thinking at max effort, averaged over five trials (ARC-AGI-3 at high effort). GPT-5.6 Sol's FrontierBench figure uses Codex and its ARC-AGI-1 figure is at xhigh. The Fable 5 HealthBench Professional figure carries a footnote reading "Mythos 5". Competitor figures come from the developers' own published results or leaderboards.

• Claude Haiku 5.5 Table 8.1.A, p.111

  Haiku 5.5 results use adaptive thinking at max effort with default sampling, averaged over five trials. FrontierCode is shown at max effort (Sonnet 5.5 scores 52.1 at xhigh). OSWorld is the offline subset; GPT-6 Luna was run by Anthropic on the same tasks. Other competitor figures come from the developers' own published results.

• Muse Glimmer 30B Benchmarks

  Meta's own results. Muse Glimmer at high reasoning; Gemma4-31B and Qwen3.6-27B in thinking mode. GDPVal-AA v2 is an Elo-style score.