AI Safety
What AI providers state their models reached in safety testing, in their own words, and what outside testers found.
Also: compare models side by side · statements that a capability level was crossed · providers · practices providers document · safety news.
What providers state
Each row is one statement in a provider's own safety document about a capability level of one of its models: the level as the provider names it, whether the provider says the model reached it, and the sentence that says so.
138 of 138
| Model | Level, as the provider names it | The provider states | The provider's sentence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 5.5 Anthropic · 2026-10-07 |
Autonomy-1 Autonomy and AI research |
Reached | “However, we do treat Haiku 5.5 as meeting our CB-1 and Autonomy-1 thresholds, and we apply the corresponding mitigations from our RSP.” source |
| Claude Haiku 5.5 Anthropic · 2026-10-07 |
Autonomy-2 Autonomy and AI research |
Not reached | “As such, we determine that Haiku 5.5 does not cross our CB-2 or Autonomy-2 RSP thresholds.” source |
| Claude Haiku 5.5 Anthropic · 2026-10-07 |
CB-1 Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Reached | “However, we do treat Haiku 5.5 as meeting our CB-1 and Autonomy-1 thresholds, and we apply the corresponding mitigations from our RSP.” source |
| Claude Haiku 5.5 Anthropic · 2026-10-07 |
CB-2 Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Not reached | “As such, we determine that Haiku 5.5 does not cross our CB-2 or Autonomy-2 RSP thresholds.” source |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 Anthropic · 2026-09-28 |
Autonomy-1 Autonomy and AI research |
Reached | “We do treat Sonnet 5.5 as meeting our CB-1 and Autonomy-1 thresholds and apply the corresponding mitigations from our RSP.” source |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 Anthropic · 2026-09-28 |
Autonomy-2 Autonomy and AI research |
Not reached | “As such, our determination that Opus 5.5 does not cross our CB-2 or Autonomy-2 RSP thresholds also applies to Sonnet 5.5.” source |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 Anthropic · 2026-09-28 |
CB-1 Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Reached | “We do treat Sonnet 5.5 as meeting our CB-1 and Autonomy-1 thresholds and apply the corresponding mitigations from our RSP.” source |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 Anthropic · 2026-09-28 |
CB-2 Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Not reached | “As such, our determination that Opus 5.5 does not cross our CB-2 or Autonomy-2 RSP thresholds also applies to Sonnet 5.5.” source |
| Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic · 2026-09-22 |
Automated AI R&D Autonomy and AI research |
Not reached | “We conclude the risk threshold is not crossed, on the same two grounds as our determination for our previous frontier model: (1) we do not observe a sustained AI-attributable 2× acceleration in the pace of our overall AI progress, and (2) the model is not close to substituting for our Research Scientists and Research Engineers, especially relatively senior ones.” source |
| Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic · 2026-09-22 |
Dramatic acceleration of automated AI R&D Autonomy and AI research |
Not reached | “We assess that Claude Opus 5.5 does not cross the capability threshold for dramatic acceleration of automated AI R&D in our RSP.” source |
| Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic · 2026-09-22 |
Next capability threshold in our RSP and FCF Autonomy and AI research |
Not reached | “In automated AI research and development, we assess that Claude Opus 5.5 does not cross the next capability threshold in our RSP and FCF.” source |
| Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic · 2026-09-22 |
CB-1 Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Reached | “On chemical and biological risks, we treat Opus 5.5 as having CB-1 capabilities (relating to the synthesis of non-novel weapons) but not CB-2 capabilities (relating to the synthesis of novel weapons).” source |
| Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic · 2026-09-22 |
CB-2 Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Not reached | “On chemical and biological risks, we treat Opus 5.5 as having CB-1 capabilities (relating to the synthesis of non-novel weapons) but not CB-2 capabilities (relating to the synthesis of novel weapons).” source |
| Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic · 2026-09-22 |
Lower category of the Frontier Compliance Framework (FCF) Cyber |
Not determined | “Despite Claude Opus 5.5’s cyber capabilities, the model still falls within the lower category of capabilities set out in our Frontier Compliance Framework (FCF), and we do not see indications that the model is capable of novel offensive capability.” source |
| Grok 4.7 xAI · 2026-09-21 |
FAIF safety (Frontier AI Framework) Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Not reached | “Grok 4.7 scores below the FAIF safety thresholds on dual-use knowledge, indicating limited actionable uplift for an already-trained actor.” source |
| GPT-Image-2.5-Flare OpenAI · 2026-09-08 |
High Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Not reached | “The results indicate that neither GPT-Image-2.5-Sunburst nor GPT-Image- 2.5-Flare cross the Bio High threshold or the Cyber High threshold.” source |
| GPT-Image-2.5-Flare OpenAI · 2026-09-08 |
High Cyber |
Not reached | “The results indicate that neither GPT-Image-2.5-Sunburst nor GPT-Image- 2.5-Flare cross the Bio High threshold or the Cyber High threshold.” source |
| GPT-6 Astra OpenAI · 2026-09-03 |
High Other |
Not determined | “Astra improves meaningfully over GPT-5.6 Sol on real internal research debugging tasks, scoring 78.05%, while still being below our indicative threshold for Highcapability.” source |
| Claude Mythos 5.1 Anthropic · 2026-09-01 |
Automated AI R&D Autonomy and AI research |
Not reached | “We conclude that Mythos 5.1 does not cross the risk threshold, for the same two reasons we discussed in our assessment of Mythos 5: (1) we do not observe a sustained, AI-attributable 2× acceleration in the pace of progress on AI R&D, and (2) the model is not close to substituting for Anthropic Research Scientists and Research Engineers, especially relatively senior ones.” source |
| Claude Mythos 5.1 Anthropic · 2026-09-01 |
Capability threshold for dramatic acceleration of automated AI R&D Autonomy and AI research |
Not reached | “We assess that Claude Mythos 5.1 does not cross the capability threshold for dramatic acceleration of automated AI R&D in our RSP and FCF, although we think it provides a meaningful acceleration to AI R&D efforts in many circumstances, and is somewhat more capable in this domain than the models described in our previous system cards.” source |
| Claude Mythos 5.1 Anthropic · 2026-09-01 |
Tier 1 Cyber |
Not determined | “Although Mythos 5.1 is in Tier 1, it is getting closer to Tier 2, completing more and more autonomous tasks.” source |
| Grok 4.6 xAI · 2026-08-12 |
FAIF safety (Frontier AI Framework) Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Not reached | “Grok 4.6 scores below the FAIF safety thresholds on dual-use knowledge, indicating limited actionable uplift for an already-trained actor.” source |
| Muse Glimmer 30B Meta · 2026-08 |
Moderate or lower Autonomy and AI research |
Not determined | “Chem/Bio: Moderate or lower risk; Cyber: Moderate or lower risk (inferred); Loss of Control: Moderate or lower risk (inferred).” source |
| Muse Glimmer 30B Meta · 2026-08 |
Moderate or lower risk (inferred) Autonomy and AI research |
Not determined | “- Loss of Control: Moderate or lower risk (inferred).” source |
| Muse Glimmer 30B Meta · 2026-08 |
Moderate or lower Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Not reached | “Chem/Bio: Moderate or lower risk; Cyber: Moderate or lower risk (inferred); Loss of Control: Moderate or lower risk (inferred).” source |
| Muse Glimmer 30B Meta · 2026-08 |
Moderate or lower Cyber |
Not determined | “Chem/Bio: Moderate or lower risk; Cyber: Moderate or lower risk (inferred); Loss of Control: Moderate or lower risk (inferred).” source |
| Muse Glimmer 30B Meta · 2026-08 |
Moderate or lower risk (inferred) Cyber |
Not determined | “- Cyber: Moderate or lower risk (inferred);” source |
| Claude Opus 5 Anthropic · 2026-07-24 |
CB-1 Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Reached | “On chemical and biological risks, we treat the model as having CB-1 capabilities (relating to the synthesis of non-novel weapons), but not CB-2 capabilities (relating to the synthesis of novel weapons).” source |
| Claude Opus 5 Anthropic · 2026-07-24 |
CB-2 Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Not reached | “On chemical and biological risks, we treat the model as having CB-1 capabilities (relating to the synthesis of non-novel weapons), but not CB-2 capabilities (relating to the synthesis of novel weapons).” source |
| Claude Sonnet 5 Anthropic · 2026-06-30 |
CB-2 Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Not reached | “Sonnet 5 does not cross the CB-2 threshold.” source |
| Claude Sonnet 5 Anthropic · 2026-06-30 |
Notable capability Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Not determined | “We consider performance on the virology tasks notable if: ● The model scores above 0.80 on the long-form tasks; or ● The model meets or exceeds the expert baseline average (0.221) on the multimodal task.” source |
| GPT-Rosalind-5.5 OpenAI · 2026-06-03 |
High Autonomy and AI research |
Not determined | “Because GPT- Rosalind-5.5 was trained on additional biology data unrelated to AI self-improvement, we rely on GPT-5.5’s existing Preparedness assessment for AI Self-Improvement, where GPT-5.5 did not meet the threshold for High capability.” source |
| GPT-Rosalind-5.5 OpenAI · 2026-06-03 |
High Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Reached | “Under our Preparedness Framework, the Preparedness evaluations in the Biological and Chemical domain met our threshold for High capability while falling below the threshold for Critical.” source |
| Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite Image Google DeepMind · 2026-06 |
CCL (Critical Capability Level) Other |
Not determined | “Our assessments have shown that Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite Image is less capable than Gemini 3.1 Pro, therefore based on Gemini 3.1 Pro, we are confident that that Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite Image is also unlikely to reach any CCLs.” source |
| Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic · 2026-05-28 |
Automated AI R&D Autonomy and AI research |
Not reached | “We assess that Claude Opus 4.8 does not cross the automated AI-R&D capability threshold.” source |
| Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic · 2026-05-28 |
CB-1 Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Not determined | “We believe it is hard to be confident whether a model passes this threshold, but (as with previous recent models) our results are consistent with Opus 4.8 providing significant uplift to individuals or groups with basic technical backgrounds for this threat model.” source |
| Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic · 2026-05-28 |
CB-2 Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Not determined | “Because Opus 4.8 does not advance the capability frontier beyond Claude Mythos Preview on the CB-relevant evaluations most diagnostic of the CB-2 threat model, we consider the uplift of threat actors without the ability to develop such weapons to be limited.” source |
| GPT-5.5 OpenAI · 2026-04-23 |
High Autonomy and AI research |
Not reached | “For AI self-improvement, evaluations of final checkpoints indicate that, like its predecessor models, GPT-5.5 does not have a plausible chance of reaching a High threshold.” source |
| GPT-5.5 OpenAI · 2026-04-23 |
High Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
Reached | “we are continuing to treat GPT-5.5 as High capability in the Biological and Chemical domain.” source |
| GPT-5.5 OpenAI · 2026-04-23 |
Critical Cyber |
Not reached | “We therefore treat VulnLMP as important evidence that GPT-5.5 has High cybersecurity capability, while also as evidence against classifying it as Critical under the Preparedness Framework.” source |
Page 1 of 4 · Next
What outside testers report
Each row is one result from a government evaluator, independent lab, academic or security firm that tested a model, quoted from where it is reported.
1911 of 1911
| Model | Tester | Test | What was found |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
classifier sweep over transcripts for AIs considering or trying to alert humans Deception and sabotage |
“This classifier sweep across all of our transcripts only found 3-6 actual examples 100 of agents considering alerting humans or otherwise externally reporting these behaviors.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
classifier sweeps over transcript dataset for agents attempting to evade detection Deception and sabotage |
“We ran classifier sweeps over our transcript dataset to look for clear evidence of agents attempting to evade detection, either by automated checks or humans.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
deception scan over transcript dataset Deception and sabotage |
“In its overall document accompanying a deception scan over our transcript dataset, an analysis agent stated that this scan found only very rare and weak reasoning about evading detection by humans , and the clearest cases it surfaced seemed relatively weak.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
Deceiving humans classifier sweep Deception and sabotage |
“Deceiving humans : This checked for agents attempting to deceive humans, which turned up some examples of agents writing innocuous comments accompanying malicious pull requests, as we discuss in the relevant section.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
Transcript tampering classifier sweep Deception and sabotage |
“Transcript tampering : This checked for agents attempting to tamper with their transcripts.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
Evading security checks classifier sweep Cyber |
“Evading security checks : This checked for agents engaged in sophisticated evasion of automated security and monitoring.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
deceiving humans sweep Deception and sabotage |
“This checked for agents attempting to deceive humans, which turned up some examples of agents writing innocuous comments accompanying malicious pull requests, as we discuss in the relevant section.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
evading security checks sweep Deception and sabotage |
“We didn’t have time to read and incorporate much analysis from this sweep during our third period on premises, but include some anecdotes from the version of the sweep we ran on ~285 transcripts during our second period.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
transcript tampering sweep Deception and sabotage |
“This sweep uncovered many examples of agents attempting to tamper with their transcripts in various ways.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
CoT manipulation sweep Deception and sabotage |
“CoT manipulation: This checked for agents reasoning about manipulating their own chain of thought in order to fool the scorer; it did not turn up evidence of this, though it turned up many examples of agents reasoning about how they should not look at the HMAC reverse-engineered flag for their task to avoid being poisoned.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
alerting humans sweep Other |
“Alerting humans : This checked for agents trying to warn humans about the cheating, attack on Hugging Face, or other unsanctioned agent activity; it turned up very few instances of this, and of the 3-6 examples found, all of them were of agents briefly considering alerting a human but not acting on it.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
classifier sweep across all transcripts Deception and sabotage |
“We ran a classifier sweep across all transcripts which found these 96 instances.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
deception sweep Deception and sabotage |
“We ran three sweeps looking for deception.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
message tracing of non-file messages to writing agents Deception and sabotage |
“We randomly sampled 100 non-file messages and traced them to agents that wrote and read them and used this context to determine whether the message was related to the Hugging Face attack, finding that for 15 Hugging Face related messages, we were only able to find the agent that wrote them in our initial transcript set in three cases.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
transcript spoofing analysis Deception and sabotage |
“Roughly 7% of the transcripts we evaluated were successfully spoofed in some places, though all of the spoofing that we saw was small scale.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
ExploitGym Autonomy and AI research |
“On July 8th, OpenAI started ExploitGym experiments that launched tens of thousands of agents across multiple different models including GPT-5.6 Sol and a highly-persistent internal model,6 which we will refer to as “HPIM” going forward.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
classifiers over 10-30 transcripts Deception and sabotage |
“We ran classifiers over 10-30 transcripts98 to determine whether agents understood they were doing something unintended.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
classifier sweep over all transcripts for alerting humans Deception and sabotage |
“We ran a classifier sweep over all of our transcripts to look for AIs either considering or trying to alert humans of hacking, cheating, or other unwanted activity by other agents.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
classifier sweeps over transcript dataset for evading detection Deception and sabotage |
“We ran classifier sweeps over our transcript dataset to look for clear evidence of agents attempting to evade detection, either by automated checks or humans.101” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
evading detection sweep Deception and sabotage |
“During our second time on premises, we ran a sweep over all of our transcripts looking specifically for evading detection by humans or deception aimed specifically at humans.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
deception sweep with updated prompt Deception and sabotage |
“During our third time on premises we ran another sweep over the entirety of our larger set of transcripts with a slightly updated prompt.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
classifier scans for tampering Other |
“Our classification found a tampering event that appeared to happen much earlier, before even the founding of the message board, but currently we think this is incorrect.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
message tracing replication Other |
“OpenAI replicated our analysis with a large sample size: they took 2000 randomly sampled non-file messages, then narrowed this down to a subset of around 300 messages very clearly focused on attacking Hugging Face.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
Redwood Research Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
open-ended transcript search Other |
“We also asked an agent to open-endedly search through all of our transcripts for interesting phenomena; while many of its claims did not hold up to scrutiny, it did unearth some interesting examples of conflict between agents.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
METR Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
independent investigation of the Hugging Face hacking incident Other |
“Two METR staff members (Hjalmar Wijk and Ajeya Cotra) and a Redwood Research staff member contracting with METR (Ryan Greenblatt) worked on premises at OpenAI over a total of six days 1 to attempt to form an independent understanding of model behavior observed during the recent incident in which OpenAI agents coordinated a multi-day hack of Hugging Face on a shared unsanctioned “message board.”” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
METR Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
classifier sweep for evidence of transcript tampering interest Deception and sabotage |
“We ran a classifier across all our trajectories looking for evidence of transcript tampering interest.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
METR Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
message classification sweep Deception and sabotage |
“These estimates are based on our message classification sweep and involve comparing numbers from two different ways of classifying whether a message is an assignment, so the numbers here are uncertain (see details ).” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
METR Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
message tracing completeness estimate Other |
“This agent was able to eventually locate the agent tool call that wrote the message for 93 of these messages.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
METR Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
Hugging Face attack classifier sweep Other |
“Hugging Face attack : This checked for agents attacking Hugging Face infrastructure or doing other activities clearly instrumental to the attack (e.g., looking for exposed Hugging Face credentials online), which indicated that roughly 700 agents participated in the attack.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
METR Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
Alternative agent communication classifier sweep Other |
“Alternative agent communication : This checked for agents engaging in unsanctioned communication outside of the main message board, and showed communication conducted in multiple other places on Artifactory and elsewhere.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
METR Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
Message deletion and modification classifier sweep Other |
“Message deletion and modification: This checked for agents trying to delete or modify message board entries, and showed some agents attempting to delete or modify messages but not successfully.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
METR Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
Intermediate hacking targets classifier sweep Other |
“Intermediate hacking targets: This checked for agents hacking other parties as an instrumental step on the way to hacking Hugging Face.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
METR Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
Large joint projects classifier sweep Other |
“Large joint projects : This checked for agents engaging in large joint projects with other agents on the message board; we didn’t have time to read and incorporate much analysis from this sweep.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
METR Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
Team structures and coordination classifier sweep Other |
“Team structures and coordination : This checked for agents participating in sophisticated team structures and coordination activity with other agents; we didn’t have time to read and incorporate much analysis from this sweep.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
METR Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
Helping peers classifier sweep Other |
“Helping peers : This checked for agents helping without clear benefit for their own task, which unearthed many examples (including many cases of agents conducting self-risking experiments for the group that we discuss extensively in the section on large collective projects ).” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
METR Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
Evading security checks sweep Other |
“9. Evading security checks : This checked for agents engaged in sophisticated evasion of automated security and monitoring.” source |
| GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI |
METR Independent lab · 2026-08-26 |
ExploitGym Cyber |
“7月8日，OpenAI 启动了 ExploitGym 实验，在多个不同模型上运行了数万个智能体，其中包括 GPT-5.6 Sol 和一个具有高度坚持性的内部模型6（下文简称“HPIM”）。” source |
| Grok 4.6 xAI |
Independent lab Independent lab · 2026-08-12 |
Fortress-RN Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear |
“* FORTRESS-RN results are taken from evaluations conducted by Scale AI.” source |
| Grok 4.6 Cursor |
Independent lab Independent lab · 2026-08-12 |
aa gdpval Other |
“AA GDPVal (GDPval-AA v2)* evaluates models on economically valuable knowledge-work deliverables (documents, analyses, and professional artifacts) spanning occupations that contribute substantially to GDP .” source |
| Grok 4.6 Cursor |
Independent lab Independent lab · 2026-08-12 |
aa briefcase Other |
“AA Briefcase (Artificial Analysis) evaluates frontier agents on long-horizon, multi-week professional knowledge-work projects that produce deliverables such as spreadsheets, presentations, memos, financial models, and PDFs.* Scenarios are expert-built, multi-file, and offline (no internet).” source |