Evals & benchmarks

AIXiaomi released and open-sourced MiMo-V2-Flash, a Mixture-of-Experts model with 309B total and 15B active parameters, under the MIT license. The company reports 73.4% on SWE-Bench Verified, the top score among open-source models, and inference at 150 tokens per second for $0.1 per million input tokens and $0.3 per million output tokens. It supports a hybrid thinking mode and a 256k context window.

Why it matters: The post gives architecture, speculative decoding speedup, and pricing figures, which help readers judge how the efficiency claims are achieved and what they cost.

AIARC Prize reports that the top Kaggle entry reached 24% on the ARC-AGI-2 private dataset at $0.20 per task, and that all winning solutions and papers are open source. The top verified commercial model, Opus 4.5 (Thinking, 64k), scored 37.6% at $2.20 per task, while a Poetiq refinement on Gemini 3 Pro reached 54% at $30 per task. The author argues that refinement loops are the main driver of 2025 progress, and says ARC-AGI-3 is planned for early 2026.

Why it matters: The post links 2025 competition results to a broader argument about refinement loops, showing how benchmark outcomes are being read as evidence of AI reasoning progress.

AIMoonshot AI released Kimi K2 Thinking, an open-source thinking model that interleaves step-by-step reasoning with tool calls across 200 to 300 sequential invocations. The model is a 1T-parameter mixture-of-experts with 32B activated parameters and a 256k context window, and it uses native INT4 quantization for roughly 2x faster generation. The model card reports benchmark results on HLE, BrowseComp, and other tests, and recommends vLLM, SGLang, or KTransformers for deployment.

Why it matters: The model card gives benchmark tables, quantization details, and deployment settings, letting readers compare Kimi K2 Thinking against GPT-5 and other models on specific tasks.

AIRunway announced Gen-4.5, a video generation model that it says holds the top position on the Artificial Analysis Text-to-Video benchmark with 1,247 Elo points. The model is available across all paid Runway plans at comparable pricing, and the post lists limitations including causal reasoning errors, object permanence failures, and success bias.

Why it matters: The post separates Runway's own ranking claim from the listed limitations, such as causal reasoning and object permanence errors, which helps judge where the model is reliable.

AICognition tested OpenAI's o1-mini and o1-preview in a simplified Devin-Base agent, comparing them with GPT-4o on its internal cognition-golden benchmark. The chart reports Devin-Base scores of 25.9% with GPT-4o, 34.6% with o1-mini, and 51.8% with o1-preview, versus 74.2% for the production Devin. The post also describes the benchmark's realistic environments, simulated users, and agent-based evaluation.

Why it matters: The post explains how Cognition evaluates coding agents with autonomous, environment-based tests, which shows how base-model swaps are measured in practice.

AICognition reports that its agent Devin resolved 79 of 570 sampled SWE-bench issues, a 13.86% success rate, without being given the files to edit. The report says this exceeds the best previous unassisted baseline of 1.96% and the best assisted result of 4.80%. It also describes the adapted evaluation setup, a 45-minute runtime limit, and cases where Devin failed on multi-file edits.

Why it matters: The report explains how SWE-bench was adapted for end-to-end agent evaluation, with failure cases that clarify where the 13.86% result comes from and its limits.

AICognition introduces Devin as an AI software engineer that can plan and execute complex engineering tasks with a shell, code editor, and browser. On SWE-bench, Devin resolved 13.86% of issues end-to-end, versus a previous state-of-the-art of 1.96%, on a random 25% subset of the dataset. Devin is in early access, with access available through a waitlist.

Why it matters: The post pairs Devin's end-to-end task demos with SWE-bench results against prior models, letting readers weigh the claimed capability against the evaluation setup.