Live data from Hacker News

Claude Code daily benchmarks for degradation tracking

marginlab.ai

31–40 of 372 posts

Re: Claude Code daily benchmarks for degradation tracking

#31
> We model tests as Bernoulli random variables and compute 95% confidence intervals around daily, weekly, and monthly pass rates. Statistically significant differences in any of those time horizons are reported.

Doesn't really work like that. I'd remove the "statistically significant" labelling because it's misleading.

Re: Claude Code daily benchmarks for degradation tracking

#32
post #26

[SWE-bench co-author here] It seems like they run this test on a subset of 50 tasks, and that they only run the test once per day. So a lot of the movement in accuracy could be attributed to that. I would run on 300 tasks and I'd run the test suite 5 or 10 times per day and average that score. Lots of variance in the score can come from random stuff like even Anthropic's servers being overloaded.

Hope you don't mind the unrelated question: How do you pay for those SWE-bench runs? I am trying to run a benchmark but it is too expensive to run enough runs to get a fair comparison. https://mafia-arena.com

Benchmarks can get costly to run- you can reach out to frontier model creators to try and get them to give you free credits, but usually they'll only agree to that once your benchmark is pretty popular.

Re: Claude Code daily benchmarks for degradation tracking

#33
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hope you don't mind the unrelated question: How do you pay for those SWE-bench runs? I am trying to run a benchmark but it is too expensive to run enough runs to get a fair comparison. https://mafia-arena.com

Benchmarks can get costly to run- you can reach out to frontier model creators to try and get them to give you free credits, but usually they'll only agree to that once your benchmark is pretty popular.

yes I reached out to them but as you say it's a chicken-and-egg problem.

Thanks!

Re: Claude Code daily benchmarks for degradation tracking

#34

There was a moment about a week ago where Claude went down for about an hour. And right after it came back up it was clear a lot of people had given up and were not using it. It was probably 3x faster than usual. I got more done in the next hour with it than I do in half a day usually. It was definitely a bit of a glimpse into a potential future of “what if these things weren’t resource constrained and could just fly…

I had that exact same feeling during the US holidays where I got to enjoy 2x usage limits and everything just seemed to work well

Re: Claude Code daily benchmarks for degradation tracking

#35

Why is this happening?

There are frequently claims that Anthropic is somehow diluting or dumbing down models in some subtle way. Unfortunately it’s tough to validate these claims without a body of regularly checked evals. This test set should hopefully help settle whether Anthropic is actually making changes under the hood or whether the changes are all in people’s heads.

Re: Claude Code daily benchmarks for degradation tracking

#36
post #9
post #5

This is probably entirely down to subtle changes to CC prompts/tools. I've been using CC more or less 8 hrs/day for the past 2 weeks, and if anything it feels like CC is getting better and better at actual tasks. Edit: Before you downvote, can you explain how the model could degrade WITHOUT changes to the prompts? Is your hypothesis that Opus 4.5, a huge static model, is somehow changing? Master system prompt changin…

Honest, good-faith question. Is CC getting better, or are you getting better at using it? And how do you know the difference? I'm an occasional user, and I can definitely see improvements in my prompts over the past couple of months.

Good-faith answer: I can't be certain. But I've been using CC since its release, and Cursor before that (and actually going all the way back to GPT3 to do codegen in the Playground). After getting used to the CC workflow, the way that I use it has been pretty consistent. To be specific, I use basically the same AGENTS.md with small modifications for each project, and I live almost exclusively in Plan mode and the best model (currently Opus 4.5).

My initial prompting is boilerplate at this point, and looks like this:

(Explain overall objective / problem without jumping to a solution)

(Provide all the detail / file references / past work I can think of)

(Ask it "what questions do you have for me before we build a plan?")

And then go back and forth until we have a plan.

Compared to my work with CC six months ago, it's just much more capable, able to solve more nuanced bugs, and less likely to generate spaghetti code.

Re: Claude Code daily benchmarks for degradation tracking

#37
post #9
post #5

This is probably entirely down to subtle changes to CC prompts/tools. I've been using CC more or less 8 hrs/day for the past 2 weeks, and if anything it feels like CC is getting better and better at actual tasks. Edit: Before you downvote, can you explain how the model could degrade WITHOUT changes to the prompts? Is your hypothesis that Opus 4.5, a huge static model, is somehow changing? Master system prompt changin…

Honest, good-faith question. Is CC getting better, or are you getting better at using it? And how do you know the difference? I'm an occasional user, and I can definitely see improvements in my prompts over the past couple of months.

I agree with you, it's personally hard to tell.

For me I've noticed it getting nothing but better over the past couple months, but I've been working on my workflows and tooling.

For example, I used to use plan mode and would put everything in a single file and then ask it to implement it in a new session.

Switching to the 'superpowers' plugin with its own skills to brainstorm and write plans and execute plans with batches and tasks seems to have made a big improvement and help catch things I wouldn't have before. There's a "get shit done" plugin that's similar that I want to explore as well.

The code output always looks good to me for the most part though and I've never thought that it's getting dumber anything, so I feel like a lot of the improvements I see are because of a skill issue on my part trying to use everything. Obviously it doesn't help there's a new way to do things every two weeks though.

Re: Claude Code daily benchmarks for degradation tracking

#38
post #10
post #5

This is probably entirely down to subtle changes to CC prompts/tools. I've been using CC more or less 8 hrs/day for the past 2 weeks, and if anything it feels like CC is getting better and better at actual tasks. Edit: Before you downvote, can you explain how the model could degrade WITHOUT changes to the prompts? Is your hypothesis that Opus 4.5, a huge static model, is somehow changing? Master system prompt changin…

That's why benchmarks are useful. We all suffer from the shortcomings of human perception.

Benchmarks measure what they measure. But your subjective experience also matters.

Re: Claude Code daily benchmarks for degradation tracking

#39
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hope you don't mind the unrelated question: How do you pay for those SWE-bench runs? I am trying to run a benchmark but it is too expensive to run enough runs to get a fair comparison. https://mafia-arena.com

Benchmarks can get costly to run- you can reach out to frontier model creators to try and get them to give you free credits, but usually they'll only agree to that once your benchmark is pretty popular.

so basically they know requests using your API key should be treated with care?

Re: Claude Code daily benchmarks for degradation tracking

#40

[SWE-bench co-author here] It seems like they run this test on a subset of 50 tasks, and that they only run the test once per day. So a lot of the movement in accuracy could be attributed to that. I would run on 300 tasks and I'd run the test suite 5 or 10 times per day and average that score. Lots of variance in the score can come from random stuff like even Anthropic's servers being overloaded.

Agreed, this benchmark would be much more useful ran multiple times a day. That could reveal degredation in line with load patterns.
Post reply on HN