GLM-5.2 is the new leading open weights model on Artificial Analysis

Post by mirekrusin » Thu, Jun 18, 2026, 1:30 PM UTC

logicchains wrote: post #372

mirekrusin wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t understand why there isn’t public dataset for reasoning that can be improved by humans/llms like Wikipedia (ie with auto judging contributions etc).

For reasoning a manually-curated dataset is too small; you need to be able to automatically generate vast volumes of synthetic reasoning data with provably correct answers. That's presumably why Claude and GPT are so good at using Lean (the theorem prover), because they get fed a bunch of synthetic, verifiably correct training data.

Post by brookst » Thu, Jun 18, 2026, 1:53 PM UTC

solid_fuel wrote: post #430

brookst wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s been amazing to see the arc of tech people going from “evil Disney, copyright is an abomination, information wants to be free” to “OMG copyright is inviolable and AI is taking money out of Plato’s descendants’ pockets!”

> taking money out of Plato’s descendants’ pockets Yeah, remind me - is it Plato's descendants that people are concerned about here, or is it every single author who had any work in Anna's Archive, any work published online, any work published on github, etc? I think that people are probably upset about the harm to living people who had their work stolen by Meta and other LLM companies - regardless of license, terms…

Post by RDTvlokip » Thu, Jun 18, 2026, 3:01 PM UTC

sinuhe69 wrote: post #322

RDTvlokip wrote: post #238

I have a question, as it happens: Do you think the benchmarks and models were trained on benchmark datasets to skew the results, even though in real-world applications we realize they're not that great?

Recent incident with the Rio 3.5 model clearly shows that many coding models are specifically trained/fine tuned for the benchmarks.

Post by toraway » Thu, Jun 18, 2026, 3:32 PM UTC

brookst wrote: post #453

solid_fuel wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> taking money out of Plato’s descendants’ pockets Yeah, remind me - is it Plato's descendants that people are concerned about here, or is it every single author who had any work in Anna's Archive, any work published online, any work published on github, etc? I think that people are probably upset about the harm to living people who had their work stolen by Meta and other LLM companies - regardless of license, terms…

Sure, that’s the motte / bailey. Easy to point to living, starving writers who suffer grevious harm, in defense of perpetual copyright. Disney and others use literally this exact argument year after year. I’m not even disagreeing. I’m just saying the shift in attitude about copyright in the tech space has been sudden, dramatic, and really funny. Remember “you wouldn’t steal a car”? Today’s anti-AI tech contingent are…

Post by benjiro29 » Thu, Jun 18, 2026, 4:59 PM UTC

greyb wrote: post #454

benjiro29 wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The formula is very easy. Go to the website of neuralwatt, and read ... 5$ = 1Kwh in power for non-subscription usage. For subscription usage you get ~50% more. Then you actually use the service and see how much tokens you use on average. You calculate the token use vs what you pay. And this gives you a stable number to compare different services and model with, if you want the token cost. This is basic school level…

The irony of questioning someone's communication skills immediately after this exchange is hard to miss.