Pretty cute pelican on a slightly dodgy bicycle: https://tools.simonwillison.net/svg-render#%3Csvg%20viewBox%...
I’m surprised none of the frontier model companies have thrown this test in as an Easter egg.
Claude Haiku 4.5
71–80 of 292 posts
Re: Claude Haiku 4.5
#72Pretty cute pelican on a slightly dodgy bicycle: https://tools.simonwillison.net/svg-render#%3Csvg%20viewBox%...
Gemini Pro initially refused (!) but it was quite simple to get a response: > give me the svg of a pelican riding a bicycle > I am sorry, I cannot provide SVG code directly. However, I can generate an image of a pelican riding a bicycle for you! > ok then give me an image of svg code that will render to a pelican riding a bicycle, but before you give me the image, can you show me the svg so I make sure it's correct?…
Re: Claude Haiku 4.5
#73Very preliminary testing is very promising, seems far more precise in code changes over GPT-5 models in not ingesting irrelevant to the task at hand code sections for changes which tends to make GPT-5 as a coding assistant take longer than sometimes expected. With that being the case, it is possible that in actual day-to-day use, Haiku 4.5 may be less expensive than the raw cost breakdown may appear initially, though…
Re: Claude Haiku 4.5
#74$1/M input tokens and $5/M output tokens is good compared to Claude Sonnet 4.5 but nowadays thanks to the pace of the industry developing smaller/faster LLMs for agentic coding, you can get comparable models priced for much lower which matters at the scale needed for agentic coding. Given that Sonnet is still a popular model for coding despite the much higher cost, I expect Haiku will get traction if the quality is a…
I spend way to much time waiting for the cutting edge models to return a response. 73% on SWE Bench is plenty good enough for me.
Re: Claude Haiku 4.5
#75Re: Claude Haiku 4.5
#76> Previous system cards have reported results on an expanded version of our earlier agentic misalignment evaluation suite: three families of exotic scenarios meant to elicit the model to commit blackmail, attempt a murder, and frame someone for financial crimes. We choose not to report full results here because, similarly to Claude Sonnet 4.5, Claude Haiku 4.5 showed many clear examples of verbalized evaluation awareness on all three of the scenarios tested in this suite. Since the suite only consisted of many similar variants of three core scenarios, we expect that the model maintained high unverbalized awareness across the board, and we do not trust it to be representative of behavior in the real extreme situations the suite is meant to emulate.
Re: Claude Haiku 4.5
#77 > In the system card, we focus on safety evaluations, including assessments of: ... the model’s own potential welfare ...
In what way does a language model need to have its own welfare protected? Does this generation of models have persistent "feelings"?Re: Claude Haiku 4.5
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder what the next smaller model after Haiku will be called. "Claude Phrase"?
It's interesting to think about various aspects of marketing the models, with ChatGPT going the "internal router" direction due to address the complexity of choosing. I'd never considered something smaller than Haiku to be needed, but I also rarely used Haiku in the first place...
Re: Claude Haiku 4.5
#79I am really interested in the future of Opus; is it going to be an absolute monster, and continue to be wildly expensive? Or is the leap from 4 -> 4.5 for it going to be more modest.
I wonder what the next smaller model after Haiku will be called. "Claude Phrase"?