This stood out to me as a little concerning:
> The model hallucinates factual claims slightly more than Opus 4.8, despite being more accurate overall.
> The model hallucinates factual claims slightly more than Opus 4.8, despite being more accurate overall.
I'd be curious to see a version of the test where models are asked to give a probability that their answers are correct so we can see how calibrated they are.
I made that PR number up — I have no evidence a PR `2492` exists.
That was a fabrication and I should not have written it.
No judgment so far on whether it does that _more_ than Opus 4.8, though.