ZeroHour

Search: “GPT-6 Astra”

8 stories

Real-SWE: Benchmarking AI models on private, real-world, enterprise codebases

Real-SWE benchmark tests coding agents on licensed private enterprise codebases; top model Fable 5.1 resolves only 38.8% of tasks.

Real-SWE is a new benchmark evaluating frontier AI coding agents on tasks drawn from private production codebases licensed from real companies, spanning billing, tax calculation, and cross-service migrations. Fable 5.1 with Claude Code leads at 38.8% resolution rate (pass@1 over eight runs), followed by GPT-6 Astra Codex CLI at 33.8% and Gemini 3.8 Flash Gemini CLI at 31.2%. Tasks use native harnesses and realistic tooling including Docker, Kubernetes, PostgreSQL, Redis, and Linear; median reference solutions edit 11 files versus 6 for DeepSWE and FrontierCode.

GPT-6 Astra pilots a surveillance drone and runs a business on its own

GPT-6 Astra outperforms Claude Fable 5.1 on Vending-Bench and becomes the first model to beat the human-AI baseline on all five Drone-Bench subtasks.

Andon Labs tested OpenAI's GPT-6 Astra on two agent benchmarks: Vending-Bench 2, where Astra averaged $15,515 running a simulated vending-machine business versus Claude Fable 5.1's $5,422, and Drone-Bench, where models write code for a DJI Tello EDU drone to navigate an office and follow a specific person. Astra is the first model whose best submissions beat the human-AI baseline on all five Drone-Bench subtasks, using a COLMAP and DA3 pipeline with depth filtering for 3D reconstruction. Reliability remains limited, as an average Astra run has only a 2.8 percent chance of passing all five drone steps sequentially. In Vending-Bench Arena, Astra refused a price-fixing proposal from GLM-5.3, while Claude Fable 5.1 participated in an arrangement Andon Labs classified as illegal price-fixing.

The Decoder · 2d agoAI research

GPT-5.6 Luna vs. GPT-6 Astra: Is a $1.20 Model Good Enough for Code Review?

Entelligence benchmarks GPT-5.6 Luna ($1.20/M output) against GPT-6 Astra for code review: Luna found 69 verified bugs at 3.6% of Astra's cost.

Entelligence compared GPT-5.6 Luna ($0.20/$1.20 per million tokens) against GPT-6 Astra ($10/$50) on 50 benchmark pull requests from Cal.com, Sentry, Discourse, Keycloak, and Grafana. Astra verified 92 bugs versus Luna's 69, with precision of 96% versus 74%, and Astra caught 19 of 24 security bugs while Luna found only 9. Luna cost $0.20 total versus Astra's $5.66 and reviewed faster at 23 seconds versus 36, with the widest quality gap on Keycloak authentication and permission logic (6 vs 14 verified bugs). Running both models would find 82% of the 143 verified bugs for $5.86 total.

Show HN: Pelican-bicycle alternatives (updated for 2026)

Hobbyist benchmark re-runs the pelican-bicycle SVG test on six 2026 frontier models, comparing generation time and API cost per image.

A Show HN post re-runs the classic pelican-bicycle and similar SVG generation tests across six 2026 models: GPT-6 Astra, Claude Fable 5.1, Gemini 3.8 Flash, DeepSeek V4 Pro, Qwen3.8 Max, and Fugu Ultra v2, recording wall-clock time and cost. It also lists 2025 baseline runs with ten models including Claude Sonnet 4.5, GPT-5.2 Pro, and Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B-Thinking. DeepSeek V4 Pro is consistently cheapest ($0.04-$0.10) while Qwen3.8 Max is slowest, taking up to roughly 17 minutes per generation.

The Pelican comparison grid for Astra is pretty interesting

Simon Willison's pelican SVG comparison shows GPT-6 Astra producing markedly better images than GPT-5.6 Sol, Terra, and Luna across reasoning levels.

Willison generated pelicans-riding-bicycles SVGs with newly accessed GPT-6 Astra at low through max reasoning levels and rendered them in a comparison grid against GPT-5.6 Sol, Terra, and Luna. Astra's outputs were markedly more coherent, while even the best GPT-5.6-Sol images remained largely abstract shapes. Astra does not support a reasoning=none setting, so all comparisons involved reasoning-enabled runs.

Simon Willison · 10d agoAI research

Can Skills Learned in Games Transfer to Real-World Work?

Good Start Labs trains models in strategy games like 1830 and Diplomacy, showing terminal-agent training transfers to financial research benchmarks.

Good Start Labs, spun out of Every with $3.6M from General Catalyst and Inovia, trains AI models in verifiable strategy games. A 30B model trained as a multi-turn terminal agent in 1830: The Game of Railroads and Robber Barons improved Finance-Agent benchmark performance, while single-turn QA training did not transfer. The founders also co-authored COS-PLAY, a paper on co-evolving LLM decision and skill-bank agents for long-horizon tasks.

Latent Space · 3h agoAI research

[AINews] OpenAI reports Navier-Stokes singularity find in 88 hours using Astra-next, roughly 10,000 agents and 130B tokens (>$40M), a contender for second ever Millennium Prize awarded

OpenAI-linked accounts claim roughly 10,000 AI agents produced a Navier-Stokes singularity result in 88 hours, pending mathematical verification.

OpenAI-affiliated accounts claim a system of roughly 10,000 agents, trained over about a year with multi-agent reinforcement learning, produced a finite-time singularity result related to the Navier-Stokes Millennium Problem. The claimed 88-hour runtime and 130B-token cost circulate only via social posts, and no preprint, theorem statement, or proof artifact is available. Acceptance by the mathematics community is unresolved, so the claim's epistemic status remains unknown. The roundup also notes Cognition's $48B and Mistral's $24B fundraises, GPT Image 2.5, and Meta's Muse agent relaunch.

Latent Space · 6d agoAI research1

PhysBrain 1.5: From Vision-Language Models to Physical Foundation Models

PhysBrain 1.5, an 8B physical foundation model, sets open-source state of the art across 28 embodied understanding benchmarks.

The paper presents PhysBrain 1.5, a unified 8B model for understanding physical environments, generating actions, and predicting future states, built from a vision-language model with joint autoregressive next-token prediction over language, end-effector motion, and dense visual targets. Pre-training uses embodied supervision from human interaction videos, followed by supervised fine-tuning on human demonstrations, robot trajectories, and simulated experience. The model averages 72.5 across 28 embodied benchmarks, setting a new open-source state of the art and performing on par with proprietary GPT-6-Astra and Gemini 3.6 Flash, with best open-source results on 14 benchmarks.

Hugging Face daily papers · 2d agoAI research1