Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Introducing Vals-Smith: turn your code base into a customized benchmark. Public benchmarks tell you which model is strongest overall, not which model is the best on your code. Vals-Smith turns your merged pull requests into real coding tasks and measures the percentage a model can actually resolve. New models...

46,847 views • 3 months ago •via X (Twitter)

28 Comments

Vals AI's profile picture
Vals AI3 months ago

Join the waitlist today!

Rayan Krishnan's profile picture
Rayan Krishnan3 months ago

props to @OfirPress @jyangballin @KLieret for laying a lot of the ground work. by default we evaluate all models with mini swe agent, methodology is heavily swe bench inspired

Jerry Liu's profile picture
Jerry Liu3 months ago

congrats on the launch!!

Gabriel Stengel's profile picture
Gabriel Stengel3 months ago

Congrats @RayanKrishnan on the launch!

Rez Havaei's profile picture
Rez Havaei3 months ago

Great work!

Aryo Patel's profile picture
Aryo Patel3 months ago

Awesome release -- can't wait to try it out code speed about to double

Jihoon's profile picture
Jihoon3 months ago

i had this idea for months and these days its great, you just have to wait because good ideas end up getting implemented thanks!

Braeden Norris's profile picture
Braeden Norris3 months ago

Super cool launch, congrats!

Inflectiv AI ⧉'s profile picture
Inflectiv AI ⧉3 months ago

🔥🔥

安叫兽|Bird🕊️ 🔶 BNB's profile picture
安叫兽|Bird🕊️ 🔶 BNB3 months ago

拿自己仓库测,比看榜单踏实多了

Ronak Malde's profile picture
Ronak Malde3 months ago

This is very exciting!!

icosaedro's profile picture
icosaedro3 months ago

PRs as the benchmark set is the only metric that matters. Generic evals lie.

Sumer Sao's profile picture
Sumer Sao3 months ago

congrats guys!

Jason Zhao's profile picture
Jason Zhao3 months ago

Awesome stuff

Rona Wang's profile picture
Rona Wang3 months ago

🚀

Vivek Gopalan's profile picture
Vivek Gopalan3 months ago

Really important

Moritz Stephan's profile picture
Moritz Stephan3 months ago

this is awesome

Daniel Rabinovich's profile picture
Daniel Rabinovich3 months ago

This is really cool!

Faraz's profile picture
Faraz3 months ago

Really cool work @RayanKrishnan !!

Dhruv Mangtani's profile picture
Dhruv Mangtani3 months ago

sounds expensive lol

Sergey Karayev's profile picture
Sergey Karayev3 months ago

repo-specific evals are the way. we built this into @Superconductor too, and you can run your own on merged PRs today no waitlist:

Dhruvik Parikh 🌎's profile picture
Dhruvik Parikh 🌎3 months ago

🔥🔥🔥

shyamal's profile picture
shyamal3 months ago

congrats on the launch!

iTokens.io ⚡️ AI API's profile picture
iTokens.io ⚡️ AI API3 months ago

This feels like the direction coding evaluation is heading. The most useful benchmark isn't the one that ranks models globally—it's the one built from your own workflows and codebase.

Jihoon's profile picture
Jihoon3 months ago

@grok competitor landscape in both closed and open source

RAZA | AI EXPLORER's profile picture
RAZA | AI EXPLORER3 months ago

Measuring performance on your own code is a game-changer. Love this.

Lucas Campa's profile picture
Lucas Campa3 months ago

Looks awesome 🚀🚀

Panizzutti's profile picture
Panizzutti3 months ago

I like this but vibe coded video

Related Videos

Fusion Models by robinhood:0xa92768863a55d8a0591709f7f5e594a249d36ea3, explained properly. Why a panel beats one model: Ask three models the same hard question and they disagree. The disagreement is the information, where they contradict each other is where one of them is wrong, and a judge can see it. OpenRouter shipped exactly this in June and their panels beat any single frontier model. Credit to them and their $10B sale to stripe. Why the same panel for everyone is the wrong shape: You don't have one best model. You have a best model per job. The one you trust for code is not the one you trust for writing, and neither is the one you'd pick for a five-line reply. A panel chosen per request, identical for every user, can't know that. A panel arranged around you can. The number that matters isn't price: It's cost per answer that works. Model A costs $4 per million tokens and gets your job right one time in four. Model B costs $10 and gets it right three times in four. Per answer you actually keep, A costs $16 and B costs $13. The cheap model was the expensive one. Everyone comparing price lists is measuring the wrong thing. You never rate anything: Stopping an answer halfway is a rating. Regenerating is a rating. Switching model and asking again is the loudest rating there is. Every one of those already writes a row we can learn from. The router learns which models earn your credits, per job, and tries a cheaper one now and then to check. Fusion only when it pays: Cost mode tries the cheap model first and escalates only if a judge says it failed. Performance mode fans out to your panel and merges. Most simple prompts never fuse. That's why it costs less, not more. Put it together and you have a personal model: Not trained. Assembled. Your profile from a two-minute questionnaire and everything you've imported from Claude or ChatGPT. Your memory, shared across every model so switching never starts from zero. Your skills, workflows you build once and run on any model. Your scorecard, which models earn your credits per job. One per person. Nobody else has yours. Every model is someone else's; the arrangement is you, and it leaves with you. People aren't loyal to models. They're loyal to results. A moat can't be a commodity, but it can be our own creation.

askr

13,900 views • 1 month ago

We’re launching Optima. Now anyone can create a custom benchmark for their use case, leveraging Artificial Analysis’ leading research and platform Building and running benchmarks is difficult. We have distilled Artificial Analysis’ research and experience developing benchmarks into Optima, a new platform for benchmarking models on your own workloads and comparing performance, speed and cost efficiency. Optima allows you to find the best model for your task, or an equally performant alternative to your current setup at 10x lower cost or time per task. We’ve integrated Artificial Analysis' research and experience in benchmarks across the Optima workflow: ➤ Build benchmarks based on your own data and use cases: There are three ways to build a benchmark with Optima. Upload an existing evaluation dataset from your own files or Hugging Face, or import agent traces from platforms including Arize AI, Braintrust and langfuse.com. Install the Optima skill to build a benchmark using context from your coding environment and previous sessions. Or simply describe your use case and provide example inputs and outputs, and Optima will build the benchmark for you ➤ Run across the latest models: Run the same benchmark across leading models in a single click, and keep your leaderboard up to date as soon as new models are released ➤ Bring Artificial Analysis grading to your own benchmark: Evaluate responses against objective rubric criteria or using the same pairwise judging approach used for Artificial Analysis benchmarks including GDPval-AA and AA-Briefcase. For pairwise judging, select your preferred responses from a sample and Optima uses those preferences to rank models across your test set ➤ Compare performance, cost and time efficiency: Optima measures more than model performance. Cost per Task and Time per Task are tracked alongside benchmark scores, with category-level results and support for custom metrics, allowing you to compare the tradeoffs between models for your specific use case Ahead of launch, here are examples questions our beta testers answered with Optima: ➤ Which model can save me 10x the cost without a meaningful decrease in quality for my finance & accounting agent? ➤ Which model best matches the writing style of lawyers for my legal agent? ➤ Which model can best identify different elements in my custom image dataset? Optima is available today. Build your own benchmark at

Artificial Analysis

133,793 views • 2 months ago