SemiAnalysis's GDPx benchmark puts the frontier at 12%, and Claude Opus 5.5 leads
AspireAI community · SemiAnalysis
SemiAnalysis released GDPx, a benchmark of 206 agentic tasks across 11 domains that it argues are where frontier intelligence will actually be deployed: chip design, cybersecurity, biology, finance, legal, quant trading, recursive self-improvement, hardware design, materials science, alignment and software engineering. Each domain was built with a specialised data partner, and every task ships with a real simulated environment rather than a spoon-fed prompt, which is the authors' main criticism of OpenAI's GDPval. The headline result is that it is a true frontier-level test: even the best model, Claude Opus 5.5, scores 12.0 percent, with Gemini 4 Carbon at 10.9 and GPT-6 Astra at 9.6, while the best open-weight entry, GLM 5.3, sits at 2.7. Two honest caveats come from SemiAnalysis itself: several models appear to sandbag because their own safety classifiers refuse in the cyber, bio and alignment domains, and the authors say their results are scoped to the tested configuration.
Read the story and explore more from the AspireAI community.
Two sparse-autoencoder analyses have resisted scaling: matching semantically similar features across layers, and compressing large feature circuits into interpretable supernodes. This paper argues both are the same underlying problem, estimating semantic distances between SAE features that sit on different activation manifolds. Its representation treats each feature not as a single decoder vector but as an activation-weighted distribution over the hidden states expressing it, projects those distributions into a shared reference space, and compares them with Wasserstein distance. The representation is proved invariant to activation rescaling and stable under perturbation, and recovers true matches under finite-sample margin conditions. Empirically it outperformed decoder-vector and LLM-based baselines and captured subtle functional distinctions between related features, and it compressed large feature circuits into interpretable supernodes automatically. The limitation is that this is interpretability tooling: the paper demonstrates better feature matching and circuit compression, not that downstream interpretability claims become more accurate.