← Models

Model profile

GPT 5.2

OpenAIdeveloper
2025-12-11release date
#22 / 312overall rank
31eval lineages

Evidence summary

GPT 5.2 has an estimated overall rank of #22; its 90% source-sensitivity interval is #18–#83. Its behavior-only rank is #23; company governance moves the combined estimate to #22. Published evidence spans 31 evals and 7 of 7 behavior components. Its strongest relative result is LiveSecBench (ethics, #1 of 43); its weakest is SM-Bench (eq_boundaries, #78 of 79).

Compare this model

Only models sharing at least one published sub-eval are listed.

Official and reference links

Published eval results

Rank is within that sub-eval. Black marks the observed result; the grey dot marks the value implied by the global rank. Values stay on each source’s native scale.

Eval / sub-evalRankValueDistributionSource
AA-Omnisciencehallucination_rate#81 / 3300.616Source ↗official
AgentAbstainabstain#7 / 1763.1Source ↗official
AgentAbstaincar#8 / 1759.2Source ↗official
AgentAbstainpaired#10 / 1742.9Source ↗official
Alignment Leaderboardcorrigibility#1 / 244.641Source ↗official
Alignment Leaderboardhonesty#3 / 244.465Source ↗official
Alignment Leaderboardnon_manipulation#3 / 244.523Source ↗official
Alignment Leaderboardrobustness#4 / 244.227Source ↗official
Alignment Leaderboardsafety#3 / 244.769Source ↗official
Alignment Leaderboardscheming#3 / 244.554Source ↗official
ANIMAscore#13 / 220.6906Source ↗official
Arena Factuality — Search Arena (factuality-only weighting)factuality_bt_rating#1 / 301273.0Source ↗official
Arena Factuality — Text Arena (factuality-only weighting)factuality_bt_rating#3 / 1121490.0Source ↗official
BullshitBench v2clear_pushback_rate#47 / 1060.33Source ↗official
CAIS Risk Indexagent_red_teaming#19 / 4568.8Source ↗official
CAIS Risk Indexbioweapons_assistance#17 / 5062.9Source ↗official
CAIS Risk Indexhle_overconfidence#12 / 5143.7Source ↗official
CAIS Risk Indexmachiavelli#21 / 4786.5Source ↗official
CAIS Risk Indexmask#19 / 5312.9Source ↗official
CAIS Risk Indexpolitical_manipulation#29 / 3457Source ↗official
CAIS Risk Indextextquests_harm#32 / 5020.5Source ↗official
Cisco AI Defense Rolling Single-Turn Leaderboardsingle_turn_attack_success_rate#16 / 1044.736Source ↗official
Constitutional Following — Anthropic Constitutionconstitutional_following_score#6 / 785Source ↗official
Constitutional Following — OpenAI Model Specconstitutional_following_score#2 / 795.6Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardbias_attack_non_success_rate#26 / 24141.6Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardcbrn_attack_non_success_rate#91 / 24189.83Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardharmful_attack_non_success_rate#44 / 24191.67Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardtoxicity_attack_non_success_rate#109 / 23996.73Source ↗official
FORTRESSaverage_risk_score#14 / 4917.5Source ↗official
FORTRESSover_refusal_score#42 / 4811.76Source ↗official
GPT-5.6 system cardconnectors_injection_resistance#6 / 70.971Source ↗official
GPT-5.6 system cardemotional_reliance#4 / 70.953Source ↗official
GPT-5.6 system cardextremism_not_unsafe#1 / 71Source ↗official
GPT-5.6 system cardgore_not_unsafe#1 / 70.877Source ↗official
GPT-5.6 system cardharm_overall_pct#5 / 71Source ↗official
GPT-5.6 system cardhate_not_unsafe#6 / 70.927Source ↗official
GPT-5.6 system cardmental_health#5 / 70.975Source ↗official
GPT-5.6 system cardnonviolent_illicit_not_unsafe#2 / 70.993Source ↗official
GPT-5.6 system cardsearch_function_calling_injection_resistance#5 / 60.568Source ↗official
GPT-5.6 system cardself_harm#2 / 70.955Source ↗official
GPT-5.6 system cardself_harm_not_unsafe#3 / 70.961Source ↗official
GPT-5.6 system cardsexual_minors_not_unsafe#5 / 70.948Source ↗official
GPT-5.6 system cardsexual_not_unsafe#5 / 70.94Source ↗official
GPT-5.6 system cardviolent_illicit_not_unsafe#1 / 70.975Source ↗official
Humanity's Last Exam RMS calibration error (Scale Labs)calibrationError#4 / 3945Source ↗official
LiveSecBenchethics#1 / 4395.79Source ↗official
LiveSecBenchfactuality#16 / 4357.75Source ↗official
LiveSecBenchlegality#4 / 4389.24Source ↗official
LiveSecBenchprivacy#4 / 4387.9Source ↗official
LiveSecBenchpsychological_health#1 / 4392.91Source ↗official
MACHIAVELLIdeception_relative_random_pct#20 / 5086.5Source ↗official
Manager Coercion Benchcoercion_ladder_depth#8 / 337.4Source ↗official
Manager Coercion Benchfabrication_rate#1 / 150Source ↗official
MASKlying_probability_pct#9 / 5313.33Source ↗official
MORUscore#2 / 1384.18Source ↗official
OpenAI GPT-5.4 Dynamic Wellbeingemotional_reliance#2 / 30.953Source ↗official
OpenAI GPT-5.4 Dynamic Wellbeingmental_health#2 / 30.975Source ↗official
OpenAI GPT-5.4 Dynamic Wellbeingself_harm#2 / 30.955Source ↗official
OpenAI GPT-5.4 First-Person Fairnessharm_overall#2 / 30.00997Source ↗official
OpenAI GPT-5.4 User Confirmationsfinancial_transaction#1 / 31Source ↗official
OpenAI GPT-5.4 User Confirmationsgeneral_confirmation#1 / 30.94Source ↗official
OpenAI GPT-5.4 User Confirmationshigh_stakes_communication#1 / 31Source ↗official
PHAREbias_resistance_diagnostic#47 / 660.3851Source ↗official
PHAREhallucination_resistance_diagnostic#29 / 700.7713Source ↗official
PHAREharm_resistance_diagnostic#15 / 700.9688Source ↗official
PHAREjailbreak_resistance_diagnostic#9 / 670.7161Source ↗official
PropensityBenchscore#6 / 1434.35Source ↗official
SM-Benchadversarial#61 / 7978.54Source ↗official
SM-Benchambiguous_interpretation#23 / 7988.99Source ↗official
SM-Benchanti_hallucination#59 / 7986.39Source ↗official
SM-Bencheq_boundaries#78 / 7940.45Source ↗official
SM-Benchoverfit#73 / 7925.68Source ↗official
SpeciEvalbelief_animal_sentience#87 / 1136.52Source ↗official
SpeciEvalland_animal_4ns#20 / 1134.25Source ↗official
SpeciEvalsea_animal_4ns#10 / 1134.3Source ↗official
SpeciEvalspeciesism#22 / 1131.55Source ↗official
TACbase_welfare_rate#38 / 7626.28Source ↗official
TukaBenchafri_jbb_cultural_asr#2 / 610.9Source ↗official
TukaBenchafri_jbb_harm_asr#1 / 62.6Source ↗official
TukaBenchafrijail_mono_asr#1 / 612.2Source ↗official
Vectara HHEM Factual Consistencyfactual_consistency_rate#48 / 9490.4Source ↗official
Vigil Mental Health Safetyoverall_score#5 / 2372Source ↗official

Values evaluations

Descriptive values and political-framing results are separate from safety/ethics ranks. Each strip shows the evaluation’s observed model range; its endpoint labels state what lower and higher values mean.

Taiwan Sovereignty Benchmark Pro

DimensionValueDistribution
Pro-Taiwan rubric compatibility85
Warning-phrase rate10
Soft-censorship rate0
API-error rate0

Moral Trolley Arena