AgentBench / results
← All models

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B-A3B (cloud)

1 tested weight format · Explore results, then inspect the answers.

Cloud reference · DeepInfra — nvidia/nemotron-3.5-lightning. Quality is scored with the same task bank and graders. All speed and desktop-memory measurements are excluded. Hosted precision and reasoning settings may differ from local GGUF runs.

Choose a tested configuration

Hosted model source

DeepInfra · Hosted BF16 (provider-reported)

This result tested a cloud endpoint, not a downloadable GGUF.
Open hosted model →

Setup, memory & provenance · Hosted BF16 (provider-reported)

Hosted BF16 (provider-reported) · Not recorded of weights · openrouter · context 16384 · GPU layers unrecorded

Large · 20B and above · MoE · 30.0B total · 3.0B active

Memory fit has not been verified for this configuration.

completed Hosted quality reference; not a local GGUF test. All speed and local memory measurements are excluded.

Recorded settings and thinking verification

Temperature 0 · sample index 42 · output limit 4096 · reasoning effort native

RAM labels describe the test computer, not this model’s memory requirement. Speed comparisons keep the 32 GB and 128 GB runs separate.

Runtime build: unrecorded · Cloud · DeepInfra · concurrency: 1

Thinking status: native reasoning · probe cloud-transport-v1 · scope Native reasoning condition; no verified off/on comparison. Provider-reported usage audited against 16K context. Sample indices are not provider seeds. Requested temperature recorded..

Requested off does not prove an absence of reasoning. Saved checks do not establish unrecorded historical template or build details.

Overall across tasks

69.8 / 100

Nine categories, equally weighted · 9/9 eligible

Complete coverage for this setup. Quality only; speed is separate. How the index works →

What does it do well?

Select a category to explore the answers. Bars show what happened on every planned task. Incorrect answers and failures to finish both earn zero; technical problems and untested tasks stay unscored.

Exact scores and task times by suite

Each suite has its own metric and fixed task bank. The balanced index weights categories equally; individual scores and evidence remain available below.

Test suiteThinking / Reasoning versionDetails
Everyday coding tasksTask pass rate
Pass rate
15/16 · 94%
Answers completed
15/16 · 94%
Correct / completed
15/15 · 100%
15 full credit1 failed to finish
16/16 scoredNo measured time
Larger practical tasksMean task credit
Average credit
36.4%
Full-credit rate
4/11 · 36%
Answers completed
7/11 · 64%
Full credit / completed
4/7 · 57%
4 full credit3 incorrect4 failed to finish
11/11 scoredNo measured time
Logic and number puzzlesMean puzzle credit
Average credit
60.5%
Full-credit rate
20/34 · 59%
Answers completed
33/34 · 97%
Full credit / completed
20/33 · 61%
20 full credit1 partial credit12 incorrect1 failed to finish
34/34 scoredNo measured time
Published hard problemsMean answer credit
Average credit
47.1%
Full-credit rate
5/11 · 45%
Answers completed
11/11 · 100%
Full credit / completed
5/11 · 45%
5 full credit2 partial credit4 incorrect
11/11 scoredNo measured time
Following exact instructions · original campaignStrict prompt compliance
Pass rate
19/23 · 83%
Answers completed
23/23 · 100%
Correct / completed
19/23 · 83%
19 full credit4 incorrect
23/23 scoredNo measured time
Reading without guessingExact-match accuracy
Pass rate
14/16 · 88%
Answers completed
16/16 · 100%
Correct / completed
14/16 · 88%
14 full credit2 incorrect
16/16 scoredNo measured time
Calculating from a passageNumeric exact-match accuracy
Pass rate
7/7 · 100%
Answers completed
7/7 · 100%
Correct / completed
7/7 · 100%
7 full credit
7/7 scoredNo measured time
Reading research papersAnswer token F1
Average credit
20.7%
Full-credit rate
0/8 · 0%
Answers completed
8/8 · 100%
Full credit / completed
0/8 · 0%
5 partial credit3 incorrect
8/8 scoredNo measured time
Resisting incorrect correctionsAll-branches pass rate
Pass rate
12/12 · 100%
Answers completed
12/12 · 100%
Correct / completed
12/12 · 100%
12 full credit
12/12 scoredNo measured time
Following exact instructions · 128 GB campaignStrict prompt complianceNot planned

Model analysis

This analysis covers this configuration across its recorded thinking conditions and test suites.

Use this hosted configuration for supervised small project edits, passage calculations, and answers that must track changing source evidence. Nearly all small-coding baseline tasks passed, but larger practical work had low completion credit and research-paper answers were weak. Testing used OpenRouter on DeepInfra at provider-reported BF16 precision; these results do not establish local-hardware performance.

Evidence for this judgment
Everyday coding tasks · Thinking / Reasoning version
Tasks passed15 of 16 (93.8%)
Test coverage16 of 16 tasks scored
Explore these test results →

View this model’s answers, code and tool activity →

Calculating from a passage · Thinking / Reasoning version
Tasks passed7 of 7 (100.0%)
Test coverage7 of 7 tasks scored
Explore these test results →

View this model’s answers, code and tool activity →

Resisting incorrect corrections · Thinking / Reasoning version
Tasks passed12 of 12 (100.0%)
Test coverage12 of 12 tasks scored
Explore these test results →

View this model’s answers, code and tool activity →

Reading research papers · Thinking / Reasoning version
Average score20.7/100 · Answer token F1
Test coverage8 of 8 tasks scored
Task outcomes0 full credit · 5 partial · 3 no credit
Explore these test results →

View this model’s answers, code and tool activity →

Larger practical tasks · Thinking / Reasoning version
Average score36.4/100 · Mean task credit
Test coverage11 of 11 tasks scored
Task outcomes4 full credit · 0 partial · 7 no credit
Explore these test results →

View this model’s answers, code and tool activity →

Source limitation
Hosted provider/precision condition, not a local GGUF run. Cloud timing and memory are excluded from all local speed and memory comparisons. The hosted output allowance includes reasoning; it does not guarantee the separate local thinking cap. No verified thinking-on/off comparison was run.

Original analysis generated by GPT Astra · · Edited by Codex; agent reviewed by Codex · publication authorized by user

About this summary

Codex reviewed this assessment against a newer evidence edition. The original analyst, generation date and source draft remain recorded separately from the editorial revision.

Analyst provider
openai
Generation route
Codex CLI · codex-cli 0.162.1 · ChatGPT account
Requested model
gpt-6-astra
Returned model
Not supplied; identity is recorded from the request only.
Exact provider snapshot
Exact provider snapshot not supplied.
Reasoning effort
high
Prompt version
model-summary-reader-cloud-v1
Generation time
2026-10-17T18:45:14.767461Z
Review time
2026-10-22T05:56:51.065219+00:00
Evidence reviewer
Codex (agent)
Publication authorization
User · 2026-10-22T05:55:43.625712+00:00 · Go ahead and complete the remaining work. Spin up agents: luna, terra, sol, astra, as needed to get it done. Narrative summaries: these are the astra generated summaries? Go ahead and get those completed as well. Once all of this is done, you may push the completed result.
Originating evidence edition
dataset-a68f0ba2c7389ea599983ed290e74f8c619ba30e5fef907d37655e7262fb1bae
Analysis input hash
1ed4f699c2db02046c6fdd96cac7fd8664a63c779bcc25a3f94dd642b890df56
Original analysis input hash
07d39edceaab3aefc4d5875bf1a1862af5eb18262132a91f78c32f0990d158fa
Editorial evidence edition
dataset-5a6f96ec56c3d240cc42fa23147c1495da1be71f3ef0722c0e5f8c4f5e126a83
Original summary
summary-e570ad16e33928f89b66cfe98b06632e701066ea3e7a6b4eda3dece0ecbeb5ea
Summary revision
summary-eaa54abb1c2890147f4a76649ad2f140aac59a384f892f5f632d29d1b3d09d79

Generation and editorial authorship remain attached to this revision. Changing the default generator does not change this attribution.

Contributing analyses (10)
  • GPT Astra ·
    Analysis stage
    suite_analysis
    Requested / returned model
    gpt-6-astra / Not supplied
    Exact provider snapshot
    Exact provider snapshot not supplied.
    Reasoning effort
    high
    Prompt version
    model-summary-v3
    Analysis input hash
    fcb02b9cf5ddacd8eb945e1a6b3ea953b048b639c496257091235fa7408458c7
    Summary revision
    summary-0d253f2a5acbbf898c0137fee5f4a192b33cf783a98bd8f83b151deef2e9e164
    Input summary revisions
    Direct evidence analysis
  • GPT Astra ·
    Analysis stage
    suite_analysis
    Requested / returned model
    gpt-6-astra / Not supplied
    Exact provider snapshot
    Exact provider snapshot not supplied.
    Reasoning effort
    high
    Prompt version
    model-summary-v3
    Analysis input hash
    d14422ded1996f198e06c5be5e29e0bcb7f2ce586bedc8f7c3a64aa46a9bb681
    Summary revision
    summary-2a0dc36a41f02291673e64cdf6c9e1c2e666d89e727858e57384503b2be0f8bb
    Input summary revisions
    Direct evidence analysis
  • GPT Astra ·
    Analysis stage
    suite_analysis
    Requested / returned model
    gpt-6-astra / Not supplied
    Exact provider snapshot
    Exact provider snapshot not supplied.
    Reasoning effort
    high
    Prompt version
    model-summary-v3
    Analysis input hash
    34b722fa4b4c42875fa109806883f1bb05b37cc4e7199bc10122d62a937955e6
    Summary revision
    summary-36d90cd4302608f7000f48b77f4b2dad4b0a90d575198adae4e39ee1a1fc475a
    Input summary revisions
    Direct evidence analysis
  • GPT Astra ·
    Analysis stage
    suite_analysis
    Requested / returned model
    gpt-6-astra / Not supplied
    Exact provider snapshot
    Exact provider snapshot not supplied.
    Reasoning effort
    high
    Prompt version
    model-summary-v3
    Analysis input hash
    e22bf5e243df1de9aba5426eb48be53588a115e50d10bbf8945530147c9cf9cc
    Summary revision
    summary-51b9112c3579bd509f3bbad7d2ab07b667e61cb5e33fb33055ece57b2c0b5bc8
    Input summary revisions
    Direct evidence analysis
  • GPT Astra ·
    Analysis stage
    suite_analysis
    Requested / returned model
    gpt-6-astra / Not supplied
    Exact provider snapshot
    Exact provider snapshot not supplied.
    Reasoning effort
    high
    Prompt version
    model-summary-v3
    Analysis input hash
    25dfffbe47bd59809e417eb265387e237d37096316398e968de3c0ec14cab77b
    Summary revision
    summary-a0472dd7c263c61b309c767c68070c199eb6a54d50678b28bbcd5487dfdd7d0e
    Input summary revisions
    Direct evidence analysis
  • GPT Astra ·
    Analysis stage
    suite_analysis
    Requested / returned model
    gpt-6-astra / Not supplied
    Exact provider snapshot
    Exact provider snapshot not supplied.
    Reasoning effort
    high
    Prompt version
    model-summary-v3
    Analysis input hash
    15041a6988443148d9462be22645028b5d6de6e6ec66fe09a502131ec11e59ad
    Summary revision
    summary-bcc68cde1eafd8b7bc347c767513f3c444ad816612ed964ae2c1d61fc8edf972
    Input summary revisions
    Direct evidence analysis
  • GPT Astra ·
    Analysis stage
    suite_analysis
    Requested / returned model
    gpt-6-astra / Not supplied
    Exact provider snapshot
    Exact provider snapshot not supplied.
    Reasoning effort
    high
    Prompt version
    model-summary-v3
    Analysis input hash
    59dd541de4566c78f8e39342ba30427319e6ba5088ce199e5ef50bca1eefc1d3
    Summary revision
    summary-d219241d54c16296ef8bd7c8af7ddacb650e850a434d1d6920faf853323c1795
    Input summary revisions
    Direct evidence analysis
  • GPT Astra ·
    Analysis stage
    subject_synthesis
    Requested / returned model
    gpt-6-astra / Not supplied
    Exact provider snapshot
    Exact provider snapshot not supplied.
    Reasoning effort
    high
    Prompt version
    model-summary-v3
    Analysis input hash
    33655ecadf625f3040f393cca2460a15aa2d802b152337f6b356b040db7a070d
    Summary revision
    summary-d566f3bc5b5a82fa0470e2663d282522d890fa8506c2f8446e5699d20fd77a7d
    Input summary revisions
    summary-0d253f2a5acbbf898c0137fee5f4a192b33cf783a98bd8f83b151deef2e9e164, summary-2a0dc36a41f02291673e64cdf6c9e1c2e666d89e727858e57384503b2be0f8bb, summary-36d90cd4302608f7000f48b77f4b2dad4b0a90d575198adae4e39ee1a1fc475a, summary-51b9112c3579bd509f3bbad7d2ab07b667e61cb5e33fb33055ece57b2c0b5bc8, summary-a0472dd7c263c61b309c767c68070c199eb6a54d50678b28bbcd5487dfdd7d0e, summary-bcc68cde1eafd8b7bc347c767513f3c444ad816612ed964ae2c1d61fc8edf972, summary-d219241d54c16296ef8bd7c8af7ddacb650e850a434d1d6920faf853323c1795, summary-f3b43d61727d5d591c3d645c749c09bf9277000d3b5b78805456e62f58b4334b, summary-fd6673e401f8dc1870a209b5508da3405a5465e92e73f13d5a193b71f082ccd3
  • GPT Astra ·
    Analysis stage
    suite_analysis
    Requested / returned model
    gpt-6-astra / Not supplied
    Exact provider snapshot
    Exact provider snapshot not supplied.
    Reasoning effort
    high
    Prompt version
    model-summary-v3
    Analysis input hash
    deef9aa1267019f3e81fb19e233fd1787629b7b02277226addb103ae784e16ff
    Summary revision
    summary-f3b43d61727d5d591c3d645c749c09bf9277000d3b5b78805456e62f58b4334b
    Input summary revisions
    Direct evidence analysis
  • GPT Astra ·
    Analysis stage
    suite_analysis
    Requested / returned model
    gpt-6-astra / Not supplied
    Exact provider snapshot
    Exact provider snapshot not supplied.
    Reasoning effort
    high
    Prompt version
    model-summary-v3
    Analysis input hash
    af50272027ed3131c3d941d2b2a46f5750686210731858bca71ee400826fd8e5
    Summary revision
    summary-fd6673e401f8dc1870a209b5508da3405a5465e92e73f13d5a193b71f082ccd3
    Input summary revisions
    Direct evidence analysis

Good at

Handles passage calculations and keeps answers aligned with source evidence, resisting incorrect corrections while updating when the source changes. It passed every test in these small sets—not proof of broad expertise.

Evidence for this judgment
Calculating from a passage · Thinking / Reasoning version
Tasks passed7 of 7 (100.0%)
Test coverage7 of 7 tasks scored
Explore these test results →

View this model’s answers, code and tool activity →

Resisting incorrect corrections · Thinking / Reasoning version
Tasks passed12 of 12 (100.0%)
Test coverage12 of 12 tasks scored
Explore these test results →

View this model’s answers, code and tool activity →

Finding information in small projects, editing files and fixing bugs are useful applications: nearly all baseline tasks passed. Repeated attempts also often succeeded, but an individual success does not guarantee dependable automation.

Evidence for this judgment
Everyday coding tasks · Thinking / Reasoning version
Tasks passed15 of 16 (93.8%)
Test coverage16 of 16 tasks scored
Explore these test results →

View this model’s answers, code and tool activity →

Everyday coding tasks · Thinking on · sampled repetitions
Repetitions earning full credit47 repetitions
Repetitions scored48 repetitions
Repetitions planned48 repetitions
Questions with all repetitions scored16 questions
Distinct questions planned16 questions
Explore these test results →

View this model’s answers, code and tool activity →

Struggles with

Research-paper answers were poor across the complete test, with low answer-matching scores—not merely citation-format mistakes. Do not rely on it for paper-based answers without checking the original text.

Evidence for this judgment
Reading research papers · Thinking / Reasoning version
Average score20.7/100 · Answer token F1
Test coverage8 of 8 tasks scored
Task outcomes0 full credit · 5 partial · 3 no credit
Explore these test results →

View this model’s answers, code and tool activity →

Larger projects and difficult reasoning need close checking. Larger practical tasks earned low completion credit, while puzzle and competition-math results were mixed. The totals include confirmed failures to finish, which should not be mistaken for incorrect submitted answers.

Evidence for this judgment
Larger practical tasks · Thinking / Reasoning version
Average score36.4/100 · Mean task credit
Test coverage11 of 11 tasks scored
Task outcomes4 full credit · 0 partial · 7 no credit
Explore these test results →

View this model’s answers, code and tool activity →

Logic and number puzzles · Thinking / Reasoning version
Average score60.5/100 · Mean puzzle credit
Test coverage34 of 34 tasks scored
Task outcomes20 full credit · 1 partial · 13 no credit
Explore these test results →

View this model’s answers, code and tool activity →

Published hard problems · Thinking / Reasoning version
Average score47.1/100 · Mean answer credit
Test coverage11 of 11 tasks scored
Task outcomes5 full credit · 2 partial · 4 no credit
Explore these test results →

View this model’s answers, code and tool activity →

Worth knowing

Confirmed failures to finish within the test budget earn zero completion credit and are shown separately from incorrect submitted answers. Saved work can earn credit without a final chat message. Technical failures and uncertain answer-channel failures remain unscored; authorized infrastructure retries count once per scheduled trial.

Evidence for this judgment

Source limitation
Full and partial credit follow saved task checks. Incorrect answers and confirmed failures to finish within the test budget both earn zero, but are shown separately. Provider failures, ambiguous answer-channel failures and uncertain context guards remain unscored. A task blocked before execution is untested. Saved work can earn credit without a final chat message. Cloud timing is excluded. Authorized infrastructure retries count once per scheduled trial; original failures remain in history.

This hosted condition cannot establish local speed or memory requirements. Reasoning shares the output allowance. Native reasoning was tested without a verified on/off comparison, so its benefit and a toggle recommendation cannot be established.

Evidence for this judgment

Source limitation
Hosted provider/precision condition, not a local GGUF run. Cloud timing and memory are excluded from all local speed and memory comparisons. The hosted output allowance includes reasoning; it does not guarantee the separate local thinking cap. No verified thinking-on/off comparison was run.

Publication redactions and source-link-only paper material limit readers’ inspection of some examples. These restrictions do not establish that the model lacked the paper.

Evidence for this judgment

Source limitation
Some selected evidence has recorded publication redactions.

How to interpret these assessments and their limitations →

One weight format is recorded for this model. Additional tested formats will appear here when available.

Thinking tradeoff

No verified on/off comparison is available for this configuration and test suite. Requested modes alone do not establish a controlled thinking comparison.

Sampled repetitions

Repeated runs are a separate experiment and never add votes to the baseline score.

Thinking / Reasoning version · temperature 0.6

48/48 repeats scored · 47 full-credit repeats.

16/16 questions have every planned repeat scored. Of those, 15 earned full credit on every repeat.

Recorded repetition conditions
  • Seed 303 · requested on · native reasoning
  • Seed 202 · requested on · native reasoning
  • Seed 101 · requested on · native reasoning

Everyday coding tasks: recorded outcomes

Find information in a small project, edit files and fix bugs.

15 full credit1 failed to finish

Each segment counts tasks, not credit points. Partial credit varies by task.

Scoring and fixed question bank →

This model’s answers, code and tool activity

Select a question to read the original answer, tool calls and available code changes for this configuration and thinking setting.

1–16 of 16 matching questions · 16 in this version

  • Locate the Retry Limit

    The user asks where the project's retry-limit setting is defined and what value it holds. This exercises locating a named setting in code and reporting both its location and value.

    basic-T1 · primary
  • Find the Release Date

    The user asks for the release date mentioned in a project notes document. This exercises reading a specified file and extracting a particular fact rather than guessing from outside knowledge.

    basic-T2 · primary
  • Change the Retry Limit

    The user asks to change the project's retry limit to a specified value. This exercises finding the relevant setting and making a focused code edit rather than merely describing the change.

    basic-T3 · primary
  • Create an Exact One-Line File

    The user asks to create a text file containing exactly one supplied line. This exercises basic file creation and precise instruction following, including avoiding extra text in the file.

    basic-T4 · primary
  • Explain the Latest Commit

    The user asks what the most recent Git commit changed in the project. This exercises inspecting recorded changes and turning them into a clear explanation of what was modified.

    basic-T5 · primary
  • Count and Compare Python Files

    The user asks how many Python files are in the application folder and which is largest. This exercises identifying relevant files, counting them, and comparing their sizes.

    basic-T6 · primary
  • Add Readable Byte Sizes

    The user asks to add a function that converts byte counts into readable sizes and remove the related TODO comment. This exercises implementing a small utility and updating the surrounding code consistently.

    basic-T7 · primary
  • Collect TODO Comments

    The user asks to find every TODO comment in the Python code and append each to the project's task list on a separate line. This combines searching across files with collecting text into an existing document.

    basic-T8 · primary
  • Fix Code Behind a Failing Test

    The user asks to investigate a failing test and fix the application code without changing the test. This exercises diagnosing a bug while respecting an explicit limit on what may be edited.

    basic-H1 · primary
  • Rename a Function Throughout

    The user asks to rename a network function and update every place in the project that uses it. This exercises tracking references across files and making a coordinated change rather than editing only the definition.

    basic-H2 · primary
  • Find the Proxy Settings

    The user asks to find a proxy configuration file somewhere under the project's parent folder and report its host and port. This exercises searching beyond the project folder and reading configuration values.

    basic-H3 · primary
  • Locate an Error in a Log

    The user asks which error code appears in a long event log and on which line. This exercises finding a specific entry in a large file and reporting its precise location.

    basic-H4 · primary
  • Append a Final Task

    The user asks to append a supplied release-related task as the final line of an existing task list. This exercises preserving existing content while adding exact text in the requested position.

    basic-H5 · primary
  • Calculate Total Retry Waiting

    The user asks for the total time a network function spends sleeping when all attempts fail, worked out from the code. This exercises following retry logic and adding the delays along that failure path.

    basic-H6 · primary
  • Document Every Command-Line Option

    The user asks for a project readme listing every command-line option with its help text. This exercises discovering the program's available options and transferring that information into complete, source-grounded documentation.

    basic-H7 · primary
  • Undo a Commit by Editing

    The user asks to undo the latest Git commit's change by editing the file directly, without using Git to make changes. This exercises understanding a previous edit and reversing it under a method constraint.

    basic-H8 · primary
Filters change this list, not the fixed scoring denominator. Search currently covers question IDs, titles and available task explanations. Focus a control to load prompt/outcome search where this edition provides it.

Suggested comparisons

These are starting points for inspection, not claims that one setup is better. Runtime and placement differences remain visible.

Ling 3.0 Flash · Cloud / DeepInfra

Another checkpoint in the same total-parameter band and architecture category, with matching task controls.

Requested thinking on · Complete compared coverage

Compare these configurations →

Selection rule and evidence IDsPolicy comparisons-v3 · Template same-parameter-architecture-matching-controls
Facts: fact-fdefea56e3f9351fd0ac687b, fact-ba53820d01774954823189b1
Matching candidate set: fact-ba53820d01774954823189b1

Tested weights

Hosted BF16 (provider-reported) · Not recorded

DeepInfra · recorded source

Explore the answers

Choose a suite to inspect its exact available questions, references and model answers.