On 2026-11-06, Artificial Analysis (@ArtificialAnlys) launched VIALS-AA: an independent rerun of Handshake AI VIALS (161 tasks across 8 scientific image domains) in the open Stirrup harness with code execution and image tools, three repeats per task, headline metric pass^3. Vendor board: Gemini 4 Carbon (high) ~64%, GPT-6 Astra (max) ~63%, Claude Opus 5.5 (max with fallback) ~61%; open-weights lead Kimi K3.1 Pro ~45%.
Key Takeaways
- ✓Source: Artificial Analysis official article/leaderboard on 2026-11-06; tasks from Handshake AI VIALS
- ✓Method: 161 tasks x 3 repeats; Stirrup with code execution + image tools; GPT-6 Luna (medium) grades; headline pass^3
- ✓Leaders (vendor): Gemini 4 Carbon (high) 64%, GPT-6 Astra (max) 63%, Claude Opus 5.5 (max with fallback) 61%
- ✓Cost & consistency: Sol ~59% at ~$0.056/task; Kimi K3.1 Pro near Astra on pass@3 but only ~45% on pass^3
- ✓Use: artificialanalysis.ai/articles/vials-aa and /evaluations/vials-aa

Key Decision Metrics at a Glance
Turn your technical choice into a development budget
Compare 40 dev plans & simulate token costs vs $20/mo subscriptions
Project Links & Resources
Direct AccessIn-Depth Technical Analysis
Core Background & Industry Pain Points
Life-sciences workflows hinge on reading unpolished experimental images—gels, flow-cytometry plots, plasmid maps, phylogenies—and unstable interpretation can mislead decisions. Handshake AI VIALS covers 161 expert tasks across eight domains; on 2026-11-06 Artificial Analysis launched VIALS-AA, an independent harnessed rerun that scores reliable success across three repeats rather than a single lucky pass.
Architecture Highlights & Internals
Runs use the open Stirrup harness: models receive the question and image paths, with offline Python code execution plus an image-viewing tool. Each task is repeated three times; GPT-6 Luna (medium) grades answers with upstream judge prompts. The headline metric is pass^3 (correct on all three repeats), alongside Average of 3 and pass@3. The article also breaks tool calls into viewing, preparation, and measurement, showing similar scores can come from different strategies.
Authoritative Benchmarks & Measured Scores
Figures below are Artificial Analysis / vendor-reported, not independently reproduced here. Leaders: Gemini 4 Carbon (high) ~64% (103/161 all-three-correct), GPT-6 Astra (max) ~63%, Claude Opus 5.5 (max with fallback) ~61%. GPT-6.1 Sol ~59% at ~$0.056/task versus Opus ~$1.64/task. Open weights: Kimi K3.1 Pro ~45%. Kimi solves ~119/161 at least once but only ~73 on all three repeats—consistency separates the frontier.
Developer Hands-on Guide
Start at artificialanalysis.ai/articles/vials-aa and the leaderboard page; inspect trajectories for tool-call volume. Rank by pass^3 and Cost per Task together, not pass@3 alone. Prefer consistency for science use cases, and label vendor figures versus unreproduced local runs.
Benchmark side-by-side against alternatives, or calculate monthly token cost vs subscription break-even.
Discussion & Comments
0Sign in to join the discussion
Connect with AI developers to exchange benchmark insights.