Score · relative 0–100: 52.0
Rank: —
Status: Provisional
Players generated: 2026-11-12
Match evidence updated: 2026-11-14

Compare in charts View player programs Back to leaderboard

For a setting marked “not confirmed”, the retained evidence cannot confirm that it was its group’s documented setting. The overall score counts these settings, so the result is not marked complete.

Intensive
No published result.
DefaultBalancednot confirmed
52.0 · rank 40 on the Balanced leaderboard
Cost per program
No charge recorded so far (incomplete)
Working programs
8 of 8
API time
2.8 min (observed mean, descriptive)
Not compared: cost is a known subtotal (some attempts have no cost record).
- No alternatives: no charge has been recorded yet.
Baseline
No published result.

Score and cost of every ranked setting

The chart needs JavaScript. The setting cards hold this model's results, and Charts compares every model.

Each setting is placed by its published score and its generation cost per player program, the mean over the game cells including repairs and failed attempts. Higher is better; further left costs less (logarithmic axis, with recorded $0 in its own lane). Filled marks are compared; hollow marks are not (the reason is in the table). The line marks the best value across ranked reasoning settings: no ranked setting with complete cost evidence scores at least as high for the same or less. It includes models without an Overall rank, so it can differ from the line on Charts. Costs mix provider-reported charges and list-price estimates; differences in score points are not tested for significance.

Show the numbers

The table needs JavaScript.

Scores by game

Go90.4
Chess67.2
Shogi36.3
Xiangqi63.7
Hex55.7
International Draughts40.3
Game of the Amazons44.9
Tumbleweed17.5

Each game counts every generation attempt, a failed one as 0 (“1 of 2 failed” marks games with failed attempts). Scores are relative within each game, across the included settings; they do not compare game difficulty.

What this result shows

No qualified setting comparison is retained.

Across included settings, the highest game score is Go (90.4); the lowest is Tumbleweed (17.5). Each game counts every generation attempt, a failed one as 0. These are relative scores within each game, not direct comparisons of difficulty.

Match evidence measures these retained programs. It does not establish how a fresh generation will perform. Independent-generation variation is not estimated in this release.

Test protocol and evidence limits

Model identifier: baidu/ernie-5.5-flash-preview
Provider route (catalog): Not retained in this result set
Prompt identity / profile: Not retained in this result set / Not retained in this result set
Prompt version: Not retained in this result set
Generation policy: Generation-quality admission policy (see methodology)
Requested output-token limits: 921600 (8 of 8 indexed attempts)

Generation evidence

Counts describe contributing programs, not independent replications: repairs and resends are not new independent samples. Independent-generation lineage is not retained.

Game	Reasoning group	Programs	Working-program strength	Raw rating	Combined record (W / D / L)
Go	Balanced	1 working of 1 attempt	90.4	2000.7	524 / 19 / 57
Chess	Balanced	1 working of 1 attempt	67.2	1607.0	242 / 244 / 76
Shogi	Balanced	1 working of 1 attempt	36.3	1292.9	114 / 38 / 262
Xiangqi	Balanced	1 working of 1 attempt	63.7	1579.0	241 / 226 / 111
Hex	Balanced	1 working of 1 attempt	55.7	1479.4	324 / 0 / 288
International Draughts	Balanced	1 working of 1 attempt	40.3	1268.8	197 / 30 / 357
Game of the Amazons	Balanced	1 working of 1 attempt	44.9	1348.8	248 / 0 / 362
Tumbleweed	Balanced	1 working of 1 attempt	17.5	892.1	98 / 0 / 516

Each row covers all the model's programs in one game and setting. Strength and raw rating are attempt-weighted means; under them, each program's score and the lowest and highest rating describe the programs (not a confidence interval). The combined record adds up their matches: evidence volume, not strength.

Failures and budgets

0 model-code generation failures; 0 provider/infrastructure failures excluded from the generation denominator. Runtime player faults are separate: 0 recorded one-sided faults across contributing program rows. A crash, an illegal move, or a timeout repeated by a later quiet replay, pinned on one program, also counts as that program's loss in its match record; other faults are left out of rating evidence.

Repair/resend outcomes and available costs are included. Exact retry ceilings and execution budgets are not retained in this result set; see the methodology for the public policy. Do not infer a measured setting from a current provider catalog.

Player program results

Default: 100% / 0% / 0% · n 8 No Overall rankMissing Intensive, Baseline

Generation cost, all settings combined

at least $0.00average per game and reasoning setting; some attempts have no cost record

Median: $0.00
Range: $0.00–$0.00
Known cost subtotal (incomplete or unverified charges): $0.00
Cost data: 8 combinations · 8 runs
Price source: Provider-reported
Price list: boardgame-list-prices-2026-11-09
Average output: 45k tokens
Output range: 29k–62k tokens
Runs with output-token data: 8

How cost is measured

Comparison cost gives equal weight to each model, game, and reasoning-setting combination. Recorded generation attempts include repairs and resends when cost evidence is available; runtime compute and service operation are excluded. Cost and output-token counts use separate telemetry denominators. A list-price estimate is not actual expenditure; mixed evidence is not a uniform standard-price comparison.

Test protocol

Combines this model's tested reasoning settings
Player-program generation; retained protocol details are under “Test protocol and evidence limits” above

Ernie 5.5 Flash Preview

Reasoning settings compared