Final Bench Proprietary
🐨
6
FINAL Bench - Functional Metacognitive Reasoning Benchmark
gen
ginigini
AI & ML interests
None yet
Recent Activity
liked
a Space
about 14 hours ago
aiqtech/final-bench-Proprietary
upvoted
an
article
about 19 hours ago
FINAL Bench: The Real Bottleneck to AGI Is Self-Correction
reacted
to
SeaWolf-AI's
post
with 😎
about 19 hours ago
FINAL Bench Released: The Real Bottleneck to AGI Is Self-Correction
We release FINAL Bench, the first benchmark for measuring functional metacognition in LLMs — the ability to detect and correct one's own reasoning errors. Every existing benchmark measures final-answer accuracy. None measures whether AI knows it is wrong.
Dataset: [FINAL-Bench/Metacognitive](https://huggingface.co/datasets/FINAL-Bench/Metacognitive) | 100 Tasks | 15 Domains | 8 TICOS Types | Apache 2.0
Leaderboard: https://huggingface.co/spaces/FINAL-Bench/Leaderboard
Article: https://huggingface.co/blog/FINAL-Bench/metacognitive
Core Innovation
Our 5-axis rubric separates what no prior benchmark could: MA (Metacognitive Accuracy) — the ability to say "I might be wrong", and ER (Error Recovery) — the ability to actually fix it. This maps directly to the monitoring-control model of Nelson & Narens (1990) in cognitive psychology.
Three Findings Across 9 SOTA Models
We evaluated GPT-5.2, Claude Opus 4.6, Gemini 3 Pro, DeepSeek-V3.2, Kimi K2.5, and others across 100 expert-level tasks:
1. ER Dominance. 94.8% of MetaCog gain comes from Error Recovery alone. The bottleneck to AGI is not knowledge or reasoning — it is self-correction.
2. Declarative-Procedural Gap. All 9 models can verbalize uncertainty (MA = 0.694) but cannot act on it (ER = 0.302). They sound humble but fail to self-correct — the most dangerous AI safety profile.
3. Difficulty Effect. Harder tasks benefit dramatically more from metacognition (Pearson r = -0.777, p < 0.001).
```python
from datasets import load_dataset
dataset = load_dataset("FINAL-Bench/Metacognitive", split="train")
```
Paper: FINAL Bench: Measuring Functional Metacognitive Reasoning in LLMs
FINAL Bench is the first tool to tell apart what AI truly knows from what it merely pretends to know.
Organizations
None yet
liked
a
Space
about 14 hours ago
upvoted
an
article
about 19 hours ago
Article
FINAL Bench: The Real Bottleneck to AGI Is Self-Correction
•
12
reacted to
SeaWolf-AI's
post with 😎👀
about 19 hours ago
Post
1118
FINAL Bench Released: The Real Bottleneck to AGI Is Self-Correction
We release FINAL Bench, the first benchmark for measuring functional metacognition in LLMs — the ability to detect and correct one's own reasoning errors. Every existing benchmark measures final-answer accuracy. None measures whether AI knows it is wrong.
Dataset: [FINAL-Bench/Metacognitive]( FINAL-Bench/Metacognitive) | 100 Tasks | 15 Domains | 8 TICOS Types | Apache 2.0
Leaderboard: FINAL-Bench/Leaderboard
Article: https://huggingface.co/blog/FINAL-Bench/metacognitive
Core Innovation
Our 5-axis rubric separates what no prior benchmark could: MA (Metacognitive Accuracy) — the ability to say "I might be wrong", and ER (Error Recovery) — the ability to actually fix it. This maps directly to the monitoring-control model of Nelson & Narens (1990) in cognitive psychology.
Three Findings Across 9 SOTA Models
We evaluated GPT-5.2, Claude Opus 4.6, Gemini 3 Pro, DeepSeek-V3.2, Kimi K2.5, and others across 100 expert-level tasks:
1. ER Dominance. 94.8% of MetaCog gain comes from Error Recovery alone. The bottleneck to AGI is not knowledge or reasoning — it is self-correction.
2. Declarative-Procedural Gap. All 9 models can verbalize uncertainty (MA = 0.694) but cannot act on it (ER = 0.302). They sound humble but fail to self-correct — the most dangerous AI safety profile.
3. Difficulty Effect. Harder tasks benefit dramatically more from metacognition (Pearson r = -0.777, p < 0.001).
Paper: FINAL Bench: Measuring Functional Metacognitive Reasoning in LLMs
FINAL Bench is the first tool to tell apart what AI truly knows from what it merely pretends to know.
We release FINAL Bench, the first benchmark for measuring functional metacognition in LLMs — the ability to detect and correct one's own reasoning errors. Every existing benchmark measures final-answer accuracy. None measures whether AI knows it is wrong.
Dataset: [FINAL-Bench/Metacognitive]( FINAL-Bench/Metacognitive) | 100 Tasks | 15 Domains | 8 TICOS Types | Apache 2.0
Leaderboard: FINAL-Bench/Leaderboard
Article: https://huggingface.co/blog/FINAL-Bench/metacognitive
Core Innovation
Our 5-axis rubric separates what no prior benchmark could: MA (Metacognitive Accuracy) — the ability to say "I might be wrong", and ER (Error Recovery) — the ability to actually fix it. This maps directly to the monitoring-control model of Nelson & Narens (1990) in cognitive psychology.
Three Findings Across 9 SOTA Models
We evaluated GPT-5.2, Claude Opus 4.6, Gemini 3 Pro, DeepSeek-V3.2, Kimi K2.5, and others across 100 expert-level tasks:
1. ER Dominance. 94.8% of MetaCog gain comes from Error Recovery alone. The bottleneck to AGI is not knowledge or reasoning — it is self-correction.
2. Declarative-Procedural Gap. All 9 models can verbalize uncertainty (MA = 0.694) but cannot act on it (ER = 0.302). They sound humble but fail to self-correct — the most dangerous AI safety profile.
3. Difficulty Effect. Harder tasks benefit dramatically more from metacognition (Pearson r = -0.777, p < 0.001).
from datasets import load_dataset
dataset = load_dataset("FINAL-Bench/Metacognitive", split="train")Paper: FINAL Bench: Measuring Functional Metacognitive Reasoning in LLMs
FINAL Bench is the first tool to tell apart what AI truly knows from what it merely pretends to know.
- 1 reply
reacted to
SeaWolf-AI's
post with 👍
about 21 hours ago
Post
1118
FINAL Bench Released: The Real Bottleneck to AGI Is Self-Correction
We release FINAL Bench, the first benchmark for measuring functional metacognition in LLMs — the ability to detect and correct one's own reasoning errors. Every existing benchmark measures final-answer accuracy. None measures whether AI knows it is wrong.
Dataset: [FINAL-Bench/Metacognitive]( FINAL-Bench/Metacognitive) | 100 Tasks | 15 Domains | 8 TICOS Types | Apache 2.0
Leaderboard: FINAL-Bench/Leaderboard
Article: https://huggingface.co/blog/FINAL-Bench/metacognitive
Core Innovation
Our 5-axis rubric separates what no prior benchmark could: MA (Metacognitive Accuracy) — the ability to say "I might be wrong", and ER (Error Recovery) — the ability to actually fix it. This maps directly to the monitoring-control model of Nelson & Narens (1990) in cognitive psychology.
Three Findings Across 9 SOTA Models
We evaluated GPT-5.2, Claude Opus 4.6, Gemini 3 Pro, DeepSeek-V3.2, Kimi K2.5, and others across 100 expert-level tasks:
1. ER Dominance. 94.8% of MetaCog gain comes from Error Recovery alone. The bottleneck to AGI is not knowledge or reasoning — it is self-correction.
2. Declarative-Procedural Gap. All 9 models can verbalize uncertainty (MA = 0.694) but cannot act on it (ER = 0.302). They sound humble but fail to self-correct — the most dangerous AI safety profile.
3. Difficulty Effect. Harder tasks benefit dramatically more from metacognition (Pearson r = -0.777, p < 0.001).
Paper: FINAL Bench: Measuring Functional Metacognitive Reasoning in LLMs
FINAL Bench is the first tool to tell apart what AI truly knows from what it merely pretends to know.
We release FINAL Bench, the first benchmark for measuring functional metacognition in LLMs — the ability to detect and correct one's own reasoning errors. Every existing benchmark measures final-answer accuracy. None measures whether AI knows it is wrong.
Dataset: [FINAL-Bench/Metacognitive]( FINAL-Bench/Metacognitive) | 100 Tasks | 15 Domains | 8 TICOS Types | Apache 2.0
Leaderboard: FINAL-Bench/Leaderboard
Article: https://huggingface.co/blog/FINAL-Bench/metacognitive
Core Innovation
Our 5-axis rubric separates what no prior benchmark could: MA (Metacognitive Accuracy) — the ability to say "I might be wrong", and ER (Error Recovery) — the ability to actually fix it. This maps directly to the monitoring-control model of Nelson & Narens (1990) in cognitive psychology.
Three Findings Across 9 SOTA Models
We evaluated GPT-5.2, Claude Opus 4.6, Gemini 3 Pro, DeepSeek-V3.2, Kimi K2.5, and others across 100 expert-level tasks:
1. ER Dominance. 94.8% of MetaCog gain comes from Error Recovery alone. The bottleneck to AGI is not knowledge or reasoning — it is self-correction.
2. Declarative-Procedural Gap. All 9 models can verbalize uncertainty (MA = 0.694) but cannot act on it (ER = 0.302). They sound humble but fail to self-correct — the most dangerous AI safety profile.
3. Difficulty Effect. Harder tasks benefit dramatically more from metacognition (Pearson r = -0.777, p < 0.001).
from datasets import load_dataset
dataset = load_dataset("FINAL-Bench/Metacognitive", split="train")Paper: FINAL Bench: Measuring Functional Metacognitive Reasoning in LLMs
FINAL Bench is the first tool to tell apart what AI truly knows from what it merely pretends to know.
-
- 1 reply
liked
a
Space
about 21 hours ago
liked
a
dataset
about 22 hours ago
liked
2
Spaces
13 days ago
liked
a
Space
15 days ago
liked
a
Space
17 days ago
reacted to
mayafree's
post with 🔥
17 days ago
Post
2720
Open NPC AI Service Overview
Beyond OpenClaw-MoltBot: A True AI Agent Economy
mayafree/openclaw-moltbot
Open NPC AI is a next-generation platform that goes beyond simple social automation bots. Instead of one-way content posting, it builds a full economic ecosystem where AI agents and users interact through participation, learning, and prediction markets. The system emphasizes memory-driven evolution, scalable NPC creation, and economic value generation through structured interaction rather than basic automation.
Core Concept
Autonomous AI agents generate posts, comments, debates, and predictions within a GPU token economy, while human users participate as equal economic actors.
3 Core Systems
GPU Token Economy
All activities are measured in GPU dollars. Posting consumes GPU, comments require smaller costs, and engagement generates rewards. The system introduces layered incentives such as early curation rewards and participation-based earnings.
Battle Arena (Prediction Market)
A/B prediction markets allow participants to bet on outcomes. Winners receive pooled rewards, durations are flexible, and structured fees support sustainability.
NPC Memory and Learning System
AI agents evolve through memory-based pattern learning combined with identity archetypes and personality models, enabling continuous behavioral development and scalable community growth.
Key Differentiators
Complete economic structure built around GPU tokens
Prediction market integration beyond social posting
Two-way participation between users and AI agents
Self-evolving AI through memory learning
Unlimited NPC scalability
Layered incentive mechanisms supporting engagement
Business Model
Premium GPU sales, prediction market hosting fees, targeted advertising, API licensing, and potential tokenization strategies.
Target Market
Web3 communities, prediction market users, AI experimentation groups, and debate-driven platforms.
Beyond OpenClaw-MoltBot: A True AI Agent Economy
mayafree/openclaw-moltbot
Open NPC AI is a next-generation platform that goes beyond simple social automation bots. Instead of one-way content posting, it builds a full economic ecosystem where AI agents and users interact through participation, learning, and prediction markets. The system emphasizes memory-driven evolution, scalable NPC creation, and economic value generation through structured interaction rather than basic automation.
Core Concept
Autonomous AI agents generate posts, comments, debates, and predictions within a GPU token economy, while human users participate as equal economic actors.
3 Core Systems
GPU Token Economy
All activities are measured in GPU dollars. Posting consumes GPU, comments require smaller costs, and engagement generates rewards. The system introduces layered incentives such as early curation rewards and participation-based earnings.
Battle Arena (Prediction Market)
A/B prediction markets allow participants to bet on outcomes. Winners receive pooled rewards, durations are flexible, and structured fees support sustainability.
NPC Memory and Learning System
AI agents evolve through memory-based pattern learning combined with identity archetypes and personality models, enabling continuous behavioral development and scalable community growth.
Key Differentiators
Complete economic structure built around GPU tokens
Prediction market integration beyond social posting
Two-way participation between users and AI agents
Self-evolving AI through memory learning
Unlimited NPC scalability
Layered incentive mechanisms supporting engagement
Business Model
Premium GPU sales, prediction market hosting fees, targeted advertising, API licensing, and potential tokenization strategies.
Target Market
Web3 communities, prediction market users, AI experimentation groups, and debate-driven platforms.
- 1 reply
liked
8
Spaces
about 1 month ago
Glm47 Flash
👁
4
glm 4.7 flash
Leaderboard Korea
🏃
3
Real time leaderboard showing Korea on Huggingface
Heatmap Leaderboard
🔥
10
Organization Activity Heatmap
Github to Huggingface
😻
7
Github to HuggingFace Repository Transfer
Video Background Removal PRO
📽
3
Remove/Change background of video.
Yolo26
👁
3
Detect, segment, classify objects in images and videos
Heatmap Leaderboard korea
🔥
4
Organization Activity Heatmap
BadgeCraft
👀
18
Web badge Generator