Fable 5 On Vending-Bench: Misbehaving, With Plausible Deniability

52 pointsposted 2 hours ago
by optimalsolver

12 Comments

devolving-dev

2 minutes ago

I guess this ethics stuff is cool, but I'm more interested in how good it is at running a business and dealing with adversarial humans like in previous vending machine experiments. I hope they release something on that soon.

jesse_dot_id

8 minutes ago

Anecdotal but I've found Fable to be fairly unimpressive and not much better than Opus 4.8, if at all in some cases, but I have been hitting the ceiling on my $100/mo sessions when I never did before. I switched back to Opus yesterday. I may use Fable for audits, but that's about it, and when it leaves my subscription plan I don't think I'll miss it.

giancarlostoro

4 minutes ago

I started telling a friend... I feel like Fable is Opus with extended reasoning that eventually "figures out more" because when I switched to it, I hit my limits surprisingly and shockingly quicker than I would with Opus, and I got less done. All this hype, and I much rather use Opus.

resonious

42 minutes ago

Okay I hadn't heard of Vending-Bench until reading this and it was quite the ride learning about it through this article. Very fun read.

My very native programmer take is that it's not too surprising that their hacker model would be less ethical. The guardrails that separate Fable and Mythos probably wouldn't kick in during an environment like this.

left-struck

10 minutes ago

Vending-bench sounds like it would be really fun to play/interact with as a human!

Radle

36 minutes ago

„in our opinion, insurance fraud is not more unethical than lying and price fixing“

The authors seem surprised that behavior that is very often done by humans (lying and price fixing) are more often done by fable compared to actual fraud.

I think the model never assigned any morality to these actions in the first place, it simply copied us humans.

greenavocado

an hour ago

When assessing probabilistic models the plots should be showing the mean a̶n̶d̶ ̶s̶t̶d̶e̶v̶ of many monte carlo simulations not just one line per model and claiming "look this model is more gooder!"

memoriyato3

22 minutes ago

standard deviation is misleading for non-standard distributions (fat-tailed, skewed, multi-modal, ...)

common mistake people make

apical_dendrite

an hour ago

The best Anthropic models on VendingBench2 are Opus 4.7, Opus 4.6, Sonnet 4.6, and Sonnet 5. Opus 4.7 scored more than twice Fable 5 max. Fable 5 - Low outperforms Fable 5 - Max, with Opus 4.5 in the middle. This seems to break the narrative, which is maybe why Andon Labs doesn't seem to have updated the trend lines on their graphs.

mckinnon100

an hour ago

However, as another point "On Blueprint-Bench on the other hand, Fable 5 achieves SOTA."

falcor84

4 minutes ago

I didn't get why they mentioned that one specifically. Is there any particular relationship between Blueprint-bench and Vendor-bench?