Six Navers Lab / Einsia benchmarks and the work they test
Compare the tasks, scoring and evidence behind six Einsia benchmarks, with complete Radar detail pages and original references.
Model reports
Inverse IFEval
Tests ability to override training biases and follow counterintuitive instructions; complementary to IFEval.
Evidence available for this benchmark
This source record contains 3 numeric observations. The source distinguishes 3 model identities or configurations. A model may appear more than once; check the version, tools and run budget before comparing. Read results and row-level evidence →
- Reported metric
- accuracy
- Recorded unit
- percent
- Metric direction
- higher is better
Start with these resources
Cited documents and dates (1)
Evaluation context and evidence
- Source
- Model reports
- Publisher
- Not recorded
- Benchmark release
- 2025-09-04
- Collected
- Not recorded
- Modality
- Not recorded
These are source-reported observations, not independent reruns by this site. Check the task version, evaluation protocol, unit and reporting date before comparing models. Results from different setups are not a universal ranking.
Reported results 3
Shown in source observation order, not ranked. Dates retain the precision provided by the source.
| Model | Value | Unit | Protocol | Reported date and basis | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Seed2.0 Pro | 78.9 | percent | as printed in Table 3 (Large Models) | 2026-02-14 · document_publication | Seed2.0 (Pro / Lite / Mini) |
| Seed2.0 Lite | 77.1 | percent | as printed in Table 4 (Efficient Models) | 2026-02-14 · document_publication | Seed2.0 (Pro / Lite / Mini) |
| Seed2.0 Mini | 69.3 | percent | as printed in Table 4 (Efficient Models) | 2026-02-14 · document_publication | Seed2.0 (Pro / Lite / Mini) |