JobBench

How each maker reported it

• Muse Spark 1.3 model page; Muse Spark 1.3 evaluation methodology

  Muse Spark 1.3, GPT 5.6 Sol and Opus 5 at max reasoning effort; Muse Spark 1.2 at xhigh. Meta reports the highest comparable score from its own runs, official leaderboards or the other makers' own reports. OSWorld 2.0 version 08.08, except 1.2 on 06.24. Agentic IF Index is a Meta-internal composite. Meta's table has no MRCR scores for Opus 5.

• Qwen3.8-Flash model card (Benchmark Results)

  Qwen's own tables. SWE tasks use Claude Code or mini-SWE-agent at temperature 1.0 and 256K context; HLE judged by GPT-4o. OSWorld 2.0 and two-setting rows are split. DeepSeek-V4-Flash is not in the vision table.

• Muse Spark 1.1 model page; report §5

  Highest reasoning effort for every model (high for Gemini 3.1 Pro, max for Opus 4.8). "Muse Spark (1.0)" is the earlier model. Third-party scores are Meta's best-effort runs.

• Qwen3.8-Max model card (Benchmark Results)

  Qwen's own table. Terminal Bench 2.1 run with Claude Code (avg@10); competitor scores are the best published across harnesses. SWE-bench Pro uses a corrected task set. Rows marked in-house are Qwen benchmarks. Fable 5 results may involve fallbacks. Agents' Last Exam is split into pass rate and score.

• Qwen3.8-27B model card (Text Performance, VL Performance)

  Qwen's own tables. SWE-bench Pro uses Claude Code on a corrected task set (Opus 4.6 is its published score). HLE judged by GPT-4o. Muse Glimmer-30B's CharXiv cell (78.8) does not say which setting, so it is left out. Qwen3.7-Plus figures here differ slightly from the Flash-Next card (e.g. SWE-bench Pro 57.6 vs 55.8).

• Qwen3.7-Plus Qwen3.8-Flash-Next model card (Benchmark Results)

  Qwen published Qwen3.7-Plus scores as a comparison column in its Qwen3.8 cards. The Qwen3.8-27B card reports slightly different Qwen3.7-Plus numbers for some rows (e.g. SWE-bench Pro 57.6, DeepSWE 14.2).