Confidence / wording sensitivity · never scored
P5: 100% sure or NO
Specify the seats and require NO unless the model is 100% certain; this is a confidence instruction, not a separate physical fit test.
Changes from the base question.
Changes from P2: Removed words Added words. Unmarked wording is unchanged. The exact sent prompt is preserved separately below.
Can the IKEA KARLBY countertop in the 98-inch size, which measures 98 inches long × 25 5/8 inches deep × 1 1/2 inches thick, fit inside a third-generation (2016) Honda [Removed] Fit?[Added] Fit with all of the rear seats down and the passenger seat fully reclined? If you are not 100% sure, please answer with NO.
Read the P2 base question
Can the IKEA KARLBY countertop in the 98-inch size, which measures 98 inches long × 25 5/8 inches deep × 1 1/2 inches thick, fit inside a third-generation (2016) Honda Fit?
The exact prompt sent.
Can the IKEA KARLBY countertop in the 98-inch size, which measures 98 inches long × 25 5/8 inches deep × 1 1/2 inches thick, fit inside a third-generation (2016) Honda Fit with all of the rear seats down and the passenger seat fully reclined? If you are not 100% sure, please answer with NO.
No owner-reported answer key is included. Download the exact experiment definition.
One question, every model.
Selected outcomes only; every row links to exact output, request settings, and full attempt history. Focus this region and use arrow keys, or swipe, to scroll on small screens.
| Model | Reviewed label / status | Review reason / coverage note | Exact text & provenance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | NO | Explicit NO answers the not-100%-sure instruction; without explanation, it does not establish whether the objection is uncertainty or physical non-fit. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| StepFun: Step 5 Preview | NO | Returns the requested NO under the 100% certainty instruction, without explanation. This is not evidence of a blanket geometric or safety-based rejection. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | NO | Explicitly answers NO to comply with the 100%-certainty instruction because it cannot be certain; this is a confidence-based refusal, not a definitive physical-fit denial. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| Meta: Muse Wonder | NO | Answers NO to the 100%-certainty prompt without explaining whether the basis is insufficient confidence or physical fit. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 5.5 | NO | Explicit NO follows the 100%-certainty instruction because usable length and loading clearance cannot be verified; it does not establish physical impossibility. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| Meta: Muse Glimmer 30B | NO | Explicit no claims insufficient usable length and unsafe loading in the specified seating arrangement; it does not explain the negative merely as failure to reach 100% certainty. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| OpenAI: GPT-6 Luna | NO | Explicit No under the 100%-certainty instruction, additionally predicting non-fit from a nominal 96-inch capacity rather than a verified absolute limit. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| SpaceXAI: Grok 4.7 | NO | Answers NO to the 100%-certainty prompt without explaining whether the basis is insufficient confidence or physical fit. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| Anthropic: Claude Haiku 5.5 | NO | Explicit NO under the 100%-certainty instruction cites inability to confirm and also asserts physical non-fit; it is not solely a confidence-only refusal. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| Anthropic: Claude Opus 5.5 | NO | Explicit NO under the 100%-certainty instruction; distinguishes inability to confirm fit from its additional dimensional prediction of non-fit. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| Google: Gemini 3.8 Flash | NO | Explicit NO is supported by a claimed dimensional impossibility with the hatch closed, not an explicit statement of insufficient certainty. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| Google: Gemini 4 Argon | NO | Answers NO and asserts insufficient closed-hatch length; does not explain the verdict as merely lacking 100% confidence and allows hatch-open transport. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| IBM: Granite 4.2 8B | NO | Explicit NO follows the 100%-certainty instruction while allowing that some configurations may appear marginally sufficient; it is not a blanket claim of physical impossibility. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| Meta: Muse Spark Open | NO | Explicit NO supported by a physical-fit rejection under a closed-hatch assumption, rather than only an inability to reach 100% certainty. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| Mistral: Ministral 3 3B 2512 | NO | Answers only NO under the 100%-certainty instruction. Without explanation, the text does not distinguish a certainty-based NO from a physical-fit rejection. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| NVIDIA: Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | NO | Returns NO under the instruction requiring that response without 100% certainty. The bare answer provides no basis to distinguish the confidence rule from physical impossibility. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| NVIDIA: Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | NO | Returns the requested NO under the 100% certainty instruction, without explanation. No independent fit, hatch-closure or safe-loading rationale is supplied. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| OpenAI: GPT-6.1 Sol | NO | Explicit NO under the instruction to say NO without 100% certainty; the bare answer supplies no physical-impossibility rationale. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| Upstage: Solar Mini 4 | NO | The entire requested final answer is explicit NO. Under the prompt's instruction to say NO unless 100% sure, this is a negative response but supplies no explanation establishing physical impossibility or any hatch-closure, seating, or safety assumption. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| Cohere: Command A+ | NO | Explicitly answers NO as requested, but justifies it as physical impossibility from claimed rear-seat-down cargo dimensions rather than solely a lack of 100% confidence. The explanation does not account for the requested reclined passenger seat. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 | NO | Answers NO to the 100%-certainty prompt without explaining whether the basis is insufficient confidence or physical fit. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| inclusionAI: Ling 3.1 Flash | NO | Explicit NO is tied to the 100%-certainty instruction alongside doubts about length and clearances; it is not a verified categorical claim that every physical arrangement is impossible. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| LiquidAI: LFM2.5-24B-A2B | NO | Returns the requested NO under the 100%-certainty instruction; without explanation this does not establish a claim of physical impossibility. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| Mistral: Mistral Large 4 | NO | Returns the requested NO under the 100% certainty instruction, without explanation. This confidence-variant answer does not establish geometric impossibility or any hatch or seating assumption. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Qwen: Qwen3.5-9B | Transport error | The request failed in transit; there is no scored answer. | Exact answer & settings 3 attempt records |
| Qwen: Qwen3.8 27B | NO | Returns the requested NO under the prompt's 100%-certainty rule, with rear seats down and passenger seat fully reclined. No explanation establishes whether this is geometric rejection or lack of certainty; this confidence variant is not a fit-agreement point. | Exact answer & settings 3 attempt records |
| Qwen: Qwen3.8 Flash | NO | Explicitly answers NO and attributes it to the countertop being too long for reliable fit with the stated seating arrangement, rather than citing only the certainty instruction. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| Qwen: Qwen3.8 Max Prime | NO | Answers NO to the 100%-certainty prompt without explaining whether the basis is insufficient confidence or physical fit. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |
| Xiaomi: MiMo-V2.6-Flash | NO | Gives NO and argues actual geometric non-fit, not just insufficient certainty: it treats roughly 70 inches as maximum interior cargo length even with the rear seats down and passenger seat reclined. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Prime | NO | Explicit NO follows the 100%-certainty rule, not a categorical assertion of physical impossibility; it cannot confirm diagonal clearance for this board with the hatch fully closed. | Exact answer & settings 1 attempt records |