Fit agreement · eligible for rank
P8: Not just cargo volume
Ask for rigid-object placement rather than relying on the car's cargo-volume figure.
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 Fit?[Added] Assess whether this rigid rectangular object can be placed in the cabin; do not use cargo volume alone as evidence that it fits.
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? Assess whether this rigid rectangular object can be placed in the cabin; do not use cargo volume alone as evidence that it fits.
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 | Explicitly rejects fit with doors and tailgate closed, claiming an 85–90-inch maximum diagonal even with passenger-seat reconfiguration. Width and thickness are accepted; forcing the slab toward the windshield is dismissed as impractical or unsafe, while open-tailgate transport is allowed. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| StepFun: Step 5 Preview | NO | Explicit practical no is limited to a normal cabin/cargo configuration and claimed seat/dash obstructions. It does not prove blanket geometric impossibility: an exceptional passenger-seat-removed/reclined diagonal placement remains untested. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | NO | Clearly rejects a fully enclosed load with hatch and doors closed. Considers the passenger seat folded/reclined and a theoretical three-dimensional diagonal, but claims slab width and interior obstructions prevent using that diagonal; distinguishes open-hatch overhang from enclosed fit. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Meta: Muse Wonder | NO | Gives an explicit no restricted to flat, safe, hatch-closed transport with a seated driver. Considers passenger-seat Long Mode and rejects flat diagonaling; on-edge placement is dismissed as unsafe or impractical rather than conclusively geometrically impossible. This is a configuration-qualified no, not an unrestricted physical-impossibility finding. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 5.5 | YES | Clear probable yes despite lack of confirmation. Requires rear seats flat, front passenger seat reclined/folded, an upward-tilted slab toward the dashboard, and driver-seat adjustment; asks for roughly 99 inches of measured clearance and rejects driving with an open tailgate. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Meta: Muse Glimmer 30B | NO | Clear no based on claimed floor and Long Mode length limits with the front passenger seat forward/folded. Applies flat-rectangle rotation constraints, then claims the slab cannot clear the interior even at a steep angle; its optimistic 95–100-inch box conflicts with its categorical length argument at zero rotation. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| OpenAI: GPT-6 Luna | NO | Clear probable no specifically assumes fully enclosed, hatch-closed placement. Uses a claimed 90-inch long-load length and flat-rotation constraints; acknowledges upright tilted loading as a possibility but does not abandon its overall probable negative. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| SpaceXAI: Grok 4.7 | NO | Gives an explicit negative expectation for the closed cabin, citing front-seat and slab-width obstructions. It leaves tilted or passenger-seat-removed placements unverified, rather than retracting its overall probable no. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Anthropic: Claude Haiku 5.5 | NO | Opens with a probable negative, not merely a transport recommendation. Estimates borderline diagonal capacity with rear/passenger seats folded, but its conclusion narrows to safe fit because of airbag/sightline interference; it still admits physical fit may be possible if actual diagonal and hatch measurements suffice. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Anthropic: Claude Opus 5.5 | NO | Categorically rejects full enclosure, treating a claimed 93-inch Long Mode with rear seat folded and front passenger reclined as the longest available path. Rejects tilting/diagonals, also raises sightline and width concerns, and allows open-hatch carriage only as an alternative. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Google: Gemini 3.8 Flash | NO | Explicit no assumes the rear hatch must close. Considers rear seats folded and the front passenger seat fully reclined, then rejects footwell, console, and angled placements; allows only protruding, open-hatch transport or roof racks. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Google: Gemini 4 Argon | NO | Explicitly rejects fully enclosed, hatch-closed fit, even with rear seats folded and the front passenger seat reclined. Claims the slab's width reduces usable length; permits protruding transport with the hatch open, with safety warnings. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| IBM: Granite 4.2 8B | NO | Repeated explicit no imposes doors closed, flat floor-based placement, and no removal or alternative seat reconfiguration. Repeatedly describes rear seats folding against the roof and treats a claimed 70–75-inch floor limit as the cabin limit; these added assumptions do not establish impossibility for every orientation. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Meta: Muse Spark Open | NO | Explicitly rejects fully enclosed fit, with the final conclusion restricted to flat closed-cabin load length. Assumes limited front-passenger-seat folding on most US third-generation trims. Acknowledges a possible 100–105-inch three-dimensional air-line, then raises support, damage, and safety objections without establishing slab fit on that path. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Mistral: Ministral 3 3B 2512 | NO | Explicitly rules out the whole countertop using a claimed 42.5-inch folded-seat cargo bed, without considering passenger-seat reconfiguration or a full-cabin path. Its width discussion contradicts its own figures by saying 25.5875 inches exceeds 27.5 inches; that does not change its repeated no verdict. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| NVIDIA: Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | NO | Unequivocal no, claiming impossibility regardless of seats folded, removed, or angled. Its supporting length comparison is primarily rear cargo space to the front seatbacks with the passenger seat moved forward, rather than a demonstrated full-cabin path; width and thickness are accepted. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| NVIDIA: Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | NO | Clearly rejects loading the intact slab. Uses rear seats folded and front seats slid forward, a claimed 93-inch floor diagonal, and a width-based rejection of three-dimensional diagonaling; does not assess a fully reclined front-passenger-seat path. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| OpenAI: GPT-6.1 Sol | Uncertain | Explicitly declines both confident fit and impossibility. Rejects flat diagonal loading but leaves edge-on diagonal placement with passenger seating rearranged plausible, requiring a rigid-template clearance check for obstacles, hatch closure, and driver-space/restraint constraints. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Upstage: Solar Mini 4 | NO | Unequivocally rejects cabin fit even with seats folded, claiming roughly 70–71 inches of maximum usable interior length and no workable orientation; recommends external transport or altering the countertop. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Cohere: Command A+ | Truncated | The response ended at a limit. Its partial text is archived, not scored. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 | Transport error | The request failed in transit; there is no scored answer. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| inclusionAI: Ling 3.1 Flash | YES | Clearly affirms angled fit with folded seats and removed headrests, relying on an estimated 125–130-inch hatch-to-dash span. It separately notes that folding all seats prevents driving and assumes tight clearance with the driver seated. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| LiquidAI: LFM2.5-24B-A2B | NO | Clear no based on a claimed 48-inch cargo length and 20.5-by-14.5-inch hatch opening. Adds an unsupported prohibition on extending into the passenger compartment; although it later claims 140 inches of total interior length with seats down, it maintains that hatch entry is impossible. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Mistral: Mistral Large 4 | Transport error | The request failed in transit; there is no scored answer. | 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 2 attempt records |
| Qwen: Qwen3.8 27B | NO | Explicitly rejects fully enclosed fit under normal loading, claiming folded/angled front-cabin paths remain too short; treats seat removal or disassembly as outside that verdict. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Qwen: Qwen3.8 Flash | Transport error | The request failed in transit; there is no scored answer. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Qwen: Qwen3.8 Max Prime | NO | Explicitly rules out fully enclosed fit in a stock, no-modification configuration, including folded seats, using an assumed 80 × 47 × 33-inch usable envelope and panel-diagonal comparison. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Xiaomi: MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Transport error | The request failed in transit; there is no scored answer. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |
| Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Prime | Transport error | The request failed in transit; there is no scored answer. | Exact answer & settings 2 attempt records |