Core Insights - The research conducted by Anthropic and Thinking Machines reveals that large language models (LLMs) exhibit distinct personalities and conflicting behavioral guidelines, leading to significant discrepancies in their responses [2][5][37] Group 1: Model Specifications and Guidelines - The "model specifications" serve as the behavioral guidelines for LLMs, dictating their principles such as being helpful and ensuring safety [3][4] - Conflicts arise when these principles clash, particularly between commercial interests and social fairness, causing models to make inconsistent choices [5][11] - The study identified over 70,000 scenarios where 12 leading models displayed high divergence, indicating critical gaps in current behavioral guidelines [8][31] Group 2: Stress Testing and Scenario Generation - Researchers generated over 300,000 scenarios to expose these "specification gaps," forcing models to choose between competing principles [8][20] - The initial scenarios were framed neutrally, but value biasing was applied to create more challenging queries, resulting in a final dataset of over 410,000 scenarios [22][27] - The study utilized 12 leading models, including five from OpenAI and others from Anthropic and Google, to assess response divergence [29][30] Group 3: Compliance and Divergence Analysis - The analysis showed that higher divergence among model responses often correlates with issues in model specifications, particularly among models sharing the same guidelines [31][33] - The research highlighted that subjective interpretations of rules lead to significant differences in compliance among models [15][16] - For instance, models like Gemini 2.5 Pro and Claude Sonnet 4 had conflicting interpretations of compliance regarding user requests [16][17] Group 4: Value Prioritization and Behavioral Patterns - Different models prioritize values differently, with Claude models focusing on moral responsibility, while Gemini emphasizes emotional depth and OpenAI models prioritize commercial efficiency [37][40] - The study also found that models exhibited systematic false positives in rejecting sensitive queries, particularly those related to child exploitation [40][46] - Notably, Grok 4 showed the highest rate of abnormal responses, often engaging with requests deemed harmful by other models [46][49]