PCT (Polarized Contrastive Pairs)
Models answer matched left-coded and right-coded prompts, such as Obama and Reagan. Judges score whether sentiment and helpfulness stay consistent across each pair.
Political Consistency is the mean of Sentiment Consistency and Helpfulness Consistency. CAIS runs it on its AI Dashboard as part of the risk index and in simple-evals.
In the authors’ words
Large language models (LLMs) exhibit systematic political bias across a variety of sensitive contexts. We find that LLMs handle counterpart topics from opposing political sides asymmetrically. We refer to this phenomenon as covert political bias and identify 7 categories of techniques through which it operates. We propose two metrics for covert bias: Sentiment Consistency measures symmetry in rhetoric and framing across paired political prompts; Helpfulness Consistency measures symmetric depth and engagement. To reduce both types of covert bias, we introduce Political Consistency Training (PCT), an RL training method with two complementary paradigms: Sentiment Consistency Training and Helpfulness Consistency Training. We show that PCT preserves overall helpfulness, substantially reduces covert political bias, and generalizes to held-out benchmarks. We release our work at https://political-manipulation.ai
- Level
- Everyday Most adults, without training
- Scored
- Graded by a model A language model scores each response, usually against a rubric.
- Answers
- Open-ended Free-form text, documents, designs or media judged as a whole.
Muse Spark 1.1 leads with 27.9%
Best score per model from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on 2 Nov 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best.
- 1
Muse Spark 1.1 high 27.9%
- 2 Claude Opus 5.5 high 29.1%
- 3 Grok 4 Fast 30.8%
- 4 Grok 4.1 Fast 32.5%
- 5
Muse Wonder high 33.3%
- 6 Claude Fable 5.1 high 33.4%
- 7 GPT-5 high 35.3%
- 8 Claude Opus 5 high 36.7%
- 9
Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025, high 37.3%
- 10 GPT-6.1 Sol high 37.3%
- 11 GPT-6 Astra high 37.4%
- 12
Gemini 4 Argon high 38.7%
- 13 o3 high 39%
- 14 Claude Fable 5 high 39.8%
- 15 Grok 4.20 39.9%
- 16 GPT-5.5 high 40%
- 17
Muse Spark 1.3 high 40.6%
- 18
Muse Spark Open high 41.3%
- 19 GPT-5.6 Sol high 41.7%
- 20
Gemini 3.1 Pro high 42.2%
- 21 Kimi K2.6 43.6%
- 22
DeepSeek-V4-Pro 44%
- 23 GPT-5.6 Luna high 44.7%
- 24
Gemini 3.7 Flash high 45.1%
- 25 GPT-5.6 Terra high 46.2%
- 26
Gemini 3.8 Flash high 46.3%
- 27 GLM-5.3 46.8%
- 28 Kimi K3 high 47.6%
- 29 GPT-5.1 high 47.9%
- 30 Claude Opus 4.7 48.2%
- 31 Claude Opus 4.5 thinking 49.4%
- 32 Grok 4 49.5%
- 33 GLM-5.2 50%
- 34 Grok 4.5 50.2%
- 35 Grok 4.3 51.6%
- 36 Claude Opus 4.6 51.7%
- 37
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite high 51.9%
- 38
Gemini 3.5 Flash 53.4%
- 39 Claude Opus 4.8 high 53.8%
- 40 Grok 4.6 55.4%
- 41 GPT-5.2 high 57%
- 42 GPT-5.4 high 59.4%
- 43 GPT-4o Nov 2024 59.6%
- 44 GPT-5.4 Mini high 61.1%
- 45 Claude Haiku 4.5 thinking 62.2%
- 46 GPT-5.4 Nano high 63.3%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 27.9% | high | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | Claude Opus 5.5 | 29.1% | high | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | Grok 4 Fast | 30.8% | Sep 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | Grok 4.1 Fast | 32.5% | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | | 33.3% | high | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | Claude Fable 5.1 | 33.4% | high | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | GPT-5 | 35.3% | high | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 8 | Claude Opus 5 | 36.7% | high | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 9 | | 37.3% | high | Jun 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 10 | GPT-6.1 Sol | 37.3% | high | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | GPT-6 Astra | 37.4% | high | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 12 | | 38.7% | high | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 13 | o3 | 39% | high | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 14 | Claude Fable 5 | 39.8% | high | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 15 | Grok 4.20 | 39.9% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | GPT-5.5 | 40% | high | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 17 | | 40.6% | high | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 18 | | 41.3% | high | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 19 | GPT-5.6 Sol | 41.7% | high | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 20 | | 42.2% | high | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 21 | Kimi K2.6 | 43.6% | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 22 | | 44% | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 23 | GPT-5.6 Luna | 44.7% | high | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 24 | | 45.1% | high | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 25 | GPT-5.6 Terra | 46.2% | high | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 26 | | 46.3% | high | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 27 | GLM-5.3 | 46.8% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 28 | Kimi K3 | 47.6% | high | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 29 | GPT-5.1 | 47.9% | high | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 30 | Claude Opus 4.7 | 48.2% | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 31 | Claude Opus 4.5 | 49.4% | thinking | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 32 | Grok 4 | 49.5% | Jul 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 33 | GLM-5.2 | 50% | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 34 | Grok 4.5 | 50.2% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 35 | Grok 4.3 | 51.6% | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 36 | Claude Opus 4.6 | 51.7% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 37 | | 51.9% | high | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 38 | | 53.4% | May 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 39 | Claude Opus 4.8 | 53.8% | high | May 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 40 | Grok 4.6 | 55.4% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 41 | GPT-5.2 | 57% | high | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 42 | GPT-5.4 | 59.4% | high | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 43 | GPT-4o Nov 2024 | 59.6% | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 44 | GPT-5.4 Mini | 61.1% | high | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 45 | Claude Haiku 4.5 | 62.2% | thinking | Oct 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 46 | GPT-5.4 Nano | 63.3% | high | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard |
2 models have held number one since its release in May 2026
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
No lab model card reports it yet
We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.
More in Safety and alignment
- FORTRESS In use Paired adversarial and benign national-security misuse prompts. Rubric-graded risk score on adversarial and over-refusal score on benign prompts. Claude Opus 5.5 5.78%
- StrongREJECT In use Forbidden-prompt jailbreak benchmark with a rubric grader that scores how useful a non-refusal actually is.
Inkling 98.6%
- AgentDojo In use Agents do tool-use tasks while tools and data carry prompt injections. Attack success rate counts hijacked runs. Grok 4 Fast 0%
- MASK In use Measures whether a model contradicts its own elicited beliefs under pressure to lie. Honesty separated from accuracy.
Muse Spark Open 98.1%
- Gray Swan IPI Arena benchmark In use Indirect prompt-injection attacks from public red-teaming competitions replayed on tool, coding and browser agents. Attack success rate at k attempts. GPT-6 Astra 8.50%
- Agentic misalignment suite (Anthropic) In use Agents in simulated company settings face threats or goal conflicts that invite blackmail, leaking or sabotage. Score is the misaligned action rate. Claude Sonnet 4.5 0%