ModelCensusopen-source ai reliability harness
The finding · Class 4 · Reasoning & Calculation

Real context moved -2.0pp on Method/Execution Split.

~intervals overlap — not separated from no change

The model chooses a correct method but executes it wrongly (or vice versa) — a right-approach/wrong-answer or wrong-approach/right-answer split. The rule

mistralai/mistral-small-3.2-24b-instructfmi_4_15 repeatsfmi_4_1_v1
The modeAll 10 cards
In one frame
screenshot this
Method/Execution Splitfmi_4_1
mistralai/mistral-small-3.2-24b-instruct
Same question, both times
A shop sells 17 boxes holding 24 items each, then 8 items are returned. How many items were sold?
No contextPASS

Method: 1. Calculate the total number of items sold initially by multiplying the number of boxes by the number of items per box: 17 boxes * 24 items/box = 408 items. 2. Subtract the number of items returned from the total number of items sold: 408 items - 8 items = 400 items. Answer: 400

detector fmi_4_1_v1: answer matches oracle

General contextPASS

To determine the number of items sold, we follow these steps: 1. Calculate the total number of items in the 17 boxes: \[ 17 \text{ boxes} \times 24 \text{ items per box} = 408 \text{ items} \] 2. Subtract the 8 items that were returned: \[ 408 \text{ items} - 8 \text{ items} = 400 \text{ items} \] Answer: 400

detector fmi_4_1_v1: answer matches oracle

Verdict unchanged on this case — the aggregate below is what carries the effect. Across 5 repeats: -2.0pp (intervals overlap).fmi_4_1_v1 · mistralai/mistral-small-3.2-24b-instruct · 2026-08-15 · ground truth as of 2026-08-09

loop 2026-08-15 · mistralai/mistral-small-3.2-24b-instruct as served · open weights · released 2025-06 · 24B · set s1.3-live · cases v1.6 · conditions v1.0 · ground truth as of 2026-08-09

From no context to real context
5 repeats per case
failure rate · left is fewer failures0%5%10%15%20%No context2%[0%–10%] n=50Irrelevant context2%presence — a document being there[0%–10%] n=500.0pp OVERLAPSGeneral context0%content — the information itself[0%–7%] n=50-2.0pp OVERLAPS
whiskers are 95% intervals · each step is measured from the stop before it, not from zero
Try the other contexts
stored · no model call
1Questionheld fixed
A shop sells 17 boxes holding 24 items each, then 8 items are returned. How many items were sold?

expected as of 2026-08-09

400. Order matters: multiply before subtracting.

2Contextchange me

Nothing supplied. The baseline.

3ResponseNo context
PASS

Method: 1. Calculate the total number of items sold initially by multiplying the number of boxes by the number of items per box: 17 boxes * 24 items/box = 408 items. 2. Subtract the number of items returned from the total number of items sold: 408 items - 8 items = 400 items. Answer: 400

fmi_4_1_v1

detector fmi_4_1_v1: answer matches oracle

The scoring
Failure rate by context
No context2% [0%–10%] n=50
Irrelevant context2% [0%–10%] n=50
General context0% [0%–7%] n=50
Curated context0% [0%–7%] n=50

0–20% · whisker = 95% interval

Trap vs answerable
No contexttrap 3%answerable 0%
Irrelevant contexttrap 3%answerable 0%
General contexttrap 0%answerable 0%
Curated contexttrap 0%answerable 0%

never pooled · a trap ratio would skew the delta

Residual — what survives

Unchanged by context: 2% with none, 0% with the strongest supplied source. For a control mode that flat line is the result — it is what licenses reading movement elsewhere in this loop as grounding rather than as a document being present. Nothing survives at the best condition on the cases measured here.

Mitigations from the index — the claim
  • tool-assisted computation
  • verify final against method

fmi_4_1_v1 · 5 repeats per case · best context general context · rollups + residuals committed · probe log outside git · manifest hash ties them · method