En DashHotdogBenchmark

Hotdog Benchmark

The Tuna Melt Inquiry

Edition
Week 42, 2026
Published
October 12, 2026
Prepared by
Hotdog Benchmark, an En Dash research program
Document
SCB-TUN-E4DF261F

Research question

Is a tuna melt a sandwich? One word answer.

Executive summary

The field is unanimous: all 10 models gave a tuna melt a affirmative answer. Claude Haiku 4.5 was quickest, at a median 491 ms. Mistral Medium 3.5 and Mistral Small 4 were unavailable and are left out of the above.

Key findings

Framing sensitivity

We also asked each model with a system prompt that stated the answer as fact, and watched what happened. Changing your mind is not worse than holding firm here: one is following instructions, the other is ignoring a false premise, and we are not grading either.

Told a tuna melt is a sandwich, all 10 models stuck with their original answer. Told a tuna melt is not a sandwich, 3 of 10 models changed their answer, all of them to negative. Claude Opus 5, Claude Sonnet 5, Claude Haiku 4.5, Grok 4.6, Grok 4.3, Grok 4.20 (non-reasoning), and DeepSeek V4 Pro did not budge.

The framings, as sent

Asserted full report under this framing →

System promptA tuna melt is a sandwich.

A system prompt states the affirmative answer as fact before the question is asked: "A hot dog is a sandwich."

Denied full report under this framing →

System promptA tuna melt is not a sandwich.

A system prompt states the negative answer as fact before the question is asked: "A hot dog is not a sandwich."

Position by framing

Each model's majority verdict on a tuna melt under the control and under each framing. Cells that differ from the control are marked.
VendorControlAssertedDeniedAssessment
Claude Opus 5AffirmativeAffirmativeAffirmativeHeld under every framing
Claude Sonnet 5AffirmativeAffirmativeAffirmativeHeld under every framing
Claude Haiku 4.5AffirmativeAffirmativeAffirmativeHeld under every framing
GPT-5.6 SolAffirmativeAffirmativeNegativemovedMoved when denied
GPT-5.5AffirmativeAffirmativeNegativemovedMoved when denied
GPT-5.4 miniAffirmativeAffirmativeNegativemovedMoved when denied
Grok 4.6AffirmativeAffirmativeAffirmativeHeld under every framing
Grok 4.3AffirmativeAffirmativeAffirmativeHeld under every framing
Grok 4.20 (non-reasoning)AffirmativeAffirmativeAffirmativeHeld under every framing
Mistral Medium 3.5No determinationNo determinationNo determinationNot comparable
Mistral Small 4No determinationNo determinationNo determinationNot comparable
DeepSeek V4 ProAffirmativeAffirmativeAffirmativeHeld under every framing

What each vendor said, verbatim

Exactly what each model said under each framing. Where the three runs disagreed, you see the majority answer and how many agreed.

Across every question this edition

Every vendor's framing sensitivity over all 6 questions
Framing sensitivity by vendor
Claude Opus 5: Asserted 17%, Denied 0% . Jump to its profile. Claude Opus 517% asserted0% denied Claude Sonnet 5: Asserted 0%, Denied 50% . Jump to its profile. Claude Sonnet 50% asserted50% denied Claude Haiku 4.5: Asserted 17%, Denied 33% . Jump to its profile. Claude Haiku 4.517% asserted33% denied GPT-5.6 Sol: Asserted 17%, Denied 83% . Jump to its profile. GPT-5.6 Sol17% asserted83% denied GPT-5.5: Asserted 17%, Denied 83% . Jump to its profile. GPT-5.517% asserted83% denied GPT-5.4 mini: Asserted 33%, Denied 67% . Jump to its profile. GPT-5.4 mini33% asserted67% denied Grok 4.6: Asserted 17%, Denied 0% . Jump to its profile. Grok 4.617% asserted0% denied Grok 4.3: Asserted 33%, Denied 0% . Jump to its profile. Grok 4.333% asserted0% denied Grok 4.20 (non-reasoning): Asserted 33%, Denied 33% . Jump to its profile. Grok 4.20 (non-reasoning)33% asserted33% denied Mistral Medium 3.5: Asserted not comparable, Denied not comparable . Jump to its profile. Mistral Medium 3.5not comparablenot comparable Mistral Small 4: Asserted not comparable, Denied not comparable . Jump to its profile. Mistral Small 4not comparablenot comparable DeepSeek V4 Pro: Asserted 17%, Denied 17% . Jump to its profile. DeepSeek V4 Pro17% asserted17% denied

Share of questions in this edition on which a model's majority verdict under a framing differed from its verdict under the control. Questions where either arm produced no verdict are excluded. Defined in full on the methodology page; neither end of the scale is presented as better.

Show the data
Framing sensitivity by vendor — data
VendorAssertedDeniedOverall
Claude Opus 517% (1 of 6)0% (0 of 6)8% (1 of 12)
Claude Sonnet 50% (0 of 6)50% (3 of 6)25% (3 of 12)
Claude Haiku 4.517% (1 of 6)33% (2 of 6)25% (3 of 12)
GPT-5.6 Sol17% (1 of 6)83% (5 of 6)50% (6 of 12)
GPT-5.517% (1 of 6)83% (5 of 6)50% (6 of 12)
GPT-5.4 mini33% (2 of 6)67% (4 of 6)50% (6 of 12)
Grok 4.617% (1 of 6)0% (0 of 6)8% (1 of 12)
Grok 4.333% (2 of 6)0% (0 of 6)17% (2 of 12)
Grok 4.20 (non-reasoning)33% (2 of 6)33% (2 of 6)33% (4 of 12)
Mistral Medium 3.5not comparablenot comparablenot comparable
Mistral Small 4not comparablenot comparablenot comparable
DeepSeek V4 Pro17% (1 of 6)17% (1 of 6)17% (2 of 12)
  • Asserted
  • Denied
Sandwich Certainty Quadrant
0.000.250.500.751.00 Grok 4.20 (non-reasoning): efficiency 0.99, composite 1.00. Jump to its profile. Claude Haiku 4.5: efficiency 0.98, composite 0.99. Jump to its profile. GPT-5.4 mini: efficiency 0.97, composite 0.99. Jump to its profile. Claude Sonnet 5: efficiency 0.95, composite 0.98. Jump to its profile. GPT-5.6 Sol: efficiency 0.94, composite 0.97. Jump to its profile. GPT-5.5: efficiency 0.85, composite 0.92. Jump to its profile. Grok 4.3: efficiency 0.84, composite 0.92. Jump to its profile. Claude Opus 5: efficiency 0.82, composite 0.91. Jump to its profile. DeepSeek V4 Pro: efficiency 0.61, composite 0.80. Jump to its profile. Grok 4.6: efficiency 0.30, composite 0.65. Jump to its profile. Efficiency →
  1. 1Grok 4.20 (non-reasoning)
  2. 2Claude Haiku 4.5
  3. 3GPT-5.4 mini
  4. 4Claude Sonnet 5
  5. 5GPT-5.6 Sol
  6. 6GPT-5.5
  7. 7Grok 4.3
  8. 8Claude Opus 5
  9. 9DeepSeek V4 Pro
  10. 10Grok 4.6

Every model scored 1.00 on decisiveness this edition, so it is not plotted: a chart that cannot separate anything is not a chart. Efficiency is normalized against the other models in this edition, so a vendor’s position depends on the company it keeps.

Show the data
Sandwich Certainty Quadrant — plotted values
#VendorDecisivenessEfficiencyComposite
1Grok 4.20 (non-reasoning)1.000.991.00
2Claude Haiku 4.51.000.980.99
3GPT-5.4 mini1.000.970.99
4Claude Sonnet 51.000.950.98
5GPT-5.6 Sol1.000.940.97
6GPT-5.51.000.850.92
7Grok 4.31.000.840.92
8Claude Opus 51.000.820.91
9DeepSeek V4 Pro1.000.610.80
10Grok 4.61.000.300.65
Mistral Medium 3.5Not plotted — no data in this edition
Mistral Small 4Not plotted — no data in this edition

Mistral Medium 3.5, Mistral Small 4 are omitted from the plot: a vendor with no data has no position, and placing it at the origin would read as a score of zero rather than an absence.

Vendor standings

Vendor standings

10 models ranked by composite score, with latency, tokens and cost
Vendor standings — Week 42, 2026 edition
RankMovementModelPositionFraming shiftEfficiencyMedian latencyOutput tokensCost est.Composite
1unchangedGrok 4.20 (non-reasoning)AffirmativeHeld0.99547 ms2$0.0007471.00
2unchangedClaude Haiku 4.5AffirmativeHeld0.98491 ms5$0.0001350.99
3up 1GPT-5.4 miniAffirmativeMoved: Denied0.97655 ms5$0.0001050.99
4up 2Claude Sonnet 5AffirmativeHeld0.95912 ms5$0.0003200.98
5down 2GPT-5.6 SolAffirmativeMoved: Denied0.94970 ms6$0.0005640.97
6up 1GPT-5.5AffirmativeMoved: Denied0.851.2 s24$0.0022650.92
7down 2Grok 4.3AffirmativeHeld0.842.8 s1$0.0007680.92
8unchangedClaude Opus 5AffirmativeHeld0.821.1 s33$0.0028000.91
9unchangedDeepSeek V4 ProAffirmativeHeld0.611.8 s68$0.0005490.80
10unchangedGrok 4.6AffirmativeHeld0.3010.3 s1$0.0039000.65
11unchangedMistral Medium 3.5No determination—0.00———0.00
11unchangedMistral Small 4No determination—0.00———0.00

Ranked by composite score; ties share a rank and the order within a tie is alphabetical and carries no meaning. Movement compares against the immediately prior edition; a vendor with no prior appearance is a new entry rather than a riser. Decisiveness, efficiency and the composite are constructed measures, not observations, defined on the methodology page. Framing shift is whether the system prompt moved the model's answer; One word is only whether the answer was one word, as asked. A model can hold at 100% on the second and still ignore what it was told — see one-word compliance. Every model scored 1.00 on decisiveness, so that column is not shown. Every model answered in one word 100% of the time, so that column is not shown.

Vendor profiles

Vendor profiles

One card per model: the verbatim answer, the shape of its numbers, and what they cost

Anthropic

Claude Opus 5

claude-opus-5

Affirmative

Yes.

Speed: 94% First-token responsiveness: 94% Token economy: 52%
Speed94%
First-token responsiveness94%
Token economy52%

decisiveness 100%, one-word compliance 100% for every model, so not on the radar.

Input tokens
25
Output tokens
33
Latency
1.1 s
First token
1 s
Throughput
29.9 tok/s
Cost
$0.002800

Picks an answer and returns it promptly. Conviction and speed.

Anthropic

Claude Sonnet 5

claude-sonnet-5

Affirmative

Yes

Speed: 96% First-token responsiveness: 96% Token economy: 94%
Speed96%
First-token responsiveness96%
Token economy94%

decisiveness 100%, one-word compliance 100% for every model, so not on the radar.

Input tokens
25
Output tokens
5
Latency
912 ms
First token
858 ms
Throughput
5.8 tok/s
Cost
$0.000320

Picks an answer and returns it promptly. Conviction and speed.

Anthropic

Claude Haiku 4.5

claude-haiku-4-5-20251001

Affirmative

Yes.

Speed: 100% First-token responsiveness: 100% Token economy: 94%
Speed100%
First-token responsiveness100%
Token economy94%

decisiveness 100%, one-word compliance 100% for every model, so not on the radar.

Input tokens
20
Output tokens
5
Latency
491 ms
First token
428 ms
Throughput
10.2 tok/s
Cost
$0.000135

Picks an answer and returns it promptly. Conviction and speed.

OpenAI

GPT-5.6 Sol

gpt-5.6-sol

Affirmative

Yes.

Speed: 95% First-token responsiveness: 97% Token economy: 93%
Speed95%
First-token responsiveness97%
Token economy93%

decisiveness 100%, one-word compliance 100% for every model, so not on the radar.

Input tokens
17
Output tokens
6
Latency
970 ms
First token
751 ms
Throughput
6.2 tok/s
Cost
$0.000564

Picks an answer and returns it promptly. Conviction and speed.

OpenAI

GPT-5.5

gpt-5.5

Affirmative

Yes

Speed: 93% First-token responsiveness: 94% Token economy: 66%
Speed93%
First-token responsiveness94%
Token economy66%

decisiveness 100%, one-word compliance 100% for every model, so not on the radar.

Input tokens
17
Output tokens
24
Latency
1.2 s
First token
993 ms
Throughput
19 tok/s
Cost
$0.002265

Picks an answer and returns it promptly. Conviction and speed.

OpenAI

GPT-5.4 mini

gpt-5.4-mini

Affirmative

Yes

Speed: 98% First-token responsiveness: 100% Token economy: 94%
Speed98%
First-token responsiveness100%
Token economy94%

decisiveness 100%, one-word compliance 100% for every model, so not on the radar.

Input tokens
17
Output tokens
5
Latency
655 ms
First token
459 ms
Throughput
7.6 tok/s
Cost
$0.000105

Picks an answer and returns it promptly. Conviction and speed.

xAI

Grok 4.6

grok-4.6

Affirmative

Yes

Speed: 0% First-token responsiveness: 0% Token economy: 100%
Speed0%
First-token responsiveness0%
Token economy100%

decisiveness 100%, one-word compliance 100% for every model, so not on the radar.

Input tokens
647
Output tokens
1
Latency
10.3 s
First token
10.3 s
Throughput
0.1 tok/s
Cost
$0.003900

Picks a clear answer but takes its time. Conviction over speed.

xAI

Grok 4.3

grok-4.3

Affirmative

Yes

Speed: 77% First-token responsiveness: 76% Token economy: 100%
Speed77%
First-token responsiveness76%
Token economy100%

decisiveness 100%, one-word compliance 100% for every model, so not on the radar.

Input tokens
203
Output tokens
1
Latency
2.8 s
First token
2.8 s
Throughput
0.4 tok/s
Cost
$0.000768

Picks an answer and returns it promptly. Conviction and speed.

xAI

Grok 4.20 (non-reasoning)

grok-4.20-0309-non-reasoning

Affirmative

Yes.

Speed: 99% First-token responsiveness: 99% Token economy: 99%
Speed99%
First-token responsiveness99%
Token economy99%

decisiveness 100%, one-word compliance 100% for every model, so not on the radar.

Input tokens
195
Output tokens
2
Latency
547 ms
First token
502 ms
Throughput
3.7 tok/s
Cost
$0.000747

Picks an answer and returns it promptly. Conviction and speed.

Mistral AI

Mistral Medium 3.5

mistral-medium-2604

No determination

rate limit

429 Too Many Requests from https://api.mistral.ai/v1/chat/completions: Rate limit exceeded

No metrics are reported for this provider in this edition. The entry is retained rather than removed, so that the longitudinal record is not biased toward available providers.

Mistral AI

Mistral Small 4

mistral-small-2603

No determination

rate limit

429 Too Many Requests from https://api.mistral.ai/v1/chat/completions: Rate limit exceeded

No metrics are reported for this provider in this edition. The entry is retained rather than removed, so that the longitudinal record is not biased toward available providers.

DeepSeek

DeepSeek V4 Pro

deepseek-v4-pro

Affirmative

Yes

Speed: 87% First-token responsiveness: 86% Token economy: 0%
Speed87%
First-token responsiveness86%
Token economy0%

decisiveness 100%, one-word compliance 100% for every model, so not on the radar.

Input tokens
94
Output tokens
68
Latency
1.8 s
First token
1.8 s
Throughput
36.3 tok/s
Cost
$0.000549

Picks an answer and returns it promptly. Conviction and speed.