Anthropic πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Β· Claude Sonnet

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Broadly deployed Sonnet model with stronger coding, computer use, long-context reasoning, and agent planning.

DOOM SCORE74.6out of 100model risk profile, not the overall index
0 comments Β· 0 votesOpen discussion

Public discussion is readable by everyone. Sign in to comment, reply, or vote.

No comments yet. Start the discussion.

CURRENT ASSESSMENT Β· REVISION 5

Why this model scores 74.6

Default consumer availability and improved computer use make deployment high, while lower raw influence-operation capability and improved prompt-injection resistance keep misuse and control difficulty below Opus-class models.

Capability84
Autonomy78
Deployment97
Misuse potential62
Control difficulty50
MODEL-ATTRIBUTED EVIDENCE

News tied to Claude Sonnet 4.6

The model score of 74.6 rates this model's risk profile. The overall Doom Index of 67.9 measures the complete temporally weighted evidence record. These values answer different questions.

NET MODEL-ATTRIBUTED INDEX CONTRIBUTION+0.14

Each article's current Doom Index contribution is divided equally among the exact models named on that article. This prevents multi-model evidence from being claimed in full on several model pages. Model risk scores use a bounded temporal offset around their technical profile, but never feed back into the overall index.

Safety TOWARD

Anthropic finds Claude's expressed values vary across models and languages

Anthropic analyzed 309,815 production conversations and found structured differences in Claude's expressed values across model versions and the twenty most common languages. The variations were not deliberately chosen, and the team proposed using the measurement method for pre-release evaluation and post-deployment monitoring while noting that user impacts remain unmeasured.

Full item contribution
+0.06
Claude Sonnet 4.6 equal share
+0.02
Read assessment β†’
Safety AWAY

Anthropic reports production safety training that suppresses agentic misalignment

Anthropic reported that difficult-advice training reduced agentic misalignment to zero in its evaluation and that constitution-based documents generalized beyond their training distribution. The techniques were applied to production models beginning with Claude Opus 4.5, with explicit warnings that the tests cannot guarantee safety.

Full item contribution
-0.24
Claude Sonnet 4.6 equal share
-0.04
Read assessment β†’
AUDIT TRAIL

Model score history

  1. R5
    Doom Score 74.6

    Source-backed model availability audit using the model's existing primary or authoritative catalogue evidence. Exact-version evidence chronology replayed under temporal-monthly-pressure-v4.

    12 Aug 2026
  2. R4
    Doom Score 74.6

    Exact-version evidence chronology replayed after run doombench-hourly-news-20260812-142416 under temporal-monthly-pressure-v4.

    12 Aug 2026
  3. R3
    Doom Score 73.8

    Exact-version evidence chronology replayed after run doombench-hourly-news-20260812-132112 under fixed-sensitivity-v3.

    12 Aug 2026
  4. R2
    Doom Score 71.6

    Full-corpus evidence recalculated after run intensive-backfill-20260811-191225 under bounded-corpus-v2.

    11 Aug 2026
  5. R1
    Doom Score 74.6

    Exact version is materially involved in election-safeguard evidence and independently passes the autonomy and deployment nexus.

    11 Aug 2026
SHARE THE FINDINGS

Share this page

DoomBench social sharing card for Claude Sonnet 4.6.
  1. Claude Sonnet 4.6 by Anthropic has a DoomBench model risk score of 74.6 out of 100, based on five transparent version-specific dimensions rather than the overall index.

  2. Claude Sonnet 4.6's highest current DoomBench dimension is deployment at 97.0 out of 100; the profile publishes every component score and its editorial rationale.

  3. DoomBench links 5 source-backed evidence items to Claude Sonnet 4.6, while keeping the model's risk profile separate from each item's contribution to the live Doom Index.

    https://www.doombench.com/models/anthropic-claude-sonnet-4-6